From 1967 until the oil crisis of 1973 there were orders for about 80 very large crude carriers (VLCC) and 40 ultra large crude carriers (ULCC), according to engine manufacturer Wartsila. This boom was followed by the total collapse of the newbuild market for these tankers until the middle of the 1980s. Since then, over 400 VLCC have been ordered, but it took more than 20 years before the next ULCC contract was signed.
The new TI class of ULCCs were delivered in the early 2000s, but within a decade most had been converted to floating production, storage and offloading (FPSO) vessels (FSOs) for use in the Mideast Gulf and southeast Asia. Prizing quantity over flexibility, these ships were wider than the new Panama Canal locks (begun in 2007 and completed in 2016), and could not travel through the Suez Canal unless on a ballast voyage.
Their massive capacity of more than 3mn barrels of crude oil reflected climbing global oil demand – almost double what it was in 1973 – and China’s arrival as the world's largest importer of crude oil. Some forecasters now predict oil demand will peak in 2030, reducing the need for supertankers, but other forces have seen shipowners and others return to newbuilding markets for VLCCs in recent months.
Pandemics, infrastructure projects, price wars and actual wars have moved and lengthened trade flows in the last four years, making larger vessels more attractive because of their economies of scale. These have impacted the make-up of the global tanker fleet in other ways as well, such as prompting a small recovery in interest in small Panamax tankers, which have long been sliding out of existence.
The role of vessel size in tanker freight markets is sometimes underappreciated. In the wake of the G7+ ban on imports of Russian crude and oil and products, and attacks on merchant shipping in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden by Yemen’s Houthi militants, flows of crude oil have had to make massive diversions. Russian crude oil is flowing now to India and China rather than to Europe, while Europe’s imports of oil, diesel and jet fuel from the Mideast Gulf are taking two weeks longer, going around the Cape of Good Hope to avoid Houthi attacks. This has pushed up tonne-miles – a measure of shipping demand – to record levels. Global clean Long Range 2 (LR2) tanker tonne-miles rose to a record high in May this year, data from analytics firm Kpler show, while tonne-miles for dirty Aframax tankers rose to a record high in May last year. It has also supported freight rates.

High freight rates have brought smaller vessels into competition with larger tankers, at the same time as long routes have increased the appeal of larger ships. The Atlantic basin appears to be key site for increases in production (from the US, Brazil, Guyana and even Namibia), and an eastward shift in refining capacity globally will further entrench these long routes and demand for economies of scale.
Aframax and LR2 tankers are the same sized ships carrying around 80,000-120,000t of crude oil or products. LR2 tankers have coated tanks, which allows them to carry both dirty and clean cargoes, and shipowners may switch their
LR2/Aframax vessels between the clean and dirty markets, with expensive cleaning, depending on which offers them the best returns. But an unusually high number of VLCCs – at least six – have also switched from dirty to clean recently. Shipowner Okeanis, which now has three of its VLCCs transporting clean products, said it had cleaned up another one in the third quarter.
A VLCC switching from crude to products is very rare. Switching to clean products from crude is estimated to cost around $1mn for a VLCC. It takes several days to clean the vessel's tanks, during which time the tanker is not generating revenue. But a seasonal slide in VLCC rates in the northern hemisphere this summer has made cleaning an attractive option for shipowners, while their economies of scale make the larger tankers more attractive to clean charterers as product voyages lengthen.
Argus assessed the cost of shipping a 280,000t VLCC of crude from the Mideast Gulf to northwest Europe or the Mediterranean averaged $10.52/t in June, much lower than the average cost of $67.94/t for shipping a 90,000t LR2 clean oil cargo on the same route in the same period. It is likely these vessels will stay in the products market, as cleaning a ship is a costly undertaking for a single voyage.
