Viewpoint: USGC biofuel bunker may be muted

  • : Biofuels, Natural gas, Oil products
  • 23/12/26

Demand for biofuels for bunkering in the US Gulf coast is likely to remain low in 2024 unless a bipartisan bill to allow biodiesel marine fuel to be counted toward existing federal Renewable Fuel Standards (RFS) were to beat the odds and gain traction in the Congress.

The marine biofuels market has been focused for some time on a new EU rule that will require cargo and passenger ships at or above 5,000 gross tonnes traveling within EU territorial waters to pay for 40pc of their CO2 emissions starting in January 2024. Vessels also will have to pay for 50pc of their emissions generated when traveling between a port outside of the EU and an EU port. Vessels operators travelling between US and EU ports compare biofuel for bunkering prices at the different locations.

Biofuel prices are cheaper in northwest Europe and the western Mediterranean than in the US Gulf, in part because of government largesse. The Netherlands, for instance subsidises advanced fatty acid methyl esters (FAME) for bunkering for ocean-going vessels,while the US does not.

From January-November, northwest Europe B30 was priced at a $59-$133/t discount to US Gulf coast. In the western Mediterranean, B24 was pegged at $52/t discount to US Gulf coast B30 for November. Argus launched the west Mediterranean price on 1 November. That price trend is widely expected to continue in 2024.

General biofuel bunker demand could also remain steady or increase only marginally, since the market may be saturated for the short term. Container shipping companies — including Maersk, Hapag-Lloyd, Ocean Network Express, CMA-CGM, Matson and Evergreen — have pledged to achieve net zero emissions by 2050. They have been exploring the use of biofuels and passing the extra cost on to their customers in the form of higher freight rates. Their customers represent some of the largest retailers in the world, including Amazon, Ikea, Michelin, Patagonia, and Unilever. But the number of container ship company customers willing and able to pay more for cleaner freight may have peaked.

Bulk carriers and tanker owners are unlikely to embrace biofuels for bunkering on a larger scale just yet as their customers and shareholders often are not as environmentally driven.

Those dynamics could be upended if US lawmakers were to pass legislation introduced in the US House of Representatives that would allow ocean-going ships to consume renewable fuels without forcing the retirement of associated renewable identification numbers (RINs) credits. If approved, the measure would lower the cost of using biodiesel for marine fuel in the US Gulf, likely increasing demand.

But with the Republican majority in the House already fractured and the 2024 presidential race already in full swing, prospects are slim for passage of such a bill before 2025 at the earliest.

HSFO demand alive and well

Ships outfitted with marine exhaust scrubbers could burn high-sulphur fuel oil (HSFO) and forgo use of alternative marine fuels. On the US Gulf coast, HSFO, even with the added 40pc cost of CO2 emissions, is cheaper than LNG, methanol, biofuels and ammonia.

The marine fuel sulphur limit is capped at 0.5pc sulphur in international waters, enabling vessels to burn very-low sulphur fuel oil (VLSFO). In US territorial waters, the sulphur content is capped at 0.1pc sulphur, prompting vessels typically to use marine gasoil (MGO).

Ships equipped with scrubbers can burn HSFO, with maximum 3.5pc sulphur and are compliant even with the 0.1pc sulphur limit.

At average November levels, and considering the added 40pc CO2 cost, US Gulf coast MGO was priced higher than LNG, methanol and B30. VLSFO was priced higher than LNG. Demand for HSFO — and consequently for vessels scrubber installations — is likely to remain healthy.

The US does not publish marine fuel sales statistics. But data from the port of Rotterdam, the Netherlands, showed local HSFO demand was up by 8pc in the first nine months of the 2023 to 2.45mn t compared with the same period in 2022.


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.

