Ammonia
Market moving insight on clean and conventional ammonia – delivering robust price assessments, actionable commentary, powerful data, vital analysis and outlooks
Overview
The ammonia market is undergoing a period of rapid and dramatic change. Conventional or ‘grey’ ammonia is traditionally produced almost exclusively for its nitrogen content. However, the urgent need to decarbonise the global economy and meet ambitious zero-carbon goals has opened up exciting new opportunities.
Ammonia has the potential to be the most cost-effective and practical ‘zero-carbon’ energy carrier in the form of hydrogen to the energy and fuels sectors. This has led to rapid growth of interest in clean ammonia and a flurry of new ‘green’ and ‘blue’ ammonia projects.
Argus has many decades of experience covering the ammonia market. We incorporate our multi-commodity market expertise in energy, marine fuels, the transition to net zero and hydrogen to provide existing market participants and new entrants with the full market narrative.
Our industry-leading price assessments, powerful data, vital analysis and robust outlooks will support you through:
- Ammonia price assessments (daily and weekly), some of which are basis for Argus ammonia futures contracts, Ammonia forward curve data and clean ammonia cost assessments and modelled weekly prices
- Short and medium to long-term forecasting, modelling and analysis of conventional and clean ammonia prices, supply, demand, trade and projects
- Bespoke consulting project support
Latest ammonia news
Browse the latest market moving news on the global ammonia industry.
Australia needs to consider CBAM impact on agriculture
Australia needs to consider CBAM impact on agriculture
Sydney, 20 February (Argus) — Australia needs to consider the associated impacts a carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) would have on the cost of critical inputs for the country's agriculture sector, specifically fertilizers ammonia and derivatives like urea and ammonium phosphate, key farming group the National Farmers' Federation (NFF) told Argus on 18 February. Australian agricultural representatives GrainGrowers and NFF are against a CBAM and said that it would negatively impact local farmers. "A CBAM for Australia risks extreme harm and in no way ensures or encourages a transition to lower emissions farming," GrainGrowers chair Rhys Turton said in a statement in October 2025. There is very little domestic fertilizer production in Australia, and farmers rely on imports of urea, the country's most used fertilizer ( see table ). Urea and ammonium phosphates are the products most exposed to import competition and price changes in the chemical and fertilizer manufacturing industry, Australia's Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water (DCCEEW) said in its Carbon Leakage Review last week. A proposed CBAM could begin with imports of cement and clinker and may expand to include hydrogen, steel and ammonia and derivatives like urea and ammonium phosphate. Fertilizer is used by local farmers for broadacre crops including wheat, canola and barley. Rising imports Australia's urea imports have risen since 2018, data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) show, and the country's last domestic production shut down in 2023 . Australian fertilizer producer Perdaman's 2.3mn t/yr Project Ceres in Western Australia is expected to come on line in 2027, making it the country's only urea production facility. The plant will use natural gas as a feedstock under a 20-year agreement with Woodside's Scarborough Gas Project. Dyno Nobel's 769,000 t/yr Phosphate Hill and Impact's 170,000 t/yr Hobart facility are Australia's only MAP/DAP and single superphosphate production facilities, respectively. MAP/DAP and superphosphates imports were 1.6mn t and 27,000t in 2025 respectively, ABS data show. Incentivising domestic production Views on a CBAM differ across different sectors, although most stakeholders agree on the need for domestic investment to drive production. Australia needs to incentivise local fertilizer production, NFF said in its December 2024 submission to the carbon leakage review. The government should provide financial assistance for new technologies aimed at reducing emissions, it added. The Australian Hydrogen Council also supports investment and financial support, but said in its submission that a CBAM would incentivise local production and reduce Australia's reliance on urea imports. A potential CBAM might represent 1-3pc of ammonium nitrate import costs in 2030, DCCEEW said. Australia produces 1.9mn t/yr of ammonium nitrate, according to the department. The country imported 147,000t in 2025, ABS data show. Ammonium nitrate is a byproduct of ammonia, which is a byproduct of hydrogen. Australia introduced its National Hydrogen Strategy in 2024. The strategy sets a green hydrogen production target of 15mn t/yr by 2050. The European Union's (EU) CBAM came into effect from 1 January 2026. The policy has caused confusion and uncertainty for the fertilizer industry and several EU countries supported suspending application on fertilizers. Australian chemicals and explosives firm Orica declined to comment, while firms CSBP, Yara and Dyno Nobel did not respond for comment at the time of writing. By Susannah Cornford Australia imports Product 2023 Import value (A$mn) Import share of total trade (%) Indicitave 2030 carbon cost as % of price Ammonia 134.0 44.0 3-5 Ammonium nitrate 175.0 87.0 1-3 Ammonium phosphate 894.0 78.0 1-3 Urea 1,844.0 100.0 N/A —DCCEEW Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2026. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