Typically, a VLCC will only carry a clean cargo when it is new and on its inaugural voyage, but just one new VLCC has joined the fleet this year, further incentivising traders to clean up vessels as demand for larger ones increases. This year has seen a jump in demand for new VLCCs, with 29 ordered so far. There were 20 ordered in 2023, just six in 2023 and 32 in the whole of 2021, Kpler data show. But the vast majority of these new VLCCs will not hit the water until 2026, 2027 or later because of a shortage of shipyard capacity.
Last year and 2024 also saw the first substantial newbuilding orders for Panamax tankers, also called LR1s, since 2017. Product tanker owner Hafnia and trader Mercuria recently partnered to launch a Panamax pool. The rationale may be that Panamax vessels can pass through the older locks at the Panama Canal, and so are not subject to the same draft restrictions imposed because of drought that has throttled transits and led to shipowners paying exorbitant auction fees to transit.

Aframaxes and MRs will remain the workhorses of crude and product tanker markets respectively, but the stretching and discombobulation of trade routes (which appear likely to stay) has already driven changes in which vessels are used and which are ordered. When these ships hit the water, they will join a tanker market very different to the one owners and charterers were operating in just four years ago.
Spotlight content
Keine Ergebnisse gefunden
Keine Ergebnisse gefunden
Keine Ergebnisse gefunden
Related news
Mexico inflation slows to 3.7pc in Dec
Mexico inflation slows to 3.7pc in Dec
Mexico City, 8 January (Argus) — Mexico's inflation decelerated to an annual 3.69pc in December, the lowest reading for the month since 2020, mainly driven by slowing agriculture and energy prices, alongside some easing in core inflation. The consumer price index (CPI) eased from 3.80pc in November, statistics agency Inegi said Thursday, after accelerating from 3.57pc in October. Inflation has trended higher since July, when it stood at 3.51pc — the lowest annual headline reading since December 2020. The annual figure was down from 4.21pc in December 2024 and marked the lowest year-end reading since 3.15pc in December 2020. The result came in below the 3.6pc forecast by Mexican bank Banamex, "interrupting the upward trend recorded since August, which we anticipate will resume in January." The bank added that full-year inflation for 2025 was below the historical average of 4.4pc. Core inflation, which excludes volatile food and energy prices, slowed to 4.33pc in December from 4.43pc in November, after accelerating from 4.28pc in October. This marked an eighth consecutive month above 4pc — the upper bound of the central bank's target range. Within core inflation, consumer goods eased to 4.30pc from 4.37pc in November, while services slowed to 4.35pc in December from 4.49pc. Among the largest contributors to CPI in December, weighted by Inegi, were tourism-related components, particularly airfare and long-distance bus fares ahead of the holiday season. Non-core inflation decelerated to 1.61pc in December from 1.73pc in November, remaining below 2pc in five of the past six months. Agriculture prices — especially fruits and vegetables — have been subdued this year by favorable weather conditions, although pressures are beginning to build. Annual inflation for fruits and vegetables contracted by 5.62pc in December, compared with contractions of 7.79pc in November and 10.27pc in October. The segment has faced rising inflationary pressure, Mexican bank Banorte said, driven by extreme rainfall in several states in November and nationwide roadblocks organized by freight truck associations in December. Energy price inflation slowed to 0.18pc in December from 0.54pc in October and 1.07pc in September. Inflation in the segment has remained contained since President Claudia Sheinbaum in early September renewed an agreement with fuel retailers to maintain a voluntary regular gasoline price cap of Ps24/l ($5.05/USG) for six months. Looking ahead, Banamex expects an increase in merchandise inflation at the start of 2026 due to higher tariffs and taxes, forecasting headline and core inflation to end 2026 at 4.3pc and 4.2pc, respectively. By James Young Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2026. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
European diesel market structure flips to contango
European diesel market structure flips to contango
