Marine fuels
Overview
The introduction of new regulations has caused fundamental change across the marine fuel markets. Reliable insight and data reflecting the market direction are more pressing than ever.
Gain daily transparency into the difference between conventional and alternative marine fuel prices and plan ahead more effectively with our market outlook and forecasts.
Our global coverage of marine fuels delivers market-driven price assessments, supply and demand data, price forecasts, and forward curve prices. Along with the latest news, market commentary, and in-depth analysis led by our market experts, our comprehensive insight helps your business decide on the best suited alternative marine fuel for your needs.
Latest marine fuels news
Browse the latest market moving news on the marine fuels industry.
Brazil shippers propose Mercosur green fuel corridor
Brazil shippers propose Mercosur green fuel corridor
Sao Paulo, 28 October (Argus) — Brazil's cabotage association Abac wants to create a sustainable maritime fuel corridor for Brazilian-flagged vessels sailing between countries of the Mercosur market block, the institution's president Luiz Fernando Resano told Argus . The green corridor proposal — in which vessels that use lower-carbon fuels such as biodiesel and ethanol would receive tax benefits — is expected to be presented at the next meeting of the commission of experts on maritime transport of South American countries in Paraguay in April. But Resano said the project has no set date for starting, and that Abac will conduct research until April to propose the route and suggest ports and fuels to be included in the project. Currently, Brazilian state-controlled Petrobras is the only company capable of supplying alternative bunker fuels among the five Mercosur members Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay, — a 24pc blend of biodiesel bunker fuel at the port of Rio Grande . Expanding the availability of lower-carbon marine fuels in the region would require significant time and effort. Brazil, for example, would need to adapt its port infrastructure to supply biodiesel and ethanol for bunkering, Resano said. Public policies must be created to boost the production of alternative fuels, as the world is moving toward more robust decarbonization goals, even with the postponement of the approval of the International Maritime Organization's (IMO) net-zero framework , he said. If IMO's carbon pricing mechanism proposal moves forward next year and comes into effect in 2028, Brazil may not have enough time to prepare for decarbonization, he said. The green corridor, then, would act as a driver of regional demand to prepare the supply chain for the future, Resano said. Abac's proposal is a way to leverage Brazil's potential in the energy transition, given that Brazil is the second-largest biofuel producer in the world, according to the International Energy Agency. It produced approximately 26,400 m³/d of biodiesel in January-September, data from hydrocarbons regulator ANP show. By Gabriel Tassi Lara Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
IMO delay jolts Singapore’s push for green marine fuels
IMO delay jolts Singapore’s push for green marine fuels
Singapore, 22 October (Argus) — The International Maritime Organization's (IMO) failure to adopt a net-zero framework (NZF) for international shipping could slow the adoption of sustainable marine fuels, although longer-term goals remain achievable, according to market participants in the major bunkering hub of Singapore. The vote at the IMO late last week to delay the NZF, which includes a global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions pricing mechanism for international shipping, could hit the adoption of alternative fuels such as biofuels, LNG and methanol. "A delay in the NZF framework will not be great for investor confidence and would potentially impact investor confidence in scaling up. However, it also depends on what the governments want in terms of the GHG strategy for their economies," said a Singapore-based shipbroker. "Many clients are now in a wait and see mode…[and this is] slowing efforts," said an advisor to shipbuilders and shipowners. It "might take a few years" for the pricing framework to be adopted, particularly given the US is against the proposal, a Singapore-based supplier said "It's a missed opportunity," said a trader with an international trading firm. "We are progressing nicely in our bio and carbon plans, so it's a shame to see it pushed back, but will only make us stronger in the year ahead," he added. Demand for biodiesel may weaken because of the delay in IMO adoption, several traders said. But buying interest for conventional bunkers such as very-low sulphur fuel oil (VLSFO) and high-sulphur fuel oil (HSFO) is expected to hold steady, even if there is limited demand for bio-bunkers, a few traders said. "For us as bunker traders it doesn't really make much difference, we buy what the shipowners need, so we just carry on the same," a UK-based trader said. Meanwhile, IMO's previous guidelines and existing compliance requirements like the Carbon Intensity Index (CII) and the EU-led FuelEU Maritime and EU Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) remain in force. The concerns expressed were also countered by a quiet determination that the region can still meet its maritime decarbonisation goals. "Opposing member states will undoubtedly use the coming year to grow the no-camp," said a representative from a key classification society, clouding hopes of a clear mandate when the motion will be tabled again by the IMO in 2026. "The NZF is not off the cards, nor is the 2050 net zero shipping emissions target. In the best case, the NZF will be delayed by a year," he further added. Discussions on implementing NZF guidelines at the Intersessional Working Group on Reduction of Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Ships (ISWG-GHG) have not been called off, the official noted. The 20th ISWG-GHG session, being held in in London on 20-24 October, may be beneficial for addressing concerns or reaching consensus before a new vote in 2026, he added. The current session is reviewing the proposed Life Cycle Assessment framework, which is included in the NZF. ISWG-GHG is a technical group that reports to the IMO's Marine Environment Protection Committee and these sessions aim to reduce GHG from shipping. By Mahua Mitra and Cassia Teo Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
Participants diverge on IMO adoption delay
Participants diverge on IMO adoption delay
