Generic Hero BannerGeneric Hero Banner
Latest market news

US Gulf lowest-cost green ammonia in 2030: Report

  • Market: Biofuels, E-fuels, Emissions, Fertilizers, Hydrogen, Petrochemicals
  • 16/04/24

The US Gulf coast will likely be the lowest cost source of green ammonia to top global bunkering ports Singapore and Rotterdam by 2030, according to a study by independent non-profits Rocky Mountain Institute and the Global Maritime Forum.

Green ammonia in Singapore is projected to be sourced from the US Gulf coast at $1,100/t, Chile at $1,850/t, Australia at $1,940/t, Namibia at $2,050/t and India at $2,090/t very low-sulphur fuel oil equivalent (VLSFOe) in 2030. Singapore is also projected to procure green methanol from the US Gulf coast at $1,330/t, China at $1,640/t, Australia at $2,610/t and Egypt at $2,810/t VLSFOe in 2030.

The US Gulf coast would be cheaper for both Chinese bio-methanol and Egyptian or Australian e-methanol. But modeling suggests that competition could result in US methanol going to other ports, particularly in Europe, unless the Singaporean port ecosystem moves to proactively secure supply, says the study.

In addition to space constraints imposed by its geography, Singapore has relatively poor wind and solar energy sources, which makes local production of green hydrogen-based-fuels expensive, says the study. Singapore locally produced green methanol and green ammonia are projected at $2,910/t and $2,800/t VLSFOe, respectively, in 2030, higher than imports, even when considering the extra transport costs.

The study projects that fossil fuels would account for 47mn t VLSFOe, or 95pc of Singapore's marine fuel demand in 2030. The remaining 5pc will be allocated between green ammonia (about 1.89mn t VLSFOe) and green methanol (3.30mn t VLSFOe).

Rotterdam to pull from US Gulf

Green ammonia in Rotterdam is projected to be sourced from the US Gulf coast at $1,080/t, locally produced at $2,120/t, sourced from Spain at $2,150/t and from Brazil at $2,310/t.

Rotterdam is also projected to procure green methanol from China at $1,830/t, Denmark at $2,060/t, locally produce it at $2,180/t and from Finland at $2,190/t VLSFOe, among other countries, but not the US Gulf coast .

The study projects that fossil fuels would account for 8.1mn t VLSFOe, or 95pc of Rotterdam's marine fuel demand in 2030. The remaining 5pc will be allocated between green ammonia, at about 326,000t, and green methanol, at about 570,000t VLSFOe.

Rotterdam has a good renewable energy potential, according to the study. But Rotterdam is also a significant industrial cluster and several of the industries in the port's hinterland are seeking to use hydrogen for decarbonisation. As such, the port is expected to import most of its green hydrogen-based fuel supply.

Though US-produced green fuels are likely to be in high demand, Rotterdam can benefit from EU incentives for hydrogen imports, lower-emission fuel demand created by the EU emissions trading system and FuelEU Maritime.

But the EU's draft Renewable Energy Directive could limit the potential for European ports like Rotterdam to import US green fuels. The draft requirements in the Directive disallow fuel from some projects that benefit from renewable electricity incentives, like the renewable energy production tax credit provided by the US's Inflation Reduction Act, after 2028. If these draft requirements are accepted in the final regulation, they could limit the window of opportunity for hydrogen imports from the US to Rotterdam to the period before 2028, says the study.


Sharelinkedin-sharetwitter-sharefacebook-shareemail-share

Related news posts

Argus illuminates the markets by putting a lens on the areas that matter most to you. The market news and commentary we publish reveals vital insights that enable you to make stronger, well-informed decisions. Explore a selection of news stories related to this one.

