Global steam cracker operating rates have been trending downward from 89pc in 2018 to 79pc in 2023, driven by the combination of high-capacity increase and slower economic growth in recent years.
In Argus's latest Ethylene Analytics, a recovery is forecast to take place in the coming years as the recent wave of new capacity cools off, absorbing demand growth before the second wave of capacity addition outgrows demand from 2027-2029. This recovery is based on a modelled assumption of modest growth in the global economy and a slowdown in capacity expansion. Historically, olefins demand growth has trended in line with GDP growth on a global basis; in recent years this relationship has disconnected. This was a result of the imbalance between the service and manufacturing industries, but we anticipate the trend will revert sooner or later moving forward.
The petrochemical industry is experiencing high levels of upcoming capacity over the next five years. On a global level, ethylene and propylene capacity is expected to increase by 47.4mn t (4pc) and 44.0mn t (5pc), respectively, over the next five years while global capacity growth from 2018 to 2023 averaged at 4.5pc/yr for both ethylene and propylene. Most investment in ethylene production has gone into steam crackers where ethylene is the main product and propylene is produced as a co-product. Propylene will see a high-capacity increase from not only steam crackers but also from propane dehydrogenation (PDH) projects, which will delay the recovery of global propylene operating rates.
The first wave of ethylene capacity addition is cooling off, but a second wave is expected to kick off in 2026. However, propylene is currently undergoing its wave of capacity addition before seeing a slowdown from 2028 onward. On the propylene side of the olefins chain, 50pc of the upcoming capacity will come from PDH, 34pc from steam crackers and the rest will be a combination of sources from refinery, coal, and methanol.
Operating rates in all regions are being negatively impacted by the combination of high-capacity increase and slower global economic growth. Olefins demand has experienced slower growth over the past two years, with negative growth in 2022 as a result of high inflation and lower consumer spending.
Based on current market fundamentals there have been project delays across most regions and also rationalisation from uncompetitive units. With steam crackers running at lower-than-normal operating rates, rationalization of capacities is a significant unknown as what assets are to shut down are dependent on many factors such as company financials, politics, and integration factors. This makes the rationalization of specific units tough to predict.
As western nations are experiencing slower GDP growth, developing nations will be the key regions for olefins growth. We are seeing a slowdown in Chinese and northeast Asian GDP, but south Asian GDP has been holding strong. Polymer demand, which accounts for more than half of olefins consumption will be the main driver of olefins demand (65pc of ethylene gets consumed into PE and 71pc of propylene gets consumed into PP globally). From a supply perspective, 17pc (8mn t) of all upcoming cracker projects have yet to start construction, which will give operating rates a boost if delayed. Given the slowdown in global economic growth in the past two years, high interest rates, and inflation, the overall outlook is fairly bearish. Consumer spending, household disposable income, economic growth, project timelines, and rationalization from uncompetitive production facilities will be the main indicators of how quickly it will take for operating rates to recover.
Current announced projects
In the past five years, most steam cracker capacity increases took place in China and the trend is expected to persist over the next five years based on announced projects, but most regions are investing. Other Asian countries such as India, South Korea, Vietnam, and Indonesia are also investing. A total of 25.6mn t and 32.9mn t of ethylene and propylene capacity is expected to come online in China over the next five years. Below is the summary of upcoming stream cracker projects globally.
Chinese projects that are currently under construction include Wanhua Chemial, Yulongdao Refining & Petrochemical, Sinopec, Jilin Petrochemical and more. Joint venture steam cracker projects in China between domestic producers and multinational corporations have also started construction which includes Sabic-Fujian Petrochemical, Ineos Sinopec Tianjin, Shell CNOOC Petrochemical, BASF Zhanjiang, and ExxonMobil. These projects will increase ethylene capacity by 21.8mn t over the upcoming five years. Asian nations excluding China includes S-oil South Korea, Hindustan Petroleum India, Lotte Chemical Indonesia have also started construction which totals 5.2mn t of ethylene capacity.