London, 8 January (Argus) — The European diesel market has shifted into a contango structure for the first time in over a year, indicating that supply in the market is currently ample during a seasonally weak period for demand. Front-month Ice January gasoil futures fell to a 25¢/t discount to the second-month February futures by the market close today, falling from a 50¢/t premium the day before. The European diesel market was last in contango — where prompt prices are lower than forward prices — in October 2024. The backwardated structure in futures — where prompt prices are higher than forward prices — narrowed steadily from early December, after reaching a peak in mid-November. Strong supply has weighed on the value of front-month futures this year, particularly from high imports expected from the US, according to one European analyst. Around 450,000t of diesel and other gasoil departed the US for Europe in the week to 2 January, and a further 525,000t has departed since then, according to Vortexa. Both volumes were the highest on the route since June last year. About 1.86mn t unloaded in the EU and UK from the Middle East in December, a seven-month high. The well-supplied market has come at a seasonally low period for regional diesel demand — January and February are normally the weakest months for European road fuel demand. January futures expire on 12 January, which may have also driven the front-month value down, according to a European trader. Traders closing their long positions in January futures before expiry would weigh on prices. The second-month and third-month futures remain backwardated, with February futures settling at a $2.50/t premium to March. Current cold weather in Europe — forecast to get colder still — should provide some support for gasoil futures. By Josh Michalowski Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2026. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
Sabic to sell European business to Aequita: Update
Sabic to sell European business to Aequita: Update
Adds detail on Sabic write down in para 2 London, 8 January (Argus) — Saudi state-controlled Sabic will sell its European petrochemicals and polymers assets to Germany-based private equity company Aequita for $500mn, it said today. The transaction will be fully funded by loans from Sabic that are repayable "based on future cashflows, resulting from synergies between the divested Sabic business and other European olefins and polyolefins assets". The companies anticipate the deal closing in the fourth quarter. Sabic said that it would record a SAR10.8bn ($2.88bn) non-cash write down as a result of the divestment The acquisition includes Sabic's production facilities in Teesside, UK, Geleen, the Netherlands, Gelsenkirchen, Germany, and Genk, Belgium. This includes an operating cracker in Geleen, Sabic having closed another cracker there, and a cracker in Teesside. Sabic said the sale allows it to "exit structurally competitive disadvantaged assets" and help it to "refocus financial resources and management attention towards growth areas where [it] has clear competitive advantages". Sabic said it would export products to Europe and the Americas from the Middle East, although the sale agreement includes all related commercial functions. Aequita is in the process of building a scaled olefins and polyolefins business. It is already acquiring olefin and polyolefin assets from LyondellBasell . It could have options to extend, with various assets up for sale including BP's integrated refinery and cracker complex in Gelsenkirchen, which is a key supplier to Sabic's polymer production at the same site. Sabic also said today that it will sell its engineering thermoplastics division in the Americas and Europe to Mutares, another German private equity company. Sabic European chemical and polyolefin assets Country Location Product Capacity ('000t) UK Teeside LDPE 415 Germany Gelsenkirchen PP 320 Germany Gelsenkirchen HDPE 220 Germany Gelsenkirchen LLDPE 300 Netherlands Geleen Ethylene 690 Netherlands Geleen Propylene 405 Netherlands Geleen HDPE 150 Netherlands Geleen LDPE 375 Netherlands Geleen PP 550 Netherlands Geleen Butadiene 120 Netherlands Geleen Benzene 170 Netherlands Geleen MTBE 160 Belgium Genk PP compounding 180 Source: Sabic Aequita olefins and polyolefin assets, post-Sabic and LYB completions Country Location Product Nameplate capacity ('000t) Netherlands Geleen Ethylene 675 Germany Munchsmunster Ethylene 345 France Berre Ethylene 456 Total ethylene 1,476 Germany Gelsenkirchen HDPE 270 Netherlands Geleen HDPE 150 Netherlands Geleen HDPE 150 Germany Munchsmunster HDPE 320 United Kingdom Wilton LDPE 400 Netherlands Geleen LDPE 470 France Berre LDPE 320 Germany Gelsenkirchen LLD-HDPE 300 Total PE 2,380 Geleen Netherlands Propylene 485 Munchsmunster Germany Propylene 250 Berre France Propylene 250 Total propylene 985 Germany Gelsenkirchen Polypropylene 325 Netherlands Geleen Polypropylene 350 Netherlands Geleen Polypropylene 250 Spain Tarragona Polypropylene 270 Spain Tarragona Polypropylene 120 United Kingdom Carrington Polypropylene 230 France Berre Polypropylene 340 Total PP 1,885 Source: Argus Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2026. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