Australia should have CBAM on some commodities: Review
Australia should have CBAM on some commodities: Review
Sydney, 13 February (Argus) — Australia should consider introducing a carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM), starting with imports of cement and clinker and potentially expanding to products such as hydrogen, steel, and ammonia and derivatives like urea and ammonium phosphate, according to a key report released by the government today. The identified commodities face risk of future carbon leakage from imports, which could lead to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions being relocated from Australia to overseas. The carbon leakage review , led by Australian National University professor Frank Jotzo between July 2023 and March 2025, assessed leakage risks in 2030 for all 75 trade-exposed commodities under Australia's safeguard mechanism across 42 commodity groups. The review was announced as part of the 2023 reform of the safeguard mechanism While current safeguard mechanism settings are effective at mitigating carbon leakage risk in the short- to medium-term, the declining emissions baselines under the scheme could put some of the identified sectors at a "more significant" risk over time, according to the report. Cement and clinker first, others to follow Risks are higher for cement and clinker, and the implementation of a border carbon adjustment for these products "is likely to be simplest," according to the report. Australian production of lime and glass, on the other hand, is only partially covered under the safeguard mechanism, and a CBAM application would face more complexity. Hydrogen, steel, and ammonia and derivatives carry material carbon leakage risks, but feature more complexity with respect to production methods, supply chains, and product diversity. Some of these products are also only partially covered by the safeguard mechanism. The government should also consider potential risks for a second group of commodities, consisting of aluminium and alumina, refined petroleum, and pulp and paper. These products face mixed evidence related to leakage risk indicators and analysis of trade and investment leakage, but the government could assess them in the forthcoming review of the safeguard mechanism scheduled for the July 2026-June 2027 financial year and consider particularly the suitability of arrangements for emissions-intensive trade-exposed activities for all commodities under the scheme. Preference for fees instead of ACCU surrenders The safeguard mechanism covers over 200 individual facilities emitting more than 100,000t of CO2 equivalent (CO2e) in a compliance year across the oil and gas, mining, manufacturing, transport and waste sectors. Facilities earn Safeguard Mechanism Credits (SMCs) if their reported scope 1 emissions fall below their baselines, and must surrender SMCs or Australian Carbon Credit Units (ACCUs) if emissions exceed the threshold. If the Australian government decides to pursue a CBAM, it should consider applying liabilities only to scope 1 emissions that exceed the relevant safeguard mechanism baseline at the time of import. The assessment should be based on explicit carbon prices only, and the liability should account for the differences between the effective carbon price paid in the originating country and an Australian benchmark price. While importers could, in principle, clear the liability by paying a fee or surrendering ACCUs, there was "broad support" for the fee option during the consultation, according to the report. Surrendering ACCUs would more closely reflect domestic requirements, but trading in ACCUs has legislative requirements that would have to be met by importers which would require careful consideration, the report warned. The ACCU purchase option would create additional demand for the product, raising prices. But stakeholder feedback "reflected concerns about the potential impact on ACCU supply" if these carbon credit units were used to meet carbon border adjustment liabilities. The government should not consider a carbon border adjustment that provides rebates for exports, as that would be inconsistent with Australia's emissions reduction targets and could raise