News
16/05/25

US House panel votes down Republican megabill

US House panel votes down Republican megabill

Washington, 16 May (Argus) — A key committee in the US House of Representatives voted today to reject a massive budget bill backed by President Donald Trump, as far-right conservatives demanded deeper cuts to clean energy tax credits and social spending programs. The House Budget Committee failed to pass the budget reconciliation bill in a 16-21 vote, with four House Freedom Caucus members — Ralph Norman (R-South Carolina), Chip Roy (R-Texas), Josh Brecheen (R-Oklahoma) and Andrew Clyde (R-Georgia) — voting no alongside Democrats. A fifth Republican voted no for procedural reasons. The failed vote will force Republicans to consider major changes to the bill before it comes up for a vote on the House floor as early as next week. Republican holdouts say the bill would fall short of their party's promises to cut the deficit, particularly because it would front-load increased spending and back-load cuts. The bill is set to add $3.3 trillion to the deficit, or $5.2 trillion if temporary provisions were permanent, according to estimates from the nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. Some critics of the bill said the proposed cut of $560bn in clean energy tax credits is not enough, because the bill would retain some tax credits for new wind and solar projects. "A lot of these credits have been in existence for 30 or 40 years, and you talk about giveaways, we want to help those who really need help," Norman said ahead of his no vote. "That's the heart of this. Sadly, I'm a no until we get this ironed out." Negotiations will fall to House speaker Mike Johnson (R-Louisiana), who can only lose three votes when the bill comes up for a vote by the full House. But stripping away more of the energy tax credits enacted in the Inflation Reduction Act could end up costing Johnson votes among moderates. More than a dozen Republicans on 14 May asked to pare back newly proposed restrictions on the remaining clean energy tax credits. Ahead of the failed vote, Trump had pushed Republicans to support what he calls the "Big Beautiful Bill". In a social media post, he said "Republicans MUST UNITE" in support of the bill and said the party did not need "GRANDSTANDERS". The failed vote has parallels to the struggles that Democrats had in 2021 before the implosion of their push to pass their sprawling "Build Back Better" bill, which was later revived as the Inflation Reduction Act. Republicans say they will work over the weekend on a compromise. The House Budget Committee has scheduled another hearing at 10pm on 18 May to attempt to vote again on the budget package, but any changes to the measure would occur later, through an amendment released before the bill comes up for a vote on the House floor. By Chris Knight Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Find out more
News

UK establishes public energy company


15/05/25
News
15/05/25

UK establishes public energy company

London, 15 May (Argus) — The UK parliament has passed a bill establishing a publicly owned energy company, Great British Energy (GBE), to support the nation's renewable energy ambitions. The company, funded with £8.3bn ($11.02bn) over the current parliamentary term, aims to accelerate renewable energy projects, enhance energy security, and support job creation, the department for energy security and net zero (Desnz) announced on Thursday. GBE will invest in clean energy initiatives, including technologies such as floating offshore wind, and collaborate with private companies to expand renewable energy capacity. The government states the company will help stabilise energy costs by reducing reliance on fossil fuels. The bill includes £200mn for renewable energy projects, such as rooftop solar for schools, hospitals, and communities. It has also committed £300mn to develop the UK's offshore wind supply chain, supporting manufacturing of components such as cables and platforms. The legislation received approval from the devolved governments of Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland, enabling GBE to operate across the UK. Desnz secretary of state Ed Miliband is expected to outline GBE's strategic priorities "soon", specifying technology focus areas and investment criteria. The government sees GBE as a key part of its plan to transition to clean energy and stimulate economic growth through a "modern industrial strategy", it said. Industry body Energy UK welcomed the bill's passage. "[GBE] can play a vital role in making the government's clean energy ambitions a reality by attracting extra private sector investment," chief executive Dhara Vyas said. By Timothy Santonastaso Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

