From 1967 until the oil crisis of 1973 there were orders for about 80 very large crude carriers (VLCC) and 40 ultra large crude carriers (ULCC), according to engine manufacturer Wartsila. This boom was followed by the total collapse of the newbuild market for these tankers until the middle of the 1980s. Since then, over 400 VLCC have been ordered, but it took more than 20 years before the next ULCC contract was signed.
The new TI class of ULCCs were delivered in the early 2000s, but within a decade most had been converted to floating production, storage and offloading (FPSO) vessels (FSOs) for use in the Mideast Gulf and southeast Asia. Prizing quantity over flexibility, these ships were wider than the new Panama Canal locks (begun in 2007 and completed in 2016), and could not travel through the Suez Canal unless on a ballast voyage.
Their massive capacity of more than 3mn barrels of crude oil reflected climbing global oil demand – almost double what it was in 1973 – and China’s arrival as the world's largest importer of crude oil. Some forecasters now predict oil demand will peak in 2030, reducing the need for supertankers, but other forces have seen shipowners and others return to newbuilding markets for VLCCs in recent months.
Pandemics, infrastructure projects, price wars and actual wars have moved and lengthened trade flows in the last four years, making larger vessels more attractive because of their economies of scale. These have impacted the make-up of the global tanker fleet in other ways as well, such as prompting a small recovery in interest in small Panamax tankers, which have long been sliding out of existence.
The role of vessel size in tanker freight markets is sometimes underappreciated. In the wake of the G7+ ban on imports of Russian crude and oil and products, and attacks on merchant shipping in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden by Yemen’s Houthi militants, flows of crude oil have had to make massive diversions. Russian crude oil is flowing now to India and China rather than to Europe, while Europe’s imports of oil, diesel and jet fuel from the Mideast Gulf are taking two weeks longer, going around the Cape of Good Hope to avoid Houthi attacks. This has pushed up tonne-miles – a measure of shipping demand – to record levels. Global clean Long Range 2 (LR2) tanker tonne-miles rose to a record high in May this year, data from analytics firm Kpler show, while tonne-miles for dirty Aframax tankers rose to a record high in May last year. It has also supported freight rates.

High freight rates have brought smaller vessels into competition with larger tankers, at the same time as long routes have increased the appeal of larger ships. The Atlantic basin appears to be key site for increases in production (from the US, Brazil, Guyana and even Namibia), and an eastward shift in refining capacity globally will further entrench these long routes and demand for economies of scale.
Aframax and LR2 tankers are the same sized ships carrying around 80,000-120,000t of crude oil or products. LR2 tankers have coated tanks, which allows them to carry both dirty and clean cargoes, and shipowners may switch their
LR2/Aframax vessels between the clean and dirty markets, with expensive cleaning, depending on which offers them the best returns. But an unusually high number of VLCCs – at least six – have also switched from dirty to clean recently. Shipowner Okeanis, which now has three of its VLCCs transporting clean products, said it had cleaned up another one in the third quarter.
A VLCC switching from crude to products is very rare. Switching to clean products from crude is estimated to cost around $1mn for a VLCC. It takes several days to clean the vessel's tanks, during which time the tanker is not generating revenue. But a seasonal slide in VLCC rates in the northern hemisphere this summer has made cleaning an attractive option for shipowners, while their economies of scale make the larger tankers more attractive to clean charterers as product voyages lengthen.
Argus assessed the cost of shipping a 280,000t VLCC of crude from the Mideast Gulf to northwest Europe or the Mediterranean averaged $10.52/t in June, much lower than the average cost of $67.94/t for shipping a 90,000t LR2 clean oil cargo on the same route in the same period. It is likely these vessels will stay in the products market, as cleaning a ship is a costly undertaking for a single voyage.
Typically, a VLCC will only carry a clean cargo when it is new and on its inaugural voyage, but just one new VLCC has joined the fleet this year, further incentivising traders to clean up vessels as demand for larger ones increases. This year has seen a jump in demand for new VLCCs, with 29 ordered so far. There were 20 ordered in 2023, just six in 2023 and 32 in the whole of 2021, Kpler data show. But the vast majority of these new VLCCs will not hit the water until 2026, 2027 or later because of a shortage of shipyard capacity.
