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 bunker suppliers ask for ethanol regulation
Brazil bunker suppliers ask for ethanol regulation
Sao Paulo, 24 September (Argus) — Brazilian bunker suppliers are urging Brazil's hydrocarbons regulator ANP to include ethanol in its upcoming national marine biofuels regulation, arguing that the biofuel was only partially addressed in the initial proposal released for public comment. The proposed regulation aims to align Brazil's bunker fuel framework with international standards and would allow suppliers to market biodiesel, hydrotreated vegetable oil (HVO) and gas-to-liquids (GTL) products without requiring specific authorization, provided the fuels meet ANP specifications. Ethanol, however, would remain subject to special authorization requirements, a provision that has drawn criticism from both bunker suppliers and ethanol producers. ANP initially argued that ethanol was not included because the proposal is intended to align domestic regulations with ISO 8217:2024 specifications and standards recognized by the International Maritime Organization (IMO). The IMO has not yet developed specific guidelines for ethanol bunkering operations. During a public hearing on Wednesday, the Brazilian bunker association Abrabunker and ethanol producers' association Unica jointly called on ANP to establish a dedicated ethanol standard that would allow suppliers to market the fuel without obtaining special approval. The groups proposed that the specification of ethanol set in Brazil's existing Resolution 907 — aimed at ethanol for road-fuel use — also be accepted for marine fuel use. The proposal covers both anhydrous and hydrous ethanol grades for bunkering operations. Industry participants argued that including ethanol in the regulation would help stimulate domestic production and logistics infrastructure development ahead of wider global adoption of the fuel in the maritime sector. According to Abrabunker, the measure would position Brazil to capitalize on its large ethanol industry and strengthen its role in the emerging alternative marine fuels market. Brazil ethanol output has been growing rapidly with the expansion of corn-based production. The country is expected to produce 39.8bn liters (686,959 b/d) of ethanol in 2026, up by 6.4pc from a year earlier, according to energy research firm EPE. The firm sees a 20pc growth to 50bn l by 2035 from 2026 levels. Brazil currently lacks a comprehensive regulatory framework defining storage requirements and fuel specifications for biodiesel, HVO and ethanol sold to vessels. Suppliers must obtain special authorization from ANP to conduct alternative bunker fuel operations. Petrobras and Raizen are the only companies currently authorized to market biodiesel bunker blends containing up to 24pc biodiesel. Ethanol authorizations have been granted on a case-by-case basis for testing purposes. Bunker One received approval earlier this year to conduct a 100pc ethanol bunkering trial in Brazil. By Gabriel Tassi Lara and Maria Lígia Barros Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2026. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
Saudi Aramco offers fuel oil for loading within Hormuz
Saudi Aramco offers fuel oil for loading within Hormuz
Singapore, 23 September (Argus) — Saudi Arabia's state-controlled Saudi Aramco is offering October-loading high-sulphur fuel oil (HSFO) cargoes from within the strait of Hormuz, market participants said, adding that this is likely the first time the company has offered cargoes loading within the strait on a fob basis through a tender since the start of the US-Iran war. Aramco is offering six cargoes, with three to load from Jubail and the other three from Ras Tanura. Participants suggested that Aramco's tender guarantees safe passage through the strait of Hormuz, with one trader noting that the company may have a dedicated shipping service provider for transit through the strait. This could not be directly confirmed, and market participants continue to remain sceptical about the possibility of safe transit, although there has been some headway made in US-Iran negotiations this week. The cargoes are likely around 80,000-100,000t (516,000-645,000 bl) each, with market participants noting that the refiner could have offered up to 1mn t in total. The tender closed on 22 September with validity until 23 September. The HSFO from Jubail is expected to be cracked, while the Ras Tanura cargoes could include straight-run fuel oil, sources said. Straight-run fuel oil typically fetches a premium over cracked fuel oil, as it can be further processed to produce lighter, higher-value products. Aramco does not usually offer fuel oil through tenders, with its trading arm typically handling such negotiations privately. It is also unclear why Aramco is choosing to offer cargoes on a fob basis now, especially after it previously awarded an unusual tender to offer fuel oil from Jubail on a delivered at port (dap) Singapore basis, market participants said. The refiner likely offered two 80,000t cargoes for loading on 10-20 September and 21-30 September from Jubail, with the tender closing around 27 August, market participants said. Aramco may have offered additional cargoes, but this could not be confirmed, nor could the tender results. This could have been the first time Aramco has offered a tender on a dap Singapore basis, traders said. Aramco could also be offering fuel oil from Fujairah and Oman, participants suggested, although this could not be confirmed. But Aramco has recently offered crude for loading via ship-to-ship in the Gulf of Oman , and fuel oil flows from Fujairah have been increasing recently, and most of these volumes are likely of the high-sulphur grade. These flows could rise to around 200,000 b/d and beyond in September, marking at least a seven-month high, the highest since the US-Iran war started, data from global trade analytics firms Kpler and Vortexa show. Most of these volumes are currently set to head to Asia. Fuel oil from within the Mideast Gulf is also likely being shipped to tanks in Fujairah for blending before being re-exported, a trader said. Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2026. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