considerable international trade law concerns. "Rebating emissions obligations to exports would effectively exempt production for export from emissions reductions obligations, running counter to overall policy objectives towards net zero and increasing the required emissions reductions elsewhere in the economy," the report read. Teba provisions could be removed Trade-exposed, baseline-adjusted (Teba) facilities operating in emission-intensive sectors that might face unfair competition from imports from countries with weaker or no emission reduction policies currently benefit from discounted baseline decline rates under the safeguard mechanism. Decline rates can be as low as 2pc for non-manufacturing sectors or 1pc for manufacturing sectors, compared with the standard 4.9pc/yr declining rate until 2030. The Teba provisions for a commodity should be removed once a border carbon adjustment is fully implemented for that commodity, according to the review. Limited impact on downstream activity The report also noted that analysis indicates the impact of a carbon border adjustment on downstream activity, such as construction, would be "very limited". "The review's analysis suggests that the maximum price impacts on final goods that incorporate commodities that may be subject to a border carbon adjustment, such as wind farms, house construction and crops like wheat, would be vanishingly small as a share of product prices," the report said. The government said today it will continue to consult on carbon leakage with affected industries, and will consider the report's recommendations in the safeguard mechanism review. By Juan Weik Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2026. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
Q&A: Hydrogen industry banks on EU mandated demand
Q&A: Hydrogen industry banks on EU mandated demand
Brussels, 11 February (Argus) — The EU may only secure half its 10mn t of domestic hydrogen production goal by 2030, but lead markets and legally mandated demand mechanisms — including via made-in-Europe obligations — can promote uptake alongside the bloc's aspirational goals, Hydrogen Europe's Director for transport, industrial policy and sustainability Laurent Donceel told Argus . How important do you see lead markets legislation for hydrogen? This is a whole new political priority — creating demand for made-in-Europe sustainable products. The upcoming Industrial Accelerator Act focuses on creating lead markets through public procurement and subsidies. But mechanisms like revision of car and van CO2 standards may be equally important, providing captive demand for projects like Stegra in Sweden, Salzgitter in Germany and Hydnum Steel in Spain. The new CO2 car standards introduce 10pc compliance options including up to 3pc sustainable fuels and e-fuels and 7pc credits for clean steel. If manufacturers utilize 7pc for clean steel credits, under the forthcoming legislation, this could drive demand for 6mn t of green steel by 2035, requiring roughly 500,000t of green hydrogen on top of RED III targets. This is why the revised CO2 standards are so interesting. How will policy discussions in the European Parliament and among EU states impact uptake? European Commission analysis shows hydrogen would cover 10pc of energy end-use in Europe by 2050 as oil and gas decline. E-fuels would cover an extra 7pc — it's massive. Building on shortfalls in the Renewable Energy Directive (RED), many sectors could rely on e-fuels to comply with the maritime renewable fuel mandate, aviation and CO2 standards for cars. On revision of the emissions trading system (ETS), this should be the tool to cover the price gap between sustainable fuels, e-fuels, and fossil fuels for maritime, aviation, and other sectors. Free allowances must be conditional, tied to clean fuel uptake and decarbonization investments rather than granted unconditionally. Carbon prices are reaching €90/t — the highest since 2023. We understand sectors are concerned about competitiveness. But free allowances need to be linked to clear carbon leakage analysis and decarbonization investments. Will reform of the EU's carbon border threaten investments? The newly proposed article 27a in the reform of the carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) creates a really bad signal. This clause allows the European Commission to consider exempting sectors from CBAM if there's proven market impact. We've already seen some big projects put on hold because of this concern. What do you want then? We're asking for article 27a to be scrapped entirely . The terms are pretty vague. It could happen retroactively. And there's no clarity as to how such a decision would be taken by the European Commission. This is a sword of Damocles hanging over all projects, including blue hydrogen [produced from natural gas] with carbon capture and storage. In the European Parliament there's good awareness of the dangers across parties. We