Borouge, SATORP and a joint venture between CP Chem and Qatar Energy in the Middle East are also investing in new crackers with a total capacity addition of 5.2mn t. In Europe, Ineos Project One and PKN Orlen have announced projects while Sabic UK invested in a green project. The Sabic project involves restarting and converting its current cracker to run on hydrogen.
Russia has steam cracker projects slated to start up in the five-year span, including Nizhnekamskneftekhim, Irkutsk Oil, Baltic Chemical, and Amur GCC while Uzbekistan has also announced an expansion from Gas Chemical Complex. North America has three projects slated to come on over the next five years that will increase its capacity by 3.6mn t. North American projects include Shintech US, Joint venture CP Chem Qatar Energy, and Dow in Canada.
Argus’s Ethylene Analytics includes a global plant-level capacity dataset detailing expected project timelines.
Author: Dhanish Kalayarasu
Date: 15/05/2024
Spotlight content
Related news
EU readies new bioenergy strategy
EU readies new bioenergy strategy
Brussels, 26 November (Argus) — The European Commission is today expected to adopt a new strategy aimed at boosting "nature-positive" investment and making better use of biomass. The latest version of the strategy seen by Argus deleted wording from a previous leaked draft that mentioned disincentivising "inefficient" biomass combustion, including changes to EU and national subsidies to avoid prioritising combustion over material use. Industry groups last month had criticised the previous draft strategy for "punishing" biomass combustion and ignoring the role of sustainable biofuels. The commission may still amend the current strategy document, which sets out a direction for policies but is not itself a legal proposal. Demand for biofuels will likely rise from 2025, in part thanks to the bloc's ReFuelEU Aviation and FuelEU initiatives, but sustainable biomass remains finite and its use is most effective in hard-to-abate sectors, the commission said in the document. The commission wants to add value to energy, industry, food, health and other sectors through biomass processing and biotechnology. The body said it would, for example, support uptake of bio-based plastics and novel materials by 2027 alongside recycling. Officials could also assess whether EU-wide definitions could support certification and scaling of bio-based polymers. And an EU methodology could certify long-lasting biogenic carbon storage in buildings under the carbon removal and carbon farming certification framework. The commission will issue legislation such as the upcoming BioTech Acts to bolster industrial production of bio-based chemicals and may target bio-based content requirements in some products. In the strategy, the commission and the European Investment Bank will use finance instruments to support biorefineries that incorporate new technologies. And a forthcoming Circular Economy Act aims to support biogas and biomethane production as well as using digestate as a fertiliser. A review next year of the bloc's emissions trading system will also explore potential for scalable biogenic carbon, capture, use and storage projects. The EU is also scheduled to review its Renewable Energy Directive by 2027 and assess how national biomass support schemes affect biodiversity. Dafydd ab Iago Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
Q&A: European Bioplastics wants more EU policy support
Q&A: European Bioplastics wants more EU policy support
London, 26 November (Argus) — The bioplastics industry in Europe hopes to see more policy support for the sector from the EU, as costs and investments remain a concern even though demand from the packaging sector is growing, European Bioplastics' EU Policy Affairs manager, Julie Pieters told Argus. We have seen some regulatory support from the EU for the recycling industry with content targets, particularly in the Single Use Plastics Directive (SUPD) and the Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulations (PPWR), but is there any legislation that is in the works to support bio-attributed and bio-based plastics? At the moment the only thing we have in place is a communication from the European commission in 2022 on bio-based, biodegradable and compostable plastics. But this is only a communication. In the Packaging and Packaging Plastic Waste Regulation (PPWR) there is a legislative hook for bio-based plastics. In principle, the review needs to be done by 2028 but the European Commission told us that it would like to do it before 2027. They would need to do a review of where the bio-based plastics market is today, and based on that they could begin a legislative proposal for bio-based content in plastic packaging, setting targets and seeing if bio-based content can be used to count towards recycled content targets that are already in place. Some applications of plastic packaging will also be marked as having to be made compostable. EU member states can also make this list of products longer if they wish to, so some bioplastic examples are also showing real opportunities in the field. There has also been some talk from people about having bio-based targets in other sectors like the automotive or construction field. A great example of this would be in the end-of-life vehicle regulation (ELV) proposed by the EU. Bio-based targets on plastics