IMO uncertainty stalls LatAm biobunker growth
IMO uncertainty stalls LatAm biobunker growth
Sao Paulo, 16 September (Argus) — Latin American biodiesel producers are delaying investments in the maritime sector as the shipping industry awaits a decision on the International Maritime Organisation's (IMO) proposed Net-Zero Framework (NZF). A supplier on Latin America's Pacific coast cancelled plans to deliver palm oil-based biodiesel to Peruvian and Ecuadorian ports. Other regional producers have also postponed projects targeting the biobunker market. Marine biodiesel demand in 2026 has been estimated to be at least two-thirds lower than in 2025, Latin American suppliers told Argus . In the absence of a global regulatory driver, and following heightened US-Iran tensions, vessels calling at regional ports have focused on purchasing the lowest-cost fuel and not straying from more conventional fuel options . Suppliers said current demand in Latin America does not justify investments without global shipping emissions regulations. Competing for European demand is not financially viable because biodiesel prices in Rotterdam are much lower than in US ports. Europe remains the main demand centre as shipowners must comply with FuelEU Maritime and Renewable Energy Directive (RED) requirements. Argus assessed B30 advanced fame and VLSFO delivered on board (dob) Netherlands at an average price of $877.50/t in the past 30 days. Argus' B24 advanced fame and VLSFO dob Rio Grande — was assessed at an average price of $1,094/t in the same period. Argus currently only assesses B24 advanced fame for the Latin America market instead of B30. Market participants are waiting for regulatory clarity to expand production and supply, but agreement on IMO's NZF still appears distant. Limited progress was made at the Inter-sessional Working Group on Reduction of GHG Emissions from Ships (ISWG-GHG 22) meeting on 1-4 September, which involved more than 1,200 delegates and contributors. The issue was deferred to the next inter-sessional meeting on 23-27 November, shortly before the extraordinary Marine Environment Protection Committee session from 30 November to 3 December in London. Discussions continued outside the formal meeting. Countries broadly agreed that the current draft should remain the basis for negotiations, but a group of member states is seeking to remove provisions covering the Net-Zero Fund. Market participants doubt the NZF will be approved this year. Shipowners' association Bimco said there were some signs of willingness to compromise at ISWG-GHG 22, but disagreements over the framework remain significant, making convergence challenging and raising doubts over whether a revised proposal can emerge before MEPC 85 in early December. SEA-LNG also described the scenario for approval later this year as "challenging". But one Brazilian delegate said he remains optimistic about the negotiations and expects "substantial progress" at ISWG-GHG 23. By Gabriel Tassi Lara Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2026. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
Q&A: ZCS hopeful on IMO Net Zero Framework in 2026
Q&A: ZCS hopeful on IMO Net Zero Framework in 2026
Sao Paulo, 4 September (Argus) — The shipping sector's energy transition appears to have slowed since the postponement of an International Maritime Organization (IMO) vote on its Net-Zero Framework, which may face changes before agreement is reached. But optimism remains. Daniel Barcarolo, head of regulatory affairs at the Maersk Mc-Kinney Moller Center for Zero Carbon Shipping (ZCS), and Francielle Carvalho, its regulatory affairs manager, told Argus they see a possible agreement in the IMO's December session. They said regulatory clarity will be the primary driver of alternative fuels adoption. With the US-Iran conflict reinforcing the debate on energy security in Europe, will this accelerate adoption of alternative fuels in shipping, or is it an effect that fades once the conflict ends? This type of geopolitical shock strengthens the energy security argument in favor of fuel diversification. We saw something similar during the war in Ukraine and the gas crisis in Europe, which forced the continent to seek new energy sources. However the conflict itself is not the main driver of the transition. What tends to remain after the crisis ends is the realisation that dependence on a limited number of fossil fuel suppliers represents a structural vulnerability, and that diversifying energy sources is the appropriate response. Such episodes also serve as real-world price sensitivity tests, effectively putting into practice scenarios that illustrate how increases in fossil fuel prices are absorbed by society and supply chains, along with the associated impacts. It is the same mechanism at play in the pricing of fossil carbon emissions. Political momentum, however, tends to fade once the conflict is resolved unless it is translated into binding long-term regulation. Energy security may accelerate the conversation, but what ultimately sustains adoption of alternative energy sources is predictable regulation, not temporary price spikes. With the food-versus-fuel debate in Europe and with FuelEU and RED III excluding or limiting first-generation biofuels in decarbonisation targets, is there room for these rules to change with the current energy security pressures? A clarification is needed: RED III does not completely exclude first-generation biofuels. Rather, it imposes a cap on their use. The directive maintains a ceiling for food and feed-based biofuels while continuing to prioritise advanced biofuels and Renewable Fuels of Non-Biological Origin (RFNBOs). Under FuelEU Maritime, first-generation biofuels are indeed not eligible, but there is room for biofuels certified as low indirect land-use change (ILUC) risk. This could open the door for pathways such as 'intermediate