hope member states do not only look from the side of agricultural policy and farmers, but for all clean industries pursuing decarbonization. Our assessment shows fertilizer price increases from CBAM in 2026 would be minimal, despite certain agricultural ministers' claims. Are EU states struggling to implement EU renewable goals for hydrogen? Targets are going to be hard to reach, with much of the demand coming through the refinery route. The 42.5pc renewable hydrogen target for industrial consumption faces significant headwinds due to cost issues in fertilizers, steel and ammonia. High energy costs and low willingness to pay make industrial decarbonization challenging. Together with developments in e-fuels, aviation and maritime, you'll get roughly 60pc of all regulatory mandated demand for hydrogen. Projects need captive demand. When we have harmonized regulation and strong penalties, you know that it is going to create the demand. The biggest is aviation. A full 1.2pc of fuel delivered at European airports in 2030 has to be synthetic sustainable aviation fuel (e-SAF). With 10pc aviation growth, you're at 49mn t of kerosene in 2030. Take 1.2pc of that — it's actually quite a big future market for e-fuels. Of the 2.8mn t of green hydrogen required by 2030 under RED III, data suggest we'll reach 1.7mn t through projects currently in the pipeline, refinery routes, aviation and maritime. That means some 85pc from domestic production and 15pc from imports based on binding agreements. That leaves roughly 40pc uncovered. Despite the EU likely falling short of the original aspiration of 10mn t domestic and 10mn t imports, the increase remains substantial. Between 2024 and 2030, we're seeing almost fivefold growth in hydrogen production from projects under construction or with final investment decisions. Are you having difficulties with the Union Database (UDB)? The UDB is a big issue. We are very concerned it's not going as fast as we want. It's important for end-users to show sustainability. But the whole framework of the mechanism is still not functioning, which slows down contracts between off-takers and producers. Originally designed for biofuels, it's now extending to sustainable aviation fuels, maritime fuels, and additional end-users. As you create new targets for end-users like maritime and aviation, they also need access to the UDB. It's turning into quite a monster of a tool, but in the end it should be the main point of reference. By Dafydd ab Iago Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2026. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
EU H2 groups oppose CBAM suspension clause proposal
EU H2 groups oppose CBAM suspension clause proposal
Paris, 11 February (Argus) — A group of European clean hydrogen industry associations is calling for the removal of a proposed measure under the EU's Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) that could temporarily suspend certain products, including fertilizers, from its scope. The European Commission proposed Article 27a in December. It stipulates a temporary suspension could be issued if CBAM causes "severe harm to the Union internal market due to serious and unforeseen circumstances related to the impact on the prices of goods", but is yet to be accepted by the European Parliament or European Council. Accepting the clause would undermine "market trust in the CBAM, the EU's carbon pricing system and the overall credibility of the EU energy and climate regulatory framework," the groups said in an 11 February letter to the parliament's environment, climate and food safety committee. Hydrogen Europe, Renewable Hydrogen Coalition and Hydrogen Council were among the signatories. CBAM has been an important driver of investment in decarbonisation vectors and products such as clean hydrogen, ammonia and green steel, according to the groups. But they said the suspension measure risks compromising efforts already made because it "lacks any foreseeable, and time-bound conditions" to be administered. Weakening the scope of CBAM could "further increase long-term exposure to fossil fuel price shocks" and prevent investments in renewable and low-carbon ammonia and fertilizer projects, they said. The proposed article already "had an immediate, tangible and materially disruptive effect on the fertilizer markets" with industry participants being hesitant to close contracts and negotiations being delayed, the groups said. The measure could be "even more consequential" for the long-term market prospects of projects under initial development stages. This is because "developers and investors must decide today how to price future CBAM exposure over asset lifetimes of 15 to 30 years," the groups said. "First movers, both in the EU and globally, are undermined if compliance undertaken in good faith today can be revisited retroactively tomorrow," they concluded. By Pamela Machado 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.