24/05/20

Q&A:Shipping needs cultural shift to decarbonise: Total

Q&A:Shipping needs cultural shift to decarbonise: Total

Amsterdam, 20 May (Argus) — A cultural change in buying behaviour and supply patterns is necessary for the shipping sector to meet its decarbonisation targets and may be the biggest hurdle to overcome, strategy and projects director for TotalEnergies' marine fuels division Frederic Meyer told Argus. Edited highlights follow: What is the biggest challenge standing in the way of the maritime industry in meeting decarbonisation targets and the fuel transition ? A cultural change is required — for decades the maritime sector has relied on by-products with high energy density from the crude refining process such as fuel oil. The industry will now have to pivot its attention towards fuels developed for the purpose of consumption within the maritime industry. This will also require time as the sector looks to level up, and it remains to be seen whether there will be enough time to meet the International Maritime Organisation (IMO)'s net-zero by or around 2050 targets. But we have seen some good progress from cargo owners who are seeking scope 3 emissions related documents. How does TotalEnergies see marine biodiesel demand moving in the short term? In the short term, there is little incentive for the majority of buyers in the market. This is due to a lack of any regulatory mandates, as well as limited impact from existing regulations such as the IMO's carbon intensity indicator (CII) and the EU's Emissions Trading System (ETS). Despite providing a zero emission factor incentive for biofuels meeting the sustainability criteria under the EU's Renewable Energy Directive (RED), EU ETS is still on a staggered implementation basis beginning with only 40pc this year, rising to 70pc next year and 100pc in 2026. Further, EU ETS prices have been quite low, which also weighed on financial incentives for marine biodiesel. Therefore, many buyers are currently waiting for further incentives and signals from the regulators before purchasing marine biodiesel blends. Another point impacting demand is the current edition of ISO 8217, which does not provide much flexibility when it comes to marine biodiesel blend percentages and specifications. The new 2024 edition will likely provide greater flexibility for blending percentages, as well as a provision for biodiesel that does not meet EN14214 specifications. This will provide greater flexibility from a supply point of view. However, there remains stable demand from buyers who can pass on the extra costs to their customers. And how do you see this demand fluctuating in the medium to long term? If the other alternative marine fuels, such as ammonia and methanol, that are currently being discussed do not develop at the speed necessary to meet the decarbonisation targets, then marine biodiesel demand will likely be firm. Many in the market have voiced concerns regarding biofuel feedstock competition between marine and aviation, ahead of the implementation of sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) mandates in Europe starting next year. With Argus assessments for SAF at much higher levels than marine biodiesel blends, do you think common feedstocks such as used cooking oil (UCO) will get pulled away from maritime and into aviation? With regards to competition among different industries for the same biofuel feedstock, suppliers may channel their feedstock towards aviation fuels due to the higher non-compliance penalties associated with SAF regulations as opposed to those in marine, which would incentivise greater demand for SAF. An area that can be explored for marine is the by-product when producing SAF, which can amount to up to 30pc of the fuel output. This could potentially feed into a marine biodiesel supply pool. So it's not necessarily the case that the two sectors will battle over the same feedstock if process synergies can be found. Regarding fuel specifications, market participants have told Argus that the lack of a marine-specific fuel standard for alternatives such as marine biodiesel is feeding into uncertainty for buyers who may not be as familiar with biofuels. What impact could this have on demand for marine biodiesel blends from your point of view? Currently, mainstream biodiesel specifications in marine biodiesel blends are derived from other markets such as the EN14214 specification from road diesel engines. But given the large flexibility of a marine engine, there is room to test and try different things. For "unconventional" biofuels that do not meet those road specifications, there needs to be a testing process accompanied by proof of results that showcase its safety for combustion within a marine engine. Some companies may not have the means or capacity to test their biodiesel before taking it into the market. But TotalEnergies always ensures that there are no engine-related issues from fuel combustion. Suppliers need to enact the necessary testing and take on the burden, as cutting out this process may create a negative perception for the product more generally. Traders should also take on some of the burden and test their fuels to ensure they are fully compatible with the engine. With many regulations being discussed, how do you see the risk of regulatory clashes impacting the industry? The simple solution would be an electronic register to trace the chain of custody. In the French markets, often times the proof of sustainability (PoS) papers are stored onto an electronic database once they are retired to the relevant authority. This database is then accessible and viewable by the buyer, and the supplier could also further deliver a "sustainability information letter" which mirrors the details found in the PoS. It is important for the maritime sector to adopt an electronically traceable system. What role could other types of fuels such as pyrolysis oil potentially play in the maritime sector's decarbonisation targets? We have teams in research and development at TotalEnergies which are studying the potential use of other molecules, including but not limited to pyrolysis oil, for usage in the maritime sector. It may become an alternative option to avoid industry clashes, as pyrolysis oil would not be an attractive option to the aviation sector. We are currently exploring tyre-based pyrolysis oil, but have only started doing so recently so it remains an untapped resource. We need to figure out the correct purification and distillation process to ensure compatibility with marine engines. For the time being we are specifically looking at tyre-based pyrolysis oil and not plastic-based, but we may look at the latter in a later stage. The fuel would also have to meet the RED criteria of a 65-70pc greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction compared with conventional fossil fuels, so we are still exploring whether this can be achieved. By Hussein Al-Khalisy Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Japan’s FEPC calls for clearer nuclear policy stance