crops', including Brazil's second-crop corn, as well as biomass produced on degraded land. Nevertheless, regulatory interpretation remains unclear. The debate has gained traction through research initiatives and demonstration projects involving fuels that could qualify as intermediate crops, and there is an expectation of greater regulatory clarity this year. The argument has gained political weight due to current geopolitical conditions. But changing the food-versus-fuel calculation in Europe remains sensitive. Concerns over food security and land use are deeply established, negotiations are lengthy, and any changes require consensus among member states. At the IMO level, however, the rules are likely to follow a different path, which could create room for first-generation biofuels on a global scale. Following the postponement of the IMO Net-Zero Framework vote, what is your view for the latest attempt to achieve approval in 2026? What can supporters of the framework do to improve chances of success? We still see a path for the IMO to reach an agreement with only a limited delay. The session has been rescheduled for December 2026, and we remain optimistic about a new agreement at that time. It is difficult to expect the final outcome will be identical to the current proposal, as discussions are already moving toward adjustments to the regulatory framework. We have four new submissions from member states addressing concerns raised by other countries, which demonstrates a willingness to seek compromise and ensure a framework is ultimately adopted. From a political standpoint, this kind of signal is important because it demonstrates intent. The first meeting, in September, will be closely watched as countries gather for the initial round of discussions. If this trajectory is confirmed, it will be a positive signal for the sector, proving even a complex and sensitive framework can be agreed upon multilaterally and provide a stable basis for investment. Regarding what supporters can do, the postponement was primarily political rather than 'technical', and that is where the effort now lies. It involves direct negotiations with the most skeptical countries and, above all, changing perceptions of what this regulation represents. The framework is often viewed only as a cost and a burden, whereas in practice it can create opportunities through new markets for alternative fuels, infrastructure development, and job and income generation. Translating these opportunities into concrete national benefits could make a significant difference. Supporters are working to provide greater clarity on issues beyond ambition levels or financial contributions, including fuel certification rules and lifecycle assessment (LCA) methodologies. Is the text as approved by the IMO sufficiently ambitious to place shipping on a pathway to net zero by 2050, or will stricter targets be needed? The current draft should be viewed as a floor rather than a ceiling for ambition. The IMO's 2023 Strategy established indicative targets for 2030 and 2040, including at least 5pc, striving for 10pc, uptake of zero- or near-zero-emission fuels by 2030, along with review mechanisms that allow ambition to be increased over time. Historically, this is how the IMO operates: discussions focus on the level of ambition required to achieve agreed goals, studies are conducted, and consensus is built. Debating whether the targets are ambitious enough is a necessary part of the process. We cannot have a framework that lacks ambition because ambition is what drives the transition forward. At this stage, what we consider most important is having a binding global mechanism in place. Once that exists, work can begin on implementation, including emissions measurement and reporting, fuel certification, testing of new fuels, and the procedures and administrative requirements associated with them. These are challenges that only truly emerge once the framework starts operating, and solving them is a prerequisite for raising ambition in the future. The sequence matters: first establish the structure, address implementation challenges, and then progressively increase ambition from that foundation. Beyond the framework itself, long-term predictability is equally important. FuelEU Maritime has demonstrated this in practice. Having a long-term target enabled fuel producers and shipping companies to plan ahead, knowing that by 2040-45 they will need to meet a specific level of ambition. One of the biggest barriers is the cycle of shipowners waiting for greater alternative fuel availability before investing, and fuel suppliers waiting for stronger demand before expanding production. What can break this deadlock? What breaks this cycle is regulatory certainty combined with first-mover consortia. Long-term regulation creates the market conditions that innovation needs in order to compete with established fuels. We have seen evidence of this, with companies ordering ammonia-fueled vessels even before ammonia has been commercially deployed as a marine fuel, and with early trials of ethanol as a marine fuel. These are signs the sector is moving to assess alternatives before a consolidated fuel supply exists. This can scale when producers, shipowners, charterers, and ports organize around green shipping corridors with multi-year supply agreements, supported by newbuild vessel orders. Mechanisms such as contracts for difference can also help bridge the cost gap for the first production facilities and accelerate deployment. By Natália Coelho 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.
Running out of options
This insight paper explores Middle East oil supply pressure from Hormuz and Red Sea shipping risks, plus rising demand from China and India.
Refined Products Through Year-End 2026
Recovery Under Constraint: Why refined product markets could remain tighter than crude through 2026, with continued support for cracks, margins and trade flows.
Refining Under Strain: Supply Disruptions & Rising Oil Market Risk
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.