Last year and 2024 also saw the first substantial newbuilding orders for Panamax tankers, also called LR1s, since 2017. Product tanker owner Hafnia and trader Mercuria recently partnered to launch a Panamax pool. The rationale may be that Panamax vessels can pass through the older locks at the Panama Canal, and so are not subject to the same draft restrictions imposed because of drought that has throttled transits and led to shipowners paying exorbitant auction fees to transit.

Aframaxes and MRs will remain the workhorses of crude and product tanker markets respectively, but the stretching and discombobulation of trade routes (which appear likely to stay) has already driven changes in which vessels are used and which are ordered. When these ships hit the water, they will join a tanker market very different to the one owners and charterers were operating in just four years ago.
Spotlight content
Related news
Q&A: Australia's ACCUs could support biofuels
Q&A: Australia's ACCUs could support biofuels
Sydney, 22 May (Argus) — Australian wood-fibre processor and exporter Midway was selected this week to lead the development of a new reforestation and afforestation carbon-crediting method that might include pongamia trees, which could lead to harvesting of oil seed to be used in biofuel production. Carbon projects manager John Lawson spoke with Argus on the sidelines of industry member organisation Carbon Market Institute's (CMI) Carbon Farming Forum in Fremantle, Western Australia, where assistant minister for climate change and energy Josh Wilson made the announcement . Edited highlights follow: What are the next steps and the expected timeline for this method development? We have a project team stood up and ready to go, and we have already started engaging a lot of industry expertise and interest to contribute to this through targeted input and workshops. We're meeting with the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water next week to finalise what the specific milestones are for them and what they want to see, and then we'll be able to have a view as to what we think we can deliver. But we're targeting a 12-to-18-month timeline to get the method to a finalised state to the department. Is there any estimated carbon abatement potential for the method? Some of the work we need to do is to shore some of that up, as pongamia is a completely novel activity. It will depend a bit on how complex the method ends up being, and what the rules are. But a reasonable, conservative rule of thumb might be 100 [Australian Carbon Credit Units] (ACCUs) per hectare, and we've heard people talking about anywhere from 80,000 to 150,000 hectares as potential, which could see significant investment. So, we're talking about millions, if not tens of millions of potential [CO2] abatement. How different would it be from the expired reforestation and afforestation method? We're not proposing to change foundationally what the method is — that is, capturing the sequestered carbon in these forests. It's about creating more flexibility for plantation foresters by expanding what types of forests can be considered under the method to include seed oil crops and other harvest operations, and then have some corresponding changes to the abatement calculations. We're looking to try and simplify some of the measurement and verification approaches. There's potential to expand the type of both mixed species environmental plantings and commercial forestry species under this method. Importantly, this will also create opportunity for some of the activities previously under the farm forestry method, which sunset [in 2024] and wasn't remade. And how different would it be from the existing plantation forestry method? Foundationally, the activity wouldn't be any different, it's just adding a different measurement and verification avenue. Instead of having to use FullCam [Full Carbon Accounting Model] like you do in the current method, it would allow you to do a measurement-based, on-site process. It's important to note that we aren't coming into this presuming that we have all the answers already. What we gave the department is a clear policy position about what we thought the method could be, specifying three areas of focus: adding woody biomass from seed oil crops like pongamia; adding a measured version of plantation forestry; and what we've called a collection of general method improvements. Is pongamia the main driver behind this method? Pongamia seems to be the highest interest species, but that's not to say it's the only species that could be covered under the method. There are opportunities for other species as well. Our view is not to make this a Pongamia-specific activity, it's to make it specific to those types of seed oil crops. It's focused on woody species that support measurable sequestration in the way that the method currently does. The minister announced that Midway will be leading a consortium, but no names were publicly disclosed. How many companies are involved and what types of businesses they are? There's about a dozen companies. The types of businesses that are looking at this are largely emitters, from