Biofuels and feedstocks
Overview
Demand for biofuels is increasing significantly, driven by the need to decarbonise road transport as part of the energy transition. Global biofuels output is expected to rise by more than 3mn b/d in the next five years, and such rapid growth means that new challenges and opportunities are constantly emerging. Keeping on top of the ever-changing biofuels landscape requires accurate pricing, insightful analysis and access to the latest data.
The Argus biofuels solution provides in-depth pricing and market analysis across the entire global renewable fuel supply chain, from original feedstock to finished fuel, with prices and key insights into regional biodiesel, ethanol and feedstock markets.
Latest biofuels news
Browse the latest market moving news on the global biofuels industry.
Brazil soy demand for biodiesel may rise by 72pc
Brazil soy demand for biodiesel may rise by 72pc
Sao Paulo, 16 April (Argus) — Demand for soybeans used to produce biodiesel in Brazil may increase by 72pc to 74mn metric tonnes (t) by 2035 on the back of slated gains in the country's biodiesel blending mandate, according to the soybean and corn producers' association of Mato Grosso state, Aprosoja-MT. Aprosoja-MT forecasts Brazil's biodiesel output will rise to 18mn t in 2035 from 10mn t in 2026, in large part due to the planned increase of the biodiesel blending mandate in the fuel of the future law to 24pc by 2035 from the current 15pc. Considering soybean oil represents around 70pc of the feedstocks used for biodiesel production in Brazil, according to hydrocarbons regulator ANP, demand for soy oil in 2035 would reach 12.3mn t. That means it would be necessary to crush 74mn t of soybeans to produce around 12.3mn t of oil by 2035 from 7.2mn t in 2025. Aprosoja-MT estimates Brazil's consumption of diesel, including biodiesel, of 1.4mn b/d in the 2026-35 period. In 2025, Brazil consumed an average 1.2mn b/d of diesel. The fuel of the future law establishes targets for the increase in biofuels blending in Brazil. It sets that the biodiesel blending mandate should grow by 1 percentage point/yr until 2030, which could be extended until 2035. But the increase of the blending mandate to 15pc from 14pc was delayed by six months in 2025, and the increase to 16pc — scheduled for March 2026 — has not been implemented yet because the government is still running the necessary feasibility tests . According to mines and energy ministry MME, the final report covering blends of 16-20pc is expected to be approved by late March 2027 if tests confirm these levels are feasible. That means the increase of the blending mandate to 16pc will have to wait at least until April 2027. Brazil's biodiesel demand is expected to reach 365,000 b/d in 2035, according to the association of vegetable oil industries Abiove. That would be more than double from 170,000 b/d in 2025, which reflected a 14.2pc average blending rate, according to ANP. Brazil's industrial sector would have to invest R52.2bn ($10.4bn) in new soybean crushers and biodiesel plants to be able to meet that demand, according to Abiove. By João Marinho Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2026. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
Rotterdam 1Q bunker sales fall sharply
Rotterdam 1Q bunker sales fall sharply
London, 16 April (Argus) — Demand for conventional marine fuels in Rotterdam fell by 28pc on the year in the first quarter of 2026, after the Netherlands implemented the EU's revised Renewable Energy Directive (RED III) at its ports. The decline also reflects disruption linked to the US-Iran war. Market participants reported a drop in Rotterdam bunker demand even before the war, as some shipowners shifted fuelling to neighbouring ports to avoid price premiums created by the Netherlands' unilateral transposition of RED III marine mandates from 1 January. Sales of very-low sulphur fuel oil (VLSFO) fell most sharply, down by 44pc from a year earlier to about 440,000t in the first quarter. High-sulphur fuel oil (HSFO) volumes dropped by 25pc to about 619,000t, while ultra-low sulphur fuel oil (ULSFO) sales fell by 13pc. Marine gasoil (MGO) and marine diesel oil (MDO) demand declined by 8pc on the year to around 361,000t. Some shipowners instead opted to bunker in neighbouring Antwerp, which forms part of the ARA hub and offers lower conventional bunker prices without requiring route changes. Others prioritised bunkering at Gothenburg in Sweden or ports in Germany, market participants said. Price differentials supported the shift. Between early February and the end of March, MGO dob Rotterdam prices averaged $12.75/t higher than the Antwerp equivalent, while VLSFO dob Rotterdam held an average premium of roughly $14.50/t over the same period. Tighter global supply has added further pressure. The effective closure of the strait of Hormuz sharply reduced bunker availability in Singapore, increasing competition for VLSFO and MGO cargoes that would otherwise be exported to the ARA hub. After the start of the US-Iran war, Rotterdam MGO prices rose by 75pc to an average of about $1,186/t in March, while VLSFO prices climbed by 57pc to an average of $710.50/t. By Gabriel Tassi Lara and Hussein Al-Khalisy Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2026. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