24/05/20
24/05/20

Japan’s FEPC calls for clearer nuclear policy stance

Osaka, 20 May (Argus) — Japan's Federation of Electric Power Companies (FEPC) has called for a clarification of the country's nuclear power policy, to ensure stable electricity supply and alignment with its net zero emissions goal. The call comes as the government reviews its basic energy policy , which was formulated in 2021 and calls for the reduction of dependence on nuclear reactors as much as possible. But Japan's guidelines for green transformation, which was agreed in February 2023, states that Japan should make the most of existing nuclear reactors. Tokyo should clearly state in its new energy policy that it is necessary to not only restart existing nuclear reactors, but also build new reactors, said FEPC chairman Kingo Hayashi on 17 May. Hayashi is also the president of utility Chubu Electric Power. Hayashi emphasised that to utilise reactors, it would be necessary to have discussions regarding financial support, policy measures that would help ensure cost recovery, address back-end issues in the nuclear fuel cycle and conduct a review of nuclear damage compensation law. Japan's current basic energy policy is targeted for the April 2030-March 2031 fiscal year, when the country's greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions is forecast to fall by 46pc from 2013-14 levels. To achieve this, the power mix in the policy set the nuclear ratio at 20-22pc, as well as 36-38pc from renewables, 41pc from thermal fuels and 1pc from hydrogen and ammonia. Japan typically reviews the country's basic energy policy every three years. Nuclear, as well as renewables, would be necessary to reduce Japan's GHG emissions, although thermal power units would still play a key role in addressing power shortages. But Japan has faced challenges in restarting the country's reactors following safety concerns after the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster, with only 12 reactors currently operational. Japan's nuclear generation in 2023 totalled 77TWh, which accounted for just 9pc of total power output. Tokyo has made efforts to promote the use of reactors, after the current basic energy policy was introduced in 2021. The trade and industry ministry (Meti) has updated its nuclear policy, by allowing nuclear power operators to continue using reactors beyond their maximum lifespan of 60 years by excluding a safety scrutiny period in the wake of the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster. This could advance the discussion on Japan's nuclear stance, especially if the new basic energy policy includes more supportive regulations. The trade and industry ministry started discussions to review the energy policy on 15 May, aiming to revise it by the end of this fiscal year. It is still unclear what year it is targeting and what ratio will be set for each power source in the new policy. But the deliberation would form a key part of efforts to update the GHG emissions reduction goal, ahead of the submission of the country's new nationally determined contribution in 2025, with a timeframe for implementation until 2035. By Motoko Hasegawa Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Houston refiners weather hurricane-force winds: Update


24/05/17
24/05/17

Houston refiners weather hurricane-force winds: Update

Adds Calcasieu comment, update on flaring reporting Houston, 17 May (Argus) — Over 2mn b/d of US refining capacity faced destructive winds Thursday evening as a major storm blew through Houston, Texas, but the damage reported so far has been minimal. Wind speeds of up to 78 mph were recorded in northeast Houston and the Houston Ship Channel — home to five refineries with a combined 1.5mn b/d of capacity — faced winds up to 74 mph, according to the National Weather Service . Further South in Galveston Bay, where Valero and Marathon Petroleum refineries total 818,000 b/d of capacity, max wind speeds of 51 mph were recorded. Chevron's 112,000 b/d Pasadena refinery on the Ship Channel just east of downtown Houston sustained minor damage during the storm and continues to supply customers, the company said. ExxonMobil's 564,000 b/d Baytown refinery on the Ship Channel and 369,000 b/d Beaumont, Texas, refinery further east faced no significant impact from the storm and the company continues to supply customers, a spokesperson told Argus . Neither Phillips 66's 265,000 b/d Sweeny refinery southwest of Houston nor its 264,000 b/d Lake Charles refinery 140 miles east in Louisiana were affected by the storm, a spokesperson said. There was no damage at Motiva's 626,000 b/d Port Arthur, Texas, refinery according to the company. Calcasieu's 136,000 b/d refinery in Lake Charles, Louisiana, was unaffected by the storm and operations are normal, the refiner said. Marathon Petroleum declined to comment on operations at its 593,000 b/d Galveston Bay refinery. Valero, LyondellBasell, Pemex, Total and Citgo did not immediately respond to requests for comment on operations at their refineries in the Houston area, Port Arthur and Lake Charles. A roughly eight-mile portion of the Houston Ship Channel from the Sidney Sherman Bridge to Greens Bayou closed from 9pm ET 16 May to 1am ET today when two ships brokeaway from their moorings, and officials looked in a potential fuel oil spill, according to the US Coast Guard. The portion that closed provides access to Valero's 215,000 b/d Houston refinery, LyondellBasell's 264,000 b/d Houston refinery and Chevron's Pasadena refinery. Emissions filings with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) are yet to indicate the extent of any flaring and disruption to operations in the Houston area Thursday evening, but will likely be reported later Friday and over the weekend. Gulf coast refiners ran their plants at average utilization rates of 93pc in the week ended 10 May, according to the Energy Information Administration (EIA), up by two percentage points from the prior week as the industry heads into the late-May Memorial Day weekend and beginning of peak summer driving season. The next EIA data release on 22 May will likely reveal any dip in Gulf coast refinery throughputs resulting from the storm. By Nathan Risser Houston area refineries Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Rio Grande do Sul remaneja fornecimento de gás


