Sri Lanka in talks with Qatar for fuel, LNG supplies

Market: LPG, Natural gas, Oil products
29/06/22

Sri Lanka has reached out to Qatar for supplies of oil products, LNG and LPG in a bid to overcome fuel shortages in the country, potentially creating new trade flows between the two nations.

"Met with HE [his excellency] Saad Sherida Al-Kaabi, the minister of state for energy affairs and the president and CEO of Qatar Energy to discuss the supply of petroleum products, LPG and LNG to SL [Sri Lanka] to overcome the energy crisis with the assistance of Qatar Energy and the Qatar Development Fund," Sri Lanka's energy minister Kanchana Wijesekera said on 28 June.

This is likely the first time that Sri Lanka is seeking to import LNG, although it does not yet have an LNG import terminal. The country plans to launch one next year, although it is unclear if the terminal will come on line in time to help it resolve its fuel crisis. Qatar is the world's second-largest LNG exporter with 77mn t/yr of capacity. Most of its exports headed to China in December, latest GTT data show.

This is also likely the first time that Sri Lanka is seeking LPG from Qatar, the biggest Middle Eastern exporter of the fuel, with most of its 11mn t/yr of exports currently heading to India and southeast Asia. Sri Lanka imports most of its LPG, mainly from Iran, to meet around 500,000 t/yr of domestic demand. Sri Lankan LPG distributor Laugfs Gas owns and operates the country's largest import-export terminal at Hambantota port, with a current storage capacity of 30,000t.

Seeking fuel

Sri Lanka has historically not imported oil products from Qatar as well, data from oil analytics firm Vortexa show. But it receives supplies from other Middle East countries, such as fuel oil from the UAE, its top supplier since at least June 2019.

Qatar exported an average of around 104,000 b/d of gasoil and 12,000 b/d of gasoline last year, Vortexa data show. Sri Lanka's diesel imports currently come from India, Singapore and the Middle East, totalling 39,000 b/d last year. It typically sources gasoline from India and Singapore, with imports totalling 22,000 b/d last year. Sri Lanka consumes around 110,000 b/d of oil products but its sole 50,000 b/d Kelaniya refinery produces only around 35,000 b/d.

Sri Lanka has been actively seeking spot diesel, although it is struggling to find suppliers because of financing issues, according to market participants. The country is facing its worst foreign exchange crisis since gaining independence in 1948, resulting in fuel, food and power shortages.

Sri Lankan importer Lanka IOC (LIOC) is now having to restrict gasoline sales at retail outlets across the country, limiting two-wheelers, three-wheelers and four-wheelers to just 1,500 Sri Lanka rupees ($19), Rs2,500 and Rs7,000 worth of fuel each day. The restriction goes into effect immediately, LIOC said on 28 June, without giving an end date.

Sri Lanka will also allow more companies from oil-producing nations to enter the domestic market, currently dominated by LIOC and state-controlled importer Ceylon Petroleum (Ceypetco). LIOC is the Sri Lankan subsidiary of state-owned Indian refiner IOC.

"Cabinet approval was granted to open up the fuel import and retail sales market to companies from oil producing nations," Wijesekera said on 28 June. "They will be selected on the ability to import fuel and operate without forex requirements from the CBSL [Central Bank of Sri Lanka] and banks for the first few months of operations."

By Reena Nathan, Cara Wong, Frances Goh, Rou Urn Lee, Pratima Pareek and Sarah Giam

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

11/04/25

Mexico suspends Valero fuel import permits

Mexico City, 11 April (Argus) — Mexico's tax authority SAT on 9 April suspended US refiner Valero's fuel import permits, the company said today. The company did not specify why its import license was suspended. "Valero is addressing each administrative observation noted in the suspension to clarify the issues. Additionally, [authorities] mistakenly stated that the company does not have valid import permits, which is incorrect since the permits are valid through 2038," the company said. When consulted, Valero told Argus it has no further information to share at this time. In Mexico, Valero holds gasoline, diesel and jet fuel import permits valid through 2038. The company is one of only a handful of private-sector companies with such permits. Shell, Marathon and ExxonMobil hold permits to import only gasoline and diesel. Valero is the leading private fuel importer in Mexico. On 9 April, its sales accounted for 10pc of Mexico's gasoline and diesel demand, according to the company. Private-sector companies started importing fuel into Mexico in 2016 after the market opened to more competition, but under former president Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador's administration, the energy ministry (Sener) cancelled dozens of fuel import permits. Valero is cooperating with the Mexican government and has recently joined a voluntary price cap agreement to keep regular gasoline below Ps24/l ($4.45/USG), the company said, adding that it "implements rigorous traceability and security controls throughout its supply chain." The company stores fuel at four private-sector terminals in Mexico, with over 4mn bl of capacity. The company is also expected to start storing fuel at the new 1.1mn bl OTM terminal in Altamira, Tamaulipas, in the near future. By Cas Biekmann Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Find out more