Rotterdam biomarine sales fall in 1Q
Rotterdam biomarine sales fall in 1Q
London, 16 April (Argus) — Marine biodiesel blend sales fell by 35pc in the first quarter compared with the fourth quarter of last year, but were roughly steady compared with the first quarter of 2025. Participants pointed to lacklustre demand in January and February, with an uptick in March as the US-Iran war led to Dutch B100 flipping to a discount against MGO . But these discounts failed to support significant demand growth , as volatility weighed on marine fuel trading activity and buyers hesitant to make significant changes to their procurement strategy based on an acute price spread. Rotterdam's loss has been Singapore's gain. Data from the Port of Singapore showed roughly a 13pc growth in marine biodiesel blend sales on the quarter to the first quarter of 2026. This demand is attributed to FuelEU Maritime requirements, which came into effect in 2025 and require ships coming in, out of, and operating within EU waters to reduce emissions. Shipowners bunkering marine biodiesel in Singapore for EU-bound voyages can use it for FuelEU Maritime compliance. And compliance generated from bunkering marine biodiesel in Singapore can then be used to achieve compliance on vessels operating European routes, via the pooling mechanism, in which obligated companies can combine their compliance balance with other vessels. Bio-LNG sales firmed by 28pc on the quarter in the first quarter of 2026, generating over-compliance which has sold at a significant premium to cost . This may have also weighed on marine biodiesel blend sales, as bio-LNG volumes bunkered would have generated FuelEU compliance surpluses that can then be sold on to vessels that do not have LNG-capable engines. This would then potentially dampen FuelEU-driven demand from those vessels for marine biodiesel blends, and many shipowners did opt to buy surpluses to meet FuelEU requirements. But this dynamic may soon change because of the US-Iran war, where the FuelEU used cooking oil methyl ester (Ucome)–MGO abatement ex-emissions trading system (ETS) price was negative on 7 April. It has since returned to positive levels, marked at €61.45/tCO2e on 15 April. But this remains significantly below FuelEU compliance surplus levels, with offers seen at €175-210/tCO2e, meaning it is currently cheaper to generate compliance using marine biodiesel blends than to buy surpluses to meet the FuelEU requirements. By Hussein Al-Khalisy Rotterdam bunker sales t Fuel 1Q 2026 4Q 2025 Q1 2025 q-o-q % y-o-y % ULSFO 162,142 219,039 187,031 -26 -13 VLSFO 439,804 745,786 789,218 -41 -44 HSFO 619,010 804,962 829,197 -23 -25 MGO/MDO 360,517 402,781 393,071 -10 -8 Conventional total 1,581,473 2,172,568 2,198,517 -27 -28 Biofuel blends 104,630 161,934 104,037 -35 1 LNG (m3) 267,454 192,433 261,200 39 2 Bio-LNG (m3) 15,260 11,932 na 28 na Biomethanol 996 na 5,490 na -82 Port of Rotterdam Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2026. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
NY weighs new yardstick to set climate goals
NY weighs new yardstick to set climate goals
New York, 13 April (Argus) — New York governor Kathy Hochul (D) is asking state lawmakers for more time to reduce emissions. Potentially more important is how the state actually measures them. The state's leaders, at loggerheads over climate policy and other issues, have already blown past a deadline to agree to a new budget. Hochul frustrated progressives by pushing for changes to the state's 2019 climate law, which not only mandates deep emissions reductions but also includes a bespoke system for tracking climate impacts that discourages natural gas and some biofuels. New York requires a 40pc reduction in economy-wide greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 2030 from 1990 levels and an 85pc drop by 2050. But the state's unique emissions-accounting method effectively requires deeper cuts to emissions than targets suggest. Environmentalists say this system will speed New York's transition to renewables and leave the state less exposed to future oil supply shocks. But it also threatens higher near-term energy costs in a state that burns more oil for home heating than any other, where natural gas is the largest source of electricity and where driving predominates outside public transit-connected New York City. Hochul backed off prior efforts to change the GHG accounting rules. Now campaigning for re-election on a platform of making the high-cost state more affordable, she insists changes are necessary. Methane pain State law requires New York to track the warming of GHGs on a 20-year timeline, instead of the 100-year timeline used by nearly all other states. That difference means New York treats a