in cars is still in trilogues [a trilogue is a negotiation between the European parliament, the council and the European commission] so we would have to wait to see what comes out in the final directive. What are the hurdles that bioplastics producers are facing, both in Europe and globally? I think the European bio-plastics industry faces similar hurdles to other European industries — trade hurdles, investment hurdles, competition with other regions in the world. We developed a lot of the bioplastics technology in Europe but the industrialisation can often take place outside of Europe because of lower energy costs and investment opportunities. I think also policy support can help to boost the sector both in Europe and globally. We have had members of the association want to invest in Europe but in the end they have ended up going to other regions because the market is just bigger. I don't think the support mandated from the EU and the clarity for producers in Europe is not quite there yet, especially when it comes to encouragement in developing the market. What parts of the bioplastics space in Europe are currently faring well commercially, are there any products or projects that are doing particularly well? Or are there any end-use sectors that are seeing uptake? Currently, the most success we are seeing is in the packaging sector, mainly related to food packaging at the moment. Around 50pc of the bioplastics demand comes from packaging. Things like fruit and vegetable bags and compostable bin liners are doing well in terms of end-use. Polylactic Acid (PLA) is seeing some growth potential in some market segments as well with uptake. Some drop in polymers are also seeing movement for more durable goods, cosmetic packaging, automotive components as well especially if they allow for rapid substitution of fossil based carbon. Does the association have a position on the difference between feedstocks? For example take bio-attributed plastics such as bio-PE derived from bionaphtha via a mass balanced approach versus something like PLA? How do you define biomass feedstock? I think it can occasionally be a bit of complex question to answer particularly in terms of mass balance. European Bioplastics association represents all types of bioplastics and we have a position on the technology of mass balance which can help allow us to remove some fossil-fuel derived material from the plastics space but there needs to be safeguards as well, especially in terms of communication towards the consumer. In terms of biomass feedstock at the association we define it as being the material or product is partly derived from biomass (plants). Biomass used for bioplastics usually stems from material like corn, sugarcane or cellulose. It is also important to note that some material that can be biobased but not bio-degradable, some can be biodegradable but not bio-based and some can be both bio-based and bio-degradable. The European Bioplastics Conference is taking place in Berlin on 2-3 December. What are some of the key themes that will be discussed there? It's the 20th anniversary of the conference so it will look back at the last 20 years of the bioplastic industry in Europe and try to provide a snapshot of where the bioplastics market in Europe is at currently. The bioeconomy strategy report published by the European Commission just before the conference will also play a role in discussions. In the bioplastics sphere, the industry is struggling with the same kind of difficulties as the petrochemical sector in Europe, which we know is not doing well at the moment. But as it is more of an innovative sector this can provide an additional burden, especially when it comes to feedstocks and feedstock pricing. The conference is timely in the sense we see some positive policy developments coming out of Brussels and we hope they come in time to support the sector. Otherwise, the conference always provides the opportunity to discuss the latest innovations in the biobased and compostable plastics sphere and to go deeper into their functionalities. By George Barsted Argus recently launched the industry's first biochemical reference prices, built on Argus methodology and derived from ISCC-certified bio-naphtha. Published monthly and calculated from daily bionaphtha and biopropane premiums, these references cover bio-attributed ethylene, propylene, butadiene and benzene. Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
Brazil's Bolsonaro begins serving full sentence
Brazil's Bolsonaro begins serving full sentence
Sao Paulo, 25 November (Argus) — Brazil's supreme court (STF) today ordered former Brazilian president Jair Bolsonaro to begin serving his prison sentence for plotting an attempted coup. Bolsonaro was sentenced to 27 years and three months . He will serve his full sentence in the federal police headquarters in capital Brasilia, where he was already jailed following a preventive arrest due to "very serious evidence" that he could try to escape on 22 November. He had been placed on strict house arrest since early August. His defense attempted to have him serve the entire sentence at home, citing severe health problems, but all appeals did not come to fruition. The defense argued that Bolsonaro deals with permanent diseases that "demand intense medical assistance". Bolsonaro has been hospitalized several times in the last two years due