News

Participants mostly support IMO GHG pricing mechanism

11/04/25

News

11/04/25

Participants mostly support IMO GHG pricing mechanism

London, 11 April (Argus) — International shipping organisations and market participants mostly support the global greenhouse gas (GHG) pricing mechanism approved today at the International Maritime Organization's (IMO) 83rd Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) meeting, but some raised concerns. The structure approved by the IMO establishes that ships must reduce their fuel intensity by a "base target" of 4pc in 2028 against 93.3 gCO2e/MJ, the latter representing the average GHG fuel intensity value of international shipping in 2008. Emissions above this target will be charged at $380/tCO2e. The levels defined by the approved regulation are achievable, according to a market participant, who said the gradually increasing targets may allow the market to properly adapt to the transition. The International Chamber of Shipping (ICS) secretary general Guy Platten said the sector is already investing billions of dollars in 'green' technology, so the agreement gives certainty that sustainable marine fuels producers need. "The world's governments have now come forward with a comprehensive agreement which, although not perfect in every respect, we very much hope will be formally adopted later this year," he said. The European Shipowners (ECSA) secretary general Sotiris Raptis agreed the draft "is not perfect", but he celebrated progress towards a net zero emissions target, saying "it is a good starting point for further work" and pointing out that it may ensure the necessary investment in production of clean fuels. During a press briefing, IMO secretary general Arsenio Dominguez said ships operating in international waters will be obliged to comply with the regulations after adoption, despite the US' refusal to engage with the discussions . Adoption of the pricing mechanism will be discussed and voted on in October. Offering a counterview, the Global Maritime Forum said the agreed measures may not be strong enough to reach IMO targets. "The GHG intensity targets create uncertainty as to whether the strategy's emissions reduction checkpoints for 2030 and 2040 will be met," it said. "As currently designed, measures are unlikely to be sufficient to incentivise the rapid development of e-fuels such as e-ammonia or e-methanol , which will be needed in the long run due to their scalability and emission reduction potential." It said that failure to invest in these fuels would put at risk the target of at least 5pc zero- and near-zero emission fuel use by 2030 and the industry's entire 2050 net-zero goal. The World Shipping Council's vice president Bryan Wood-Thomas praised the agreement and said one benefit of it is the pricing system that is "more aggressive" if a vessel fails to meet the GHG intensity standard. "But you also have a fee system that gives investors more confidence in actual revenue [from using cleaner fuels]," he said. The Brazilian representative told Argus the fact that some countries thought the agreement was too ambitious while others indicated it was not ambitious enough show the group may have reached a balance that can be possible to comply. About the Brazilian position, the representative said the country "was never against an agreement". "We were only against some aspects of the agreement, and we think that the membership has heard our concerns, and that's why we ended up pretty happy with the results", he said. Brazil voted in favour of the agreement today. By Hussein Al-Khalisy, Madeleine Jenkins, Natália Coelho, and Gabriel Tassi Lara. Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