sectors like transport, mining, energy, LNG. There's very good interest as well from the forestry sector — many forestry developers were interested in providing support. This is a bit outside method development, but would the plan be processing the oil seed in Australia to produce biofuels like renewable diesel? What we're aware of from the people we've spoken to — and we obviously have our pilot project with Rio Tinto — is that the intention is for those seeds to be harvested and processed locally. Just to think about the supply chain logistics, it makes more sense to do that domestically. And there's certainly a lot of interest and need for biofuels in Australia to help with safeguard mechanism compliance , which is another great benefit of what we're proposing under the method. This is one way to capture and recognise real carbon sequestration that does exist in the trees, but it also commercially helps to fund these plantations that ultimately provide even greater benefit in reducing supply chain emissions through the biofuel from the oilseed — in the mining industry, or in large freight logistics, or other activities that have to switch from diesel and other fossil fuels. By Juan Weik Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2026. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
Mexico air traffic to rise 4-6pc during World Cup
Mexico air traffic to rise 4-6pc during World Cup
Mexico City, 21 May (Argus) — Mexico's passenger air traffic could rise by 4-6pc during the 2026 Fifa World Cup, providing a boost to jet fuel demand despite Mexico hosting only a fraction of tournament matches, financial group Monex said. The uptick would be below the 8-15pc increases recorded by host countries during the 2018 and 2022 World Cups because Mexico is not the tournament's primary host, according to Monex. Mexico will host 13 of the tournament's 104 matches from 11 June-5 July, while the competition will conclude on 19 July in the US. Airport operators are expected to be among the sectors that benefit most from the event. Monex forecasts passenger traffic growth of 3.9pc for operator Asur, 2.3pc for GAP and 7.3pc for OMA in 2026, with the World Cup serving as a key catalyst. Asur's largest airport is Cancun, while GAP and OMA's flagship airports are Guadalajara and Monterrey, respectively. Both cities are among the three Mexican host cities for the tournament. The increase in passenger traffic is likely to support jet fuel consumption , which has already been growing this year. Low-cost airlines Viva and Volaris have been expanding seat availability as more aircraft return to service , creating additional upside for traffic at Mexico City's international airport. Monex expects the tourism boost associated with the World Cup to extend into 2027, forecasting average passenger traffic growth of 4-5pc across Mexico's main airport groups. By Antonio Gozain Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2026. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
US refiners boost jet fuel to near record levels
US refiners boost jet fuel to near record levels
Houston, 21 May (Argus) — US refiners are pumping out jet fuel at a near-record pace as global demand surges because of Iran-war related supply disruptions. US jet fuel output has reached above 2mn b/d in recent weeks , as refiners have added capacity and maximized yields, according to Energy Information Administration (EIA) estimates. The output is nearing the record weekly high of about 2.1mn bl set in July 2024. Jet fuel production has increased by nearly 290,000 b/d since the start of the US-Israel war on Iran on 28 February, the EIA data show. The conflict has choked off oil and products supply through the strait of Hormuz and damaged energy infrastructure, causing soaring fuel prices. US refiners expect high margins to continue at least through the end of 2026. Independent refiner Marathon Petroleum increased jet fuel capacity by 30,000 b/d at its 606,000 b/d Garyville refinery in Louisiana in March and plans to boost jet fuel capacity at its 253,000 b/d Robinson refinery in Illinois by 10,000 b/d in the third quarter. US refiner Valero has also maximized jet production in its system, increasing yields to more than 30pc of total distillates in March, up from an average of 26pc, chief operating officer Gary Simmons said on a first quarter earnings call. Valero plans to push two more refineries into "jet production mode" to increase yields even further, he said. Refiner HF Sinclair put into service a project that allows it to swing about 7,000 b/d between diesel and jet fuel at its 145,000 b/d Puget Sound refinery in Anacortes, Washington. The project is helping to supply the US west coast and Latin America, HF Sinclair said. The jet fuel production boost is not limited to the US. Canadian integrated energy company Suncor in December started producing jet fuel at its 137,000 b/d Montreal refinery in Quebec, with the potential to grow it up to 16,000 b/d. The original plan was to sell it domestically into airports in Montreal and Ottawa, but then the company saw the "unique market blowout" in the first quarter which continued