France consults on expanded biofuels mandate


15/05/25
News
15/05/25

France consults on expanded biofuels mandate

London, 15 May (Argus) — France has opened consultation on the transposition of part of the recast renewable energy directive (RED III) into national law, which would replace the current system with a new one called "incentive for the reduction of the carbon intensity of fuels" (IRICC). The proposal introduces two separate sets of requirements for transport fuels. The first is for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reductions, broken down by transport sectors — road, aviation, maritime, LPG and natural gas for vehicles, which could be CNG or LNG (see table). In the current draft, the GHG reduction target for the road sector will start at 5.9pc in 2026, rising to 10.6pc in 2030 and 18.7pc in 2035. For aviation, the target starts at 2.5pc in 2026, rising to 5.8pc in 2030 and 18.8pc in 2035. The GHG mandate levels include a gradual phasing-in of new fuel sectors – river and maritime fuels, fuel gasses, and aviation. To meet the overall RED III target of 14.5pc emissions reduction by 2030, the national French target includes the biofuels mandates, a share for rail transport, and a share or private vehicle charging. The second set of requirements is a renewable fuel requirement by energy content, which is broken down by fuel type — diesel, gasoline, LPG and natural gas fuels and marine fuel (see table). The blending requirements for diesel start at 9pc in 2026, rising to 11.4pc in 2030 and 16pc in 2035. For gasoline, the mandates start at 9.5pc in 2026, rising to 10.5pc in 2030 and 14.5pc in 2035. Finally, the proposal includes a set of sub-mandates for advanced fuels and renewable hydrogen . The advanced biofuels mandate would start at 0.7pc in 2026, rising to 1.95pc in 2030 and 2.6pc in 2035. Users of renewable fuels of non-biological origin (RFNBOs) would not be subject to the advanced sub-mandate. In feedstock restrictions, the crop cap will rise to 7pc from 6.2pc in 2030 and 2035, while the limit for fuels made from feedstocks found in Annex IX-B of RED will be at 0.6pc in 2026, 0.7pc in 2030 and 1pc in 2035 for diesel and petrol. Aviation fuel will not have a IX-B cap until 2030, and from then it will be 6pc. Mandate compliance would be managed by a certificate system through the CarbuRe registry, with a compliance deadline of 1 March the following year. Public electric vehicle charging would also generate tickets, although the amount of tickets generated by charging light passenger vehicles would be reduced from 2031 to reach 50pc in 2035. Renewable hydrogen used in transport would also generate tickets counting towards the hydrogen sub-quota and reduce the overall GHG savings requirement. Public charging stations will start generating fewer tickets for electric passenger vehicles from 2031 to 50pc by 2035. France is also considering steep penalties for non-compliance, at €700/t CO2 not avoided for the GHG reduction requirement and at €40/GJ for the fuel targets. The penalty for not meeting hydrogen and advanced fuel sub-targets would be doubled, at €80/GJ. The consultation is open for comments until 10 June. By Simone Burgin Proposed GHG reduction by transport sector % 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 Road and non-road diesel 5.9 7.1 8.3 9.5 10.6 13.2 14.8 16.2 17.5 18.7 Aviation 2.5 3.3 4.1 4.9 5.8 8.4 10.8 13.3 15.9 18.7 RFNBO sub-target (% en.) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 1.2 2.0 2.0 2.0 5.0 Maritime 2.5 3.25 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.5 RFNBO sub-target (% en.) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 2.0 2.0 LPG and natural gas fuels 0.0 0.0 2.7 6.3 10.6 13.2 14.8 16.2 17.5 18.7 DGEC Proposed energy content mandate by fuel type % (en.) 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 Diesel 9.0 9.5 10.1 10.7 11.4 12.2 13.0 13.8 14.9 16.0 Petrol 9.5 9.7 10.0 10.2 10.5 11.1 11.8 12.6 13.4 14.5 Natural gas fuels 0.0 0.0 3.0 7.0 12.0 15.0 16.0 18.0 19.0 21.0 LPG 0.0 0.0 3.0 7.0 12.0 15.0 16.0 18.0 19.0 21.0 Marine fuel 2.9 3.8 4.7 5.9 7.1 8.2 9.4 11.8 14.1 17.1 DGEC Proposed caps and sub-targets % (en.) 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 Feedstock caps Crop feedstocks 6.2 6.4 6.6 6.8 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 Annex IX-B feedstocks* 0.6 0.6 0.65 0.7 0.7 0.75 0.8 0.85 0.9 1.0 Cat. 3 tallow 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 Tall oil 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.2 Fuel sub-targets Advanced feedstocks 0.7 0.95 1.25 1.6 1.95 2.0 2.1 2.25 2.4 2.6 RFNBOs/Renewable hydrogen 0.05 0.2 0.5 1.0 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 2.0 *For diesel and petrol Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

