Bunker voluntary carbon offsets face uncertainty
A number of marine fuel traders have begun offering voluntary carbon offsets, but the outlook for offsets is uncertain since they are not a formally accepted method to reduce shipping greenhouse gas emissions.
Neither the International Maritime Organization (IMO) nor the EU accepts the offsets as a means to reduce carbon emissions, so they must be used in addition to paying for more expensive low-carbon fuels and investing in more fuel-efficient vessels. But prices for the offsets are low, and some ship owners consider them a way to address their customers and the public's environmental concerns. If the costs remain low, some owners will continue to voluntarily participate.
KPI OceanConnect, Minerva Bunkering, Trefoil Trading, Vitol Bunkers and World Fuel Services are among the bunker traders and suppliers that have joined the voluntary carbon offset bandwagon.
In July, Switzerland-based MSC Cruises said it will not pursue carbon offsets and, instead, will invest in research and development of alternative marine fuels, such as ammonia and hydrogen. This marks a shift from 2019, when MSC Cruises said it was considering carbon offsets.
The Chicago Mercantile Exchange (CME) global emissions offset September futures contract settled at $6.03/t yesterday. Argus assessed physical Amsterdam-Rotterdam-Antwerp very low-sulphur fuel oil (VLSFO) at $499.25/t yesterday. When burned, 1t of VLSFO emits about 3.151t of CO2. Using CME's contract for voluntarily carbon offsets would have added $19/t, or 3.8pc to the price of the VLSFSO. By comparison, if ship owners were to buy CO2 allowances on the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS), they would have paid $66.90/t yesterday, which would have added $210.80/t, or 42pc, to their VLSFO bills.
GHGs from shipping are not taxed or restricted. The IMO requires that shipowners reduce CO2 emissions by 40pc by 2030 and by 70pc by 2050 from 2008 base levels in international waters.
The EU is taking more immediate measures, with two proposals in the works that would apply to vessels traveling in EU territorial waters.
One would phase in maritime emissions trading in its ETS starting in 2023, with 100pc auctioning of CO2 emissions from 2026. The second measure would reduce GHG intensity levels for vessels starting from 2025, with a 75pc reduction by 2050 from 2020 base levels.
Related news posts
HSFO demand supports Rotterdam 1Q bunker sales
HSFO demand supports Rotterdam 1Q bunker sales
London, 30 April (Argus) — Total sales of fossil bunker fuels and marine biodiesel blends at the port of Rotterdam were 2.45mn t in the first quarter this year, up by 13pc compared with the final three months of 2023 but 9pc lower year on year, according to official port data. Sales firmed across the board quarter on quarter, even though market participants had described spot bunker fuel demand in the region as "mostly limited" and shipping demand as lacklustre. High-sulphur fuel oil (HSFO) sales rose the most. Disruption in the Red Sea resulted in many vessels re-routing around the southern tip of Africa, increasing the incentive of bunkering with HSFO as opposed to very low-sulphur fuel oil (VLSFO) and marine gasoil (MGO), according to market participants. The longer journeys meant that vessels on the route increased their fuel consumption to reduce delivery delays, supporting conventional bunker fuel sales at Rotterdam. Higher prices for HSFO in Singapore also helped support HSFO demand in Rotterdam. Marine biodiesel sales at Rotterdam increased by 13pc on the quarter and by 76pc on the year in January-March, despite the Dutch government's decision to half the Dutch renewable tickets (HBE-G) multiplier for shipping at the turn of the year. The move has led to a substantial increase in prices for advanced fatty acid methyl ester (Fame) 0 blends in the Amsterdam-Rotterdam-Antwerp (ARA) hub. The inclusion of shipping in the EU's Emissions Trading System (ETS) from January may have lent support to demand for biofuel blends. Marine biodiesel made up 11pc of total bunker fuel sales at Rotterdam in the first quarter, the same share as the previous quarter, which was a record high. LNG bunker sales at Rotterdam in January-March soared by 45pc on the quarter and by 150pc on the year. By Hussein Al-Khalisy Rotterdam bunker sales t Fuel 1Q24 4Q23 1Q23 q-o-q% y-o-y% VLSFO & ULSFO 857,579 847,862 1,205,288 1 -29 HSFO 818,028 643,218 809,871 27 1 MGO/MDO 383,409 361,585 468,373 6 -18 Biofuel blends 262,634 233,108 149,206 13 76 Total 2,453,610 2,177,078 2,685,515 13 -9 LNG (m³) 131,960 91,305 52,777 45 150 Port of Rotterdam Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