into the second quarter "where jet fuel became short in certain markets", executive vice president of downstream Dave Oldreive said in a first quarter earnings call. Suncor earlier this month sold jet fuel into Rotterdam in the Netherlands, he said. Europe has sought replacement supplies following the strait of Hormuz disruptions. Jet fuel prices in the US climbed to record highs in March and early April following the start of the war. At the US Gulf coast, jet fuel prices reached an all-time high of $4.73/USG on 2 April, the highest price since Argus launched its assessment in 1994. Overall US jet fuel prices are expected to average $3.33/USG in 2026, the EIA said in its latest monthly Short-Term Energy Outlook (STEO) on 12 May. That forecast is up by 74pc from the EIA's estimate before the war. Airlines pay the price Jet fuel costs for all US airlines in March averaged $3.13/USG, up by 30pc from the same month in 2025, according to Bureau of Transportation Statistics data released on 6 May. Some airlines are limiting capacity because of the higher prices. United Airlines plans to reduce its flight capacity by five percentage points in 2026 as its first quarter jet fuel costs averaged $2.78/USG, up by nearly 10pc from the first quarter of 2025. Delta Air Lines expects its jet fuel costs to roughly double in the second quarter and will keep capacity flat year-over-year "until the fuel environment improves," chief executive Ed Bastian said on a first quarter earnings call last month. Another large US carrier, American Airlines, expects its jet fuel costs to increase by $4bn in 2026 compared to previous plans. One beleaguered US airline said it could not survive the rising prices. US low-cost carrier Spirit Airlines permanently shuttered its operations on 2 May, citing higher jet fuel costs, after filing for bankruptcy protection twice since 2024. By Eunice Bridges and Hunter Fite Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2026. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
Dutch govt formalises renewable gas blending obligation
Dutch govt formalises renewable gas blending obligation
London, 21 May (Argus) — The Dutch government has formally submitted its renewable gas blending obligation bill to parliament, requiring suppliers to reduce a certain amount of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions annually by supplying biomethane to their end users. The bill allows for imports from other EU countries. Under the system, suppliers must submit green gas units — groengaseenheid (GGEs) — to a central registry managed by the Dutch Emissions Authority, with each unit representing 1 kg of CO2 equivalent emissions saved. Suppliers can meet their obligation — which is based on their market share of supply — by converting renewable gas guarantees of origin (RGGOs) and Proofs of Sustainability (PoS) into GGEs. To be eligible for conversion, the renewable gas must be unsubsidised and comply with RED III sustainability and GHG reduction criteria, verified through EU-recognised certification schemes such as ISCC. A key feature of the bill is that renewable gas produced in other EU member states can count towards the obligation, including gas injected into the interconnected European gas grid, provided it meets the same requirements as Dutch renewable gas. In practice, compliance would be demonstrated through the use of RGGOs and an accompanying PoS. Foreign GOOs can be transferred into the Dutch system via the Association of Issuing Bodies hub. The scheme will be aligned with the Union Database once it becomes operational for biomethane. The blending mechanism allows suppliers to pay a buyout price to cover all or part of their annual obligation not met by the provision of renewable gas, providing a ceiling price in the event of supply shortages. The proposed price is €450/t, but a sliding scale could be applied, whereby the price rises the more that a supplier uses the mechanism to cover its obligations. The proposal gives gas suppliers the option to carry over GGEs into the following calendar year, up to a maximum 10pc of the total quota, to "prevent unwanted market distortions". The overarching target of the blending obligation is to achieve a CO2 chain-emission reduction of 2.85mn t in 2031, estimated to correspond to 0.84bn m³ of production. This would be achieved through increasing annual targets, starting with a 0.63mn t CO2 chain emission reduction in 2027, corresponding to roughly 0.16bn m³ of green gas (see table) . To support long-term investments, the obligation will continue until 2035, with specific targets for 2031-2035 to be revised based on green gas production at the time. The bill will now go through the Dutch legislative process in Parliament, including the development of secondary legislation to set more detailed rules. By Giulio Bajona Green gas obligation annual targets CO₂ reduction (mn t) Year Target 2027 0.63 2028 0.92 2029 1.33 2030 1.91 2031 2.85 2032 2.85 2033 2.85 2034 2.85 2035 2.85 — Ministry of climate policy and green growth Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2026. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.