to complications following a stabbing he suffered while campaigning in 2018. STF also barred Bolsonaro from running for any public office until 2060. He had previously been barred from any public office until 2030 . Another six people convicted in the same trial as Bolsonaro began their full sentences Tuesday, including former vice-president candidate Walter Braga Netto, STF said. Bolsonaro's arrest leaves a window open for a more conservative presidential candidate in next year's elections to challenge current president Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, who has already confirmed he will run for a fourth, non-consecutive term. Some early conservative options are Sao Paulo governor Tarcisio Freitas, Parana governor Ratinho Junior and some of Bolsonaro's relatives, such as his wife Michelle Bolsonaro or his son senator Flavio Bolsonaro. The elections will take place in October. By João Curi Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
Q&A: Marine decarbonisation to continue despite delay
Q&A: Marine decarbonisation to continue despite delay
Sao Paulo, 24 November (Argus) — The maritime sector is staying on course towards decarbonisation, with marine biofuels and LNG gaining traction in the short term, despite the IMO postponing its net-zero framework vote until October 2026, DNV global decarbonisation director Jason Stefanatos said. No single fuel is likely to be adopted at scale in the medium to long term, and alternative marine fuels will coexist as part of the path to net zero, he said. Edited highlights follow. IMO delegates have postponed a vote on the net-zero framework until next year. What's your view on the delay, and how might it impact the adoption of alternative bunker fuels? The postponement of the IMO net-zero framework highlights the need for greater clarity on its practical implementation. But while the delay creates some uncertainty, the industry's decarbonisation targets remain unchanged. DNV's October 2025 AFI data confirms that the industry's commitment to alternative fuels remains strong Which fuels are the leading trend in maritime decarbonisation in the short and long term? In the short term, both LNG and biofuels are leading trends in maritime decarbonisation because of LNG bunkering infrastructure and because biofuels are drop-in. Over the longer term, the transition will diversify, adding more fuels in the mix, with methanol, ammonia, hydrogen and e-fuels expected to play roles as technology, supply and regulatory frameworks mature. There is no trend in the long term. The most suitable fuel and technology will be determined by each operator's specific fleet characteristics, operational requirements, overall commercial objectives, as well as global and regional geopolitical decisions and developments. With the energy transition underway in the maritime sector, is ethanol an option for mid- and long-term decarbonisation? Ethanol is technically feasible as a marine fuel, and has gained more popularity in the past months due to technical developments by engine makers and developments on the supply side. Although the vast majority today does not come from sustainable biomass, it is a promising new fuel that could play a role in the future. Its similarities with methanol enable methanol-fuelled vessels to easily switch to ethanol if needed, providing further fuel flexibility, which is important during high uncertainty times. E-fuels have been identified as a potential net-zero fuel. How do you see their development as a marine fuel, considering they are not currently available at commercial scale? E-fuels are presented as a long-term solution for maritime decarbonisation, but their commercial availability and cost competitiveness remain challenges for widespread adoption. Demand is expected to grow as regulatory requirements tighten, but supply will depend on large-scale investments in renewable energy and production capacity. Ammonia is a possible alternative fuel for the future, but barriers to its adoption remain, DNV said in a recent publication. Why does it make sense to invest in ammonia as a bunker fuel when other fuels are more established and safer? Ammonia has benefits and barriers on its adoption. On the benefits side, ammonia is a fuel without carbon content, can act as a hydrogen carrier, and has some basic infrastructure and technology in place, as there are already vessels operating with ammonia. On the other hand, safety and technical issues will require a lot of industry effort to be overcome. The FuelEU Maritime regulation introduced a 2pc reduction target for GHG emissions from vessels in 2025. Individual EU countries are implementing their own RED III regulations this year. Are these emission policies driving demand for alternative fuels, or should the EU consider tightening its restrictions? And what do these regulations mean for the wider global market? These regulations are drivers for alternative fuel demand in shipping and have contributed to accelerating investment in low-GHG fuels and technologies. However, the global impact will depend on how IMO regulations will be agreed and defined by the delegates. Some uncertainty remains as further regional regulations could lead to uneven competition and increased complexity for international operators. By Natália Coelho and Gabriel Tassi Lara Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.