Sao Paulo, 17 October (Argus) — Market participants had mixed views on the delay in voting on the adoption of the International Maritime Organization's (IMO) net-zero framework, comprising a global emissions pricing mechanism for international shipping. Delegates at the IMO's Marine Environment Protection Committee extraordinary meeting postponed the vote on adopting the net-zero framework for a year on Friday during an extraordinary meeting in London. Some traders and shipowners said that the proposed greenhouse gas (GHG) pricing mechanism is too "optimistic" and that alternative bunker fuel supplies are still scarce. Another participant said the delay was expected, considering opposition from the US and others. A European market participant also called attention to the existence of regional regulations, such as the FuelEU Maritime and the EU emission trading system. The EU previously said there are review clauses built into existing maritime regulations, which would mean that the EU can review or amend if IMO matches its ambitions . The International Chamber of Shipping's secretary general Thomas Kazakos said that he is "disappointed" that IMO members were not able to agree on a way forward. "Industry needs clarity to be able to make the investments needed to decarbonise the maritime sector, in line with the goals set out in the IMO GHG strategy", Kazakos added. Danish industry, business and financial affairs minister Morten Bodskov described the outcome as a "sad day for the green transition", adding that a global agreement is needed "as soon as possible". It is "crucial" for European shipping companies, who need "clear and predictable conditions for the green transition", he said. Another trader said that the delay was discouraging and claimed that as long as US president Donald Trump is in office, the GHG global pricing mechanism proposal will not be approved. Also, shipowners are making investments in alternative-fuelled vessels, another participant said. The European Community Shipowners' Associations and the Global Maritime Forum also lamented the outcome. By Natália Coelho Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
Divisions persist ahead of IMO's GHG levy vote
Divisions persist ahead of IMO's GHG levy vote
Dubai, 13 October (Argus) — The International Maritime Organization (IMO) plan for a global greenhouse gas (GHG) levy on shipping is facing resistance from several developing nations, which say crucial aspects of the proposal remain unclear. The IMO is holding an extraordinary session from 14–17 October to vote on formally adopting amendments, passed in April , that introduce a two-tier compliance system. These levy penalties of $100/t and $380/t of CO2 equivalent (CO2e) on ships exceeding defined emission-intensity thresholds for the 2028–30 period. Supportive countries say the levy is a crucial step to push shipping towards cleaner operations. Carbon credit trading, where shipowners can trade emission allowances, aims to reward efficiency and accelerate a shift to lower-emission fuels, they say. But others, notably from a bloc of developing nations, described the amendment as a "global levy with the trappings of flexibility", arguing it was negotiated without sufficient impact assessment. Countries including Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Kuwait, Iraq, Qatar, Oman, Bahrain and Iran, alongside Indonesia, Malaysia, Pakistan, Thailand, Russia and Venezuela opposed the draft at MEPC 83 in April . Together they represent about 7.6pc of global merchant-fleet deadweight tonnage and many are major hydrocarbon exporters. "This affects more than 80pc of global trade but only 3pc of emissions," said an IMO delegate of the Net-Zero Framework (NZF) proposal. "It will inflate food prices and add to freight costs without guaranteeing meaningful decarbonisation." Developing-country delegates said key elements are undefined, including the fund's governance structure, post-2030 penalty escalation, and lifecycle emission assessment methods. The baseline emission-intensity reference of 93.3 g CO₂e/MJ (well-to-wake, based on 2008 baseline) is established in IMO documents. Critics say this does not sufficiently account for upstream (well-to-tank) variance or methane mitigation efforts. "The carbon-price tiers were not modelled in public documents — countries simply negotiated figures based on their assumptions," a source said. Delegate sources also raised legal concerns. "The IMO would be in a position to penalise or reward operators directly," a delegate said. "That goes beyond what member states have authorised." They further argue the framework contravenes the Paris Agreement principle of common but differentiated responsibilities by applying uniform penalties across nations, diverging from the bottom-up approach of nationally determined contributions (NDCs). Tax and spend Proceeds from the compliance system would flow into a fund, with intended use to reward low-emission operators and support research & development for zero- and near-zero emission fuels. Consultancy UMAS said the NZF could raise $11bn-12bn a year between 2028 and 2030. Critics proposal say there is no clear method for distribution, and that "the fund risks becoming a black box that accumulates penalties rather than driving decarbonisation." Unlike aviation's Corsia, which allows external offsets and recognises transitional fuels, the IMO framework is more constrained. "Ships will not be able to offset emissions via credits outside the maritime sector," a delegate said. That could disadvantage operators investing in 'transitional' fuels such as LNG or low-carbon hydrogen, where infrastructure is uneven. Division bell The shipping industry appears far from united as the IMO session gets underway. The national shipowner associations of Japan, Norway, Denmark, the UK, Belgium, the Netherlands and Singapore have jointly pushed for NZF adoption, and industry bodies including ICS and WSC have publicly supported the NZF, seeing global rules as necessary to avoid fragmentation. But support is not unanimous: some shipowners and states, especially smaller or less-resourced ones, have expressed reservations about cost burdens and procedural consultation. The US did not vote in April and has since rejected the NZF, warning it may raise fuel and shipping costs and provoke reciprocal measures. In a statement on 10 October, US officials cautioned that estimates point to potential double-digit cost increases in some cases. By Bachar Halabi Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
Spotlight content
Browse the latest thought leadership produced by our global team of experts.
Explore our marine fuels products
Argus marine fuel solutions provide global daily and forecasted prices for conventional and alternative marine fuel prices, as well as daily forward curves prices.
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.