Q&A: Braskem Idesa Mexico terminal to feed cracker


14/05/25
News
14/05/25

Q&A: Braskem Idesa Mexico terminal to feed cracker

Mexico City, 14 May (Argus) — The new ethane storage terminal owned 50:50 by Brazilian-Mexican JV Braskem Idesa and the Netherlands-based Advario will be fully operational by mid-July, when the Etileno XXI cracker returns from a full-stop maintenance program, said Cleantho Leite, chief executive of Terminal Quimica Puerto Mexico (TQPM), in an interview with Argus. Edited highlights follow. What does the new terminal represent for Braskem after years of limited ethane supply? TQPM solves a long-standing ethane supply shortage in Mexico, which remains one of the largest ethane consumers in the region. Under the previous supply contract with Pemex, we did not have full supply. It was like having an F1 car with only 70pc of its fuel — eventually, we would run out of supply before even completing the race. Now, thanks to this terminal, Braskem can import the ethane it needs from the US to ensure consistent operations. Of course, we will continue buying from Pemex whenever possible, as its ethane remains the most cost-effective solution. But with this infrastructure in place, we are no longer tied to a single supply source. When will the terminal begin operating at full capacity? We are currently in pre-operational stages, and commercial operations are expected to begin by late May. Then, the Braskem complex will enter its scheduled maintenance shutdown. Once it resumes in mid-July, we will begin transitioning to full utilization of the terminal. The facility is fully capable of covering up to 100pc of Braskem's demand. In fact, it was designed with a 25pc buffer — excess capacity that could support future expansions. The equipment is ready, and whether we go from 75pc to 100pc in 15 days or in a month will depend entirely on Braskem's operating strategy. What is going to happen with the ethane Pemex no longer uses? For now, I do not see Pemex's own complexes significantly increasing their consumption of ethane. It is not like they will double their intake overnight. At least during 2025, Pemex is still in the process of reactivating its own crackers, so that volume will remain available to Braskem. If Pemex eventually requires more supply, it has its own import terminal. Alternatively, it could request capacity from TQPM if needed. Also, Braskem has long-term contracts that allow flexibility in adjusting volumes. If there is unused ethane in a given month, we can resell it to other locations. That has always been part of our strategy. The Braskem group, through Braskem Trading and Shipping, has consistently found alternatives for any surplus. Do you foresee any regulatory or permitting issues under the new legal framework in Mexico? No. We already hold all relevant permits from the now-defunct energy regulator CRE, which are now under the authority of the new CNE. That means no additional permits are required for the terminal under the new framework. Furthermore, the open-access guidelines established by the CRE are still valid and will be used by the CNE to issue and manage permits. The only other authorizations we need are from customs, which have not hindered pre-operations. Historically, the CRE reviewed transportation tariffs every five years, and we expect the CNE will follow the same regulatory schedule. What is the outlook for Braskem's crackers in Brazil regarding a transition to ethane? In Brazil, Braskem currently operates four crackers — three based on naphtha and one, in Rio de Janeiro, on ethane. The company is studying a broader shift toward ethane to reduce dependence on naphtha. Shipments to Brazil would follow a similar model to what we are doing in Mexico, with contracts signed with US suppliers. Our Salvador Bahia plant already receives ethane occasionally, using vessels that take roughly 12 days to arrive. Mexico has a geographical advantage — just two days away from US ethane. What are the long-term plans for TQPM? Our immediate focus is stable operation and efficiency. Long term, the terminal is well located in the Interoceanic Corridor and could serve future industrial projects. We have space and docking infrastructure to add tanks for chemicals, ammonia or propane. Nothing is confirmed yet, but in 3–4 years we expect opportunities to emerge. By Édgar Sígler Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

UK ethanol sector sees lower prices from US trade deal


14/05/25
News
14/05/25

UK ethanol sector sees lower prices from US trade deal

London, 14 May (Argus) — The UK ethanol sector expects prices to fall because of the recent trade deal with the US, but participants are divided on the scale of the effect. The trade deal has cut import duties on US ethanol to zero on higher volumes than recent import levels, raising the prospect of large amounts of US product crossing the Atlantic. The UK was the second largest destination for US ethanol exports in 2024, taking more than 923mn l, or 13pc of all exports, according to US industry group Renewable Fuels Association. The UK imposed a duty of £16/hectolitre ($21/hectolitre) for undenatured ethanol and £8.50/hectolitre for denatured ethanol, which the trade deal will remove. Zero tariffs will be applied to up to 1.4bn l/yr. European renewable ethanol association ePure told Argus the deal presents a "huge problem" for UK and EU ethanol producers, a view echoed by some UK market participants. But some active in the UK ethanol market have said that while they do not expect greater amounts of ethanol to arrive in the country, they do anticipate lower prices and lower domestic production. The operators of the UK's two major ethanol-producing facilities, Vivergo and Cropenergies, said there will be zero tariffs on "the size of the UK's whole ethanol market", and said they may have to close. According to Argus data the total UK production capacity for wheat-based ethanol is over 736mn l/yr. The National Farmers' Union expressed concern about the deal's effect on arable farmers, and said it is "working through what this means for the viability of the domestic bioethanol production." Although a healthy share of the total import pool from the US is waste-based, the UK government is consulting on whether to continue classing the main waste feedstock imported from the US as eligible for double counting under its renewable transport fuel obligation (RTFO). Staging post UK producers may still seek to maximise imports from the US for onward export into the EU. The current EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA) allows for zero tariffs and quotas on all trade of UK and EU goods that comply with appropriate rules or origin. But with this new deal, there is an increased chance of US ethanol entering the EU via the UK, Epure said. "Under existing customs rules US ethanol can be mixed with UK ethanol and thus avoid an EU duty," it said. This may include major proportion, which limits the share of non-originating materials to claim UK origin, or inward processing relief, which allows for imports to be processed without paying import duties or value added tax (VAT) before re-export. Some market participants contested the extent to which UK-EU flows of ethanol with partial US origin might happen, suggesting the imported ethanol would need to undergo a significant chemical change to be classified as duty free, such as being used as feedstock for products including ethyl tert-butyl ether (ETBE). EPure said the EU should be wary, and called for ethanol to be included in a final list of products subject to EU countermeasures, as it was in a recent proposal from the bloc currently under public consultation. By Toby Shay Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Generic Hero Banner

Business intelligence reports

Get concise, trustworthy and unbiased analysis of the latest trends and developments in oil and energy markets. These reports are specially created for decision makers who don’t have time to track markets day-by-day, minute-by-minute.

Learn more