US exits UN climate change bodies, climate fund: Update
US exits UN climate change bodies, climate fund: Update
Adds GCF exit details, UNFCCC comment London, 8 January (Argus) — The US has withdrawn from 66 organisations, many focused on environmental and climate topics, including UN bodies the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The US has also left the UN Green Climate Fund (GCF) — the world's biggest climate fund — and will relinquish its seat on the fund's board, it said today. The administration in February 2025 cancelled about $4bn in pledged GCF funding. "Our nation will no longer fund radical organizations like the GCF whose goals run contrary to the fact that affordable, reliable energy is fundamental to economic growth and poverty reduction", US treasury secretary Scott Bessent said. The UNFCCC now has 198 parties. It was established in 1992, and is the overarching global framework for climate action, encompassing the annual Cop climate summits and the 2015 Paris climate agreement. The latter has 194 signatories, after President Donald Trump pulled the US out in January 2025 . Given the scale of UNFCCC membership, events such as Cops offer a rare opportunity for almost-total multilateralism. The IPCC, which was established in 1988, counts 194 countries as members. It assesses science related to climate change. Its reports collate best-available science and research and are viewed as the primary authority on climate change science. The US is also leaving other UN bodies and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) including the International Renewable Energy Agency, the International Solar Alliance, and energy producer-consumer dialogue group the International Energy Forum. "Many international organizations now serve a globalist project rooted in the discredited fantasy of the 'End of History', the White House said. "These organizations actively seek to constrain American sovereignty. "We will not continue expending resources, diplomatic capital, and the legitimizing weight of our participation in institutions that are irrelevant to or in conflict with our interests", it said. The US did not attend Cop 30 in November, although several US governors and regional leaders did . The US decision to leave the UNFCCC "is a strategic blunder that gives away American advantage for nothing in return," non-profit WRI's director of the US segment David Widawsky said. "Walking away doesn't just put America on the sidelines — it takes the US out of the arena entirely. American communities and businesses will lose economic ground as other countries capture the jobs, wealth, and trade created by the booming clean-energy economy." California governor Gavin Newsom (Democrat) made a similar point at Cop 30, noting China's power in clean energy and electric vehicle markets. Trump "simply doesn't understand how enthusiastic President Xi [Jinping] is today that the Trump administration is nowhere to be found at Cop 30", Newsom said. "This latest step back from global leadership, climate co-operation and science can only harm the US economy, jobs and living standards, as wildfires, floods, mega-storms and droughts get rapidly worse. It is a colossal own goal which will leave the US less secure and less prosperous", UNFCCC executive secretary Simon Stiell said today. "It will mean less affordable energy, food, transport and insurance for American households and businesses, as renewables keep getting cheaper than fossil fuels, as climate-driven disasters hit American crops, businesses and infrastructure harder each year, and as oil, coal and gas volatility drives more conflicts, regional instability and forced migration", Stiell added. The US decision is "regrettable and unfortunate", EU climate commissioner Wopke Hoekstra said. He reiterated the bloc's commitment to climate research, co-operation and action — which it pledged, along with China when the US left the Paris accord in January 2025. Bloomberg Philanthropies in January 2025 said it and other US bodies would ensure the US met funding and reporting obligations to the UNFCCC. This is not the international climate finance often discussed at UNFCCC talks, but funding that helps the climate body operate and host events such as Cops. By Georgia Gratton Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2026. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