tonne of methane, which packs a bigger punch than CO2 but dissipates in the atmosphere more quickly, as having around three times more climate impact than other states do. Under typical emissions accounting, New York's emissions in 2023 were 24pc below 1990 levels. But according to the state's unique system, they only fell by 14pc over that period. The difference reflects the state's reliance on natural gas for heat and power. New York's system then leaves fewer options to bridge that gap. While incentives in California have helped make renewable diesel more common there than its petroleum-based counterpart, New York treats many biofuels — even if made from waste — as akin to fossil fuels by factoring in tailpipe emissions but not some upstream benefits. Renewable diesel brought into New York would not just count as only slightly better than oil, but it would also count the same whether made from recycled cooking grease or from crops, according to detailed estimates in an energy plan released by state officials last year. New York would consider more production emissions in-state, effectively treating renewable diesel made locally as worse for the climate than imports. The reverse is true for renewable natural gas, which counts as producing negative emissions if made in-state — since turning rotting dairy manure into energy avoids methane emissions — but similar to fossil-fuel natural gas if made elsewhere. While the California system has its critics, the New York energy plan says explicitly that the GHG accounting required by law "creates an incomplete picture" of biofuels' climate impacts. But the system is by design reflecting the wishes of progressive lawmakers who helped pass these requirements into law before Hochul took office, as well as those of environmental justice groups that hold sway in the Democratic-controlled state. Advocates want to stop burning any fuels that worsen air quality and think states like California have overstated the climate benefits of natural gas and biofuels at the expense of efforts to electrify cars and homes. Hochul, backed by business groups, disagrees. A recent memo prepared for her by a state energy agency estimated that polluters will have to pay far more for their emissions than they do in other states — as much as $180/tonne by 2030 — because of "differing accounting standards" and "inflexible" targets, and that fuel prices would spike. Carbon market cop out That memo gets at the core of the debate: rising energy costs are taking precedence in Hochul's policy calculus, putting the future of a carbon market in question. A task force of policy advisors in 2022 recommended a carbon market as the best option to achieve state climate targets. The program, similar to systems in California and Washington, would require fuel suppliers, industrial facilities and others to buy a dwindling pool of carbon allowances from the state. But the Hochul administration missed a 2024 legal deadline to have that plan in place and has been vague on when it will release even draft rules. After environmental groups sued, a state court directed the Hochul administration to release carbon market regulations . Hochul has since been more direct about her concerns and called for punting the rollout of the market to 2030. Environmentalists resent Hochul's argument that New York's targets are infeasible when her administration is slow-walking the rollout of a plan to achieve them. But they recognize the power governors wield in New York's mostly closed-door budget process. One potential compromise that has been discussed among advocates is implementing a carbon market with more typical emissions-accounting rules, while preserving the 20-year warming timeline for other state programs. This could address cost concerns while containing the backlash from climate advocates. It could also leave the door open for linkage with other carbon markets, which would be exceedingly difficult without aligning rules across different programs. Without changes, biofuel supporters also fear that a state "clean transportation standard" that regulators are studying could cut out many of the fuels rewarded by California. Lawmakers likewise have expressed resistance to sweeping changes. Senator Environmental Conservation Committee chair Pete Harckham (D), an influential voice on climate, has signaled some openness, however, to "modest adjustments". "We're committed to working with the governor to find reasonable solutions here, but in my humble opinion, a complete rollback of the state's climate law is untenable," Harckham said last week. By Cole Martin and Ida Balakrishna Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2026. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
Spotlight content
Browse the latest thought leadership produced by our global team of experts.
Explore our biofuels products
Key price assessments
Argus prices are recognised by the market as trusted and reliable indicators of the real market value. Explore some of our most widely used and relevant price assessments.