G7 countries put timeframe on 'unabated' coal phase-out
G7 countries put timeframe on 'unabated' coal phase-out
London, 30 April (Argus) — G7 countries today committed to phasing out "unabated coal power generation" by 2035 — putting a timeframe on a coal phase-out for the first time. The communique, from a meeting of G7 climate, energy and environment ministers in Turin, northern Italy, represents "an historic agreement" on coal, Canadian environment minister Steven Guilbeault said. Although most G7 nations have set a deadline for phasing out coal-fired power, the agreement marks a step forward for Japan in particular, which had previously not made the commitment, and is a "milestone moment", senior policy advisor at think-tank E3G Katrine Petersen said. The G7 countries are Italy — this year's host — Canada, France, Germany, Japan, the UK and the US. The EU is a non-enumerated member. But the pledge contains a caveat in its reference to "unabated" coal-fired power — suggesting that abatement technologies such as carbon capture and storage could justify its use, while some of the wording around a deadline is less clear. The communique sets a timeframe of "the first half of [the] 2030s or in a timeline consistent with keeping a limit of 1.5°C temperature rise within reach, in line with countries' net-zero pathways". OECD countries should end coal use by 2030 and the rest of the world by 2040, in order to align with the global warming limit of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels set out in the Paris Agreement, according to research institute Climate Analytics. The countries welcomed the outcomes of the UN Cop 28 climate summit , pledging to "accelerate the phase out of unabated fossil fuels so as to achieve net zero in energy systems by 2050". It backed the Cop 28 goal to triple renewable energy capacity by 2030 and added support for a global target for energy storage in the power sector of 1.5TW by 2030. The group committed to submit climate plans — known as nationally determined contributions (NDCs) — with "the highest possible ambition" from late this year or in early 2025. And it also called on the IEA to "provide recommendations" next year on how to implement a transition away from fossil fuels. The G7 also reiterated its commitment to a "fully or predominantly decarbonised power sector by 2035" — first made in May 2022 and highlighted roles for carbon management, carbon markets, hydrogen and biofuels. Simon Stiell, head of UN climate body the UNFCCC, urged the G7 and G20 countries to lead on climate action, in a recent speech . The group noted in today's outcome that "further actions from all countries, especially major economies, are required". The communique broadly reaffirmed existing positions on climate finance, although any concrete steps are not likely to be taken ahead of Cop 29 in November. The group underlined its pledge to end "inefficient fossil fuel subsidies" by 2025 or earlier, but added a new promise to "promote a common definition" of the term, which is likely to increase countries' accountability. The group will report on its progress towards ending those subsidies next year, it added. Fostering energy security The communique placed a strong focus on the need for "diverse, resilient, and responsible energy technology supply chains, including manufacturing and critical minerals". It noted the important of "guarding against possible weaponisation of economic dependencies on critical minerals and critical raw materials" — many of which are mined and processed outside the G7 group. Energy security held sway on the group's take on natural gas. It reiterated its stance that gas investments "can be appropriate… if implemented in a manner consistent with our climate objectives" and noted that increased LNG deliveries could play a key role. By Georgia Gratton Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
UN eyes policy crediting for carbon markets
UN eyes policy crediting for carbon markets