24/05/17
24/05/17

Rio Grande do Sul remaneja fornecimento de gás

Sao Paulo, 17 May (Argus) — O fornecimento de gás natural no Rio Grande do Sul teve que ser redistribuído em razão das enchentes históricas no estado, com o diesel potencialmente voltando como combustível a usinas de energia para deixar mais gás disponível para a produção de GLP (gás de cozinha). O gasoduto Gasbol, que abastece o Sul do Brasil, não tem capacidade para atender à demanda da refinaria Alberto Pasqualini (Refap), da usina termelétrica de Canoas — controlada pela Petrobras — e das distribuidoras de gás natural da região, disse Jean Paul Prates, o então presidente-executivo da Petrobras, no início desta semana. A distribuidora de gás de Santa Catarina ajustou sua própria rede local para atender aos picos de demanda no Rio Grande do Sul por meio da malha de transporte de gás. A usina térmica de Canoas está operando com geração mínima de 150 GW, sendo 61pc provenientes de sua turbina a gás. A usina foi colocada em operação para restabelecer o fornecimento adequado de energia depois que as linhas de transmissão no Sul foram afetadas pelas enchentes. A Petrobras planeja usar um motor a diesel para aumentar a geração de energia. O atual custo variável unitário (CVU) para o diesel na usina de Canoas é de R1.115,29/MWh. A companhia petrolífera também está operando a Refap a 59pc de sua capacidade instalada máxima. Fortes chuvas no Rio Grande do Sul desde 29 de abril trouxeram inundações sem precedentes ao estado, causando uma crise humanitária e danos à infraestrutura. O clima extremo deixou 154 mortos, 98 desaparecidos e mais de 540 mil deslocados, segundo a defesa civil do estado. Por Rebecca Gompertz Envie comentários e solicite mais informações em feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . Todos os direitos reservados.

Brazil's Rio Grande do Sul reallocates gas supply


24/05/17
24/05/17

Brazil's Rio Grande do Sul reallocates gas supply

Sao Paulo, 17 May (Argus) — Natural gas supply in Brazil's Rio Grande do Sul had to be redistributed because of the historic floods in the state, with diesel potentially making its way back as an power plant fuel to leave more gas available for LPG production. Gasbol, the natural gas transportation pipeline that supplies Brazil's south, does not have capacity to meet demand from the 201,000 b/d Alberto Pasqualini refinery (Refap), state-controlled Petrobras' Canoas thermal power plant and natural gas distributors in the region, according to Petrobras' then-chief executive Jean Paul Prates said earlier this week. The Santa Catarina state gas distributor has adjusted its own local network to meet peak demand in neighboring Rio Grande do Sul via the pipeline transportation network. The Canoas thermal plant is running at its minimum generation at 150GW, with 61pc coming from its gas turbine. The plant was brought on line to reinstate proper power supply after transmission lines in the south were affected by the floods. Petrobras plans to use a diesel engine to increase power generation. The current approved fuel cost (CVU) for diesel in the Canoas plant is of R1,115.29/MWh. Petrobras is also operating Refap at 59pc of its maximum installed capacity, at 119,506 b/d. Heavy showers in Rio Grande do Sul since 29 April brought unprecedented flooding to the state, causing a humanitarian crisis and infrastructure damage. The extreme weather has left 154 people dead, 98 missing and over 540,000 people displaced, according to the state's civil defense. By Rebecca Gompertz 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