Berlin, 30 April (Argus) — The UN is considering extending the scope of carbon mitigation credit generation under the Paris climate agreement to policy implementation. The UN's climate arm has tasked research institute Perspectives Climate Group senior founding partner Axel Michaelowa with drawing up a paper on how to incorporate policy crediting into the new carbon market being developed under Article 6.4 of the Paris deal. This is expected to be finalised by the UN Cop 29 climate conference in Azerbaijan in November following persistent disagreements between countries at previous summits. Policy crediting is increasingly viewed as crucial amid the rising urgency to scale up mitigation activities, Michaelowa said at an industry event in Zurich yesterday. But policy crediting presents challenges, such as how to determine the additionality of the instruments for mitigation efforts. The World Bank, which developed the first ever policy crediting activity — the Transformative Carbon Asset Facility — in 2016, determines additionality indirectly as the difference between the facility's baseline and actual emissions. Michaelowa believes this is insufficient, urging separate additionality tests to prove the policy instrument mobilises mitigation. An eligible policy instrument typically closes the cost gap between mitigation and business-as-usual technologies, Michaelowa said. "Creditable" policy instruments are mandates, or financial incentives, for deploying low-carbon technologies or behaviours. Policies that reverse previous bad governance by eliminating obstacles to mitigation activities also qualify, Michaelowa said, for example a grid operator enforcing a stop on renewable power growth to ensure grid stability, as investments in the grid would be too costly. Uzbekistan signed an agreement under the World Bank's facility in June 2023 under which it can sell carbon credits issued for the emissions reductions resulting from its cuts to high fossil fuel subsidies. The resulting funds are used to mitigate the impact of rising energy prices on the lowest income consumers, and fund awareness campaigns on the need for cost-covering energy tariffs. Uzbekistan expects to reduce its emissions by 60mn t of CO2 equivalent (CO2e) between 2022-27 as a result of the cuts, of which 2mn-2.5mn t CO2e are attributed directly to the facility's intervention, funded with $46.25mn by donor countries to result in a carbon price of between $18.50-23.12/t CO2e. The World Bank is looking at other countries and sectors to apply the lessons learned from the Uzbekistan pilot, its senior climate finance specialist Nuyi Tao said. By Chloe Jardine Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
Pemex fuel output surges, imports down in March
Pemex fuel output surges, imports down in March
Mexico City, 29 April (Argus) — Mexico's state-owned Pemex increased its gasoline and diesel output by 32pc in March from a year earlier, cutting its road fuels imports by 25pc year over year. Pemex's gasoline and diesel output at its six domestic refineries amounted to 562,300 b/d in March, up from 427,100 b/d in the same month of 2023, according to the company's monthly data published on 26 April. Gasoline production rose by 27pc to 350,400 b/d in March year over year. Gasoline output increased by 13pc from February. Pemex's gasoline imports fell by 16pc in March from a year prior, driven by increased domestic production. On a monthly basis, gasoline imports fell by 18pc from February. The company's diesel output surged by 40pc to 211,900 b/d in March year over year, driving imports down by 43pc to 112,500 b/d (see table) . Diesel production was 26pc higher in March compared with February. Road fuels output increased as Pemex's refining system processed 23pc more crude — 1.06mn b/d — in March from the prior year, as result of billion-dollar investments since 2019 to rehabilitate Pemex's refineries and a decline in crude exports . Pemex's regular 87-octane gasoline domestic sales remain almost steady at 527,400 b/d in March from a year earlier. In contrast, 92-octane premium gasoline sales rose by 11pc to 132,800 b/d year over year, as demand for premium gasoline in Mexico has increased this year. The company's diesel sales ticked up by 1pc in March from a year earlier and were 3pc above February sales. Pemex's domestic sales of refined products accounted for 75.6pc of the company's total revenue in the first quarter, Pemex said during its earnings call on 26 April. This compares to a 70.8pc share in full-year 2023, the company said. By Antonio Gozain Pemex fuel production, imports and sales '000 b/d Product Mar 24 Feb 24 Mar 23 YOY ±% Monthly ±% Production Gasoline 350 310 275.5 27.2 12.9 Diesel 212 168 152 39.8 26.0 LPG 110.0 104.0 100.3 9.7 5.8 Jet fuel 38 38 46 -17.1 1.6 Imports Gasoline 307 376 366.0 -16.1 -18.4 Diesel 112 119 196 -42.5 -5.1 LPG 69 100 101 -31.8 -31.1 Internal sales Regular gasoline 527 520 527 0.1 1.5 Premium gasoline 133 134 120 10.9 -0.7 Diesel 261.0 254.0 258 1.2 2.8 ULSD 30.0 28 32 -4.8 8.3 Jet fuel 95 97 94 1.0 -2.3 LPG 167 194 164 2.0 -13.8 Jet fuel and premium gasoline imports and ULSD imports and production are not broken out Pemex Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
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