US tariffs cast a shadow on global gas market

11/04/25

News

11/04/25

US tariffs cast a shadow on global gas market

Steel can make up nearly a third of an LNG terminal's pricetag, so the new levies could push up costs and push back start-up dates, writes Xiaoyi Deng London, 11 April (Argus) — US president Donald Trump's volatile tariff policy and some of the countermeasures already announced by large trade partners are unlikely to cause any direct disruption to global gas markets. But they will have a direct impact on future US liquefaction capacity. And the indirect effects on gas supply and demand could be huge, stemming from a weaker macroeconomic outlook, fuel substitution and inflationary pressures on infrastructure development. US LNG developers hailed Trump's return to office, after complaining that his predecessor complicated the issuance of additional export licences. But Trump's imposition of 25pc tariffs on all foreign-sourced steel and aluminum, from 12 March, will increase infrastructure costs in the US' upstream and midstream sectors. These present an immediate risk for US LNG developers, particularly for the five projects under construction and the six others expected to reach final investment decisions (FIDs) this year. Metals account for up to 30pc of the cost of an LNG export plant. A terminal can cost $5bn-25bn to build, depending on its size, with steel used for pipelines, tanks and other structural frameworks. Facilities can be built using some domestically produced metal, but higher prices for this might lead to construction and FID delays for the country's planned liquefaction projects. US tariffs' primary effect on the domestic gas market stems from duties levied on non-energy goods used by the oil and gas industry, including steel and specialised pipeline components such as valves and compressors, which are imported. The US remains a net natural gas importer from Canada , but these flows are unlikely to be affected by trade tariffs, given the lack of alternative supply sources available to some northern US states. Tariff baiting Trump's latest tariff round , unveiled on 2 April, involves a a minimum 10pc on all foreign imports from 5 April,with much higher tariffs on selected countries that briefly came into force on 9 April, before Trump bowed to panic in financial markets and announced a 90-day pause. China is the key exception. It has announced retaliatory tariffs that could disrupt US energy exports, resulting in an escalation that leaves the overall levy at 145pc in the US and 125pc in China. China had already stopped importing US LNG earlier this year. But disruption to trade between the world's two largest economies may weigh heavily on manufacturing activity in China, in turn reducing industrial gas demand. And the ripple effects of disruption to US LPG exports to China may alter fuel-switching economics in the region and beyond. Most other countries in Asia-Pacific have opted not to follow China's lead by retaliating. The Japanese government intends to negotiate a better tariff deal and is considering investing in the US' proposed 20mn t/yr Alaska LNG export project as part of wider efforts to reduce its trade surplus with the US. Countries in Asia-Pacific have been hit with some of the highest of Trump's targeted duties. The EU is keeping retaliatory measures on the table, but these are unlikely to involve US LNG. Europe has become much more reliant on LNG imports after losing the bulk of its Russian pipeline supply, and imposing tariffs on energy imports would only reignite inflationary pressures that European countries have tried to curb over the past three years. The bloc says it is ready to negotiate on possibly increasing its US LNG imports to reduce its trade surplus and would axe tariffs on industrial imports if the US agrees to do the same. But Trump says this is not enough, citing the EU's upcoming Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism as one of the "unfair trade practices" that justifies a tariff response. US LNG project pipeline mn t/yr Project Capacity Expected start/FID Under construction Plaquemines 19.2 2025 Corpus Christi stage 3 12.0 2025 Golden Pass 18.1 2026 Rio Grande 17.6 2027 Port Arthur 13.5 2027 Waiting for final investment decision Delfin FLNG 1 13.2 mid-2025 Texas LNG 4.0 2025 Calcasieu Pass 2 28.0 mid-2025 Corpus Christi train 8-9 3.3 2025 Louisiana LNG 16.5 mid-2025 Cameron train 4 6.8 mid-2025 Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

Q&A: IMO GHG scheme in EU ETS could be 'challenging'

11/04/25

News

11/04/25

Q&A: IMO GHG scheme in EU ETS could be 'challenging'

London, 11 April (Argus) — Delegates have approved the global greenhouse gas (GHG) pricing mechanism proposal at the International Maritime Organization's (IMO) 83rd Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) meeting. Argus Media spoke to ministerial adviser and Finland's head representative at the IMO delegation talks, Anita Irmeli, on the sidelines of the London MEPC meeting. What is your initial reaction to the text? We are happy and satisfied about the content of the agreed text, so far. But we need to be careful. This week, all member states were able to vote. But in October, when adaption will take place, only those states which are parties to Marpol Annex VI will be able to vote if indeed a vote is called for, and that changes the situation a little bit. Here when we were voting, a minority was enough — 40 votes. But if or when we vote in October, then we need two thirds of those party to Marpol Annex VI to be in favour of the text. Will enthusiasm for the decision today remain by October? I'm pretty sure it will. But you never know what will happen between now and and the next six months. What is the effect of the decision on FuelEU Maritime and the EU ETS? Both FuelEU Maritime and the EU ETS have a review clause. This review clause states that if we are ambitious enough at the IMO, then the EU can review or amend the regulation. So of course, it is very important that we first consider if the approved Marpol amendments are ambitious enough to meet EU standards. Only after that evaluation, which won't be until well after October, can we consider these possible changes. Do you think the EU will be able to adopt these the text as it stands today? My personal view is that we can perhaps incorporate this text under FuelEU Maritime, but it may be more challenging for the EU ETS, where shipping is now included. What was the impact of US President Donald Trump's letter on the proceedings? EU states were not impacted, but it's difficult to say what the impact was on other states. By Madeleine Jenkins Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

IMO approves two-tier GHG pricing mechanism

11/04/25

News

11/04/25

IMO approves two-tier GHG pricing mechanism

London, 11 April (Argus) — Delegates have approved the global greenhouse gas (GHG) pricing mechanism proposal at the International Maritime Organization's (IMO) 83rd Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) meeting, pending an adoption vote at the next MEPC in October. The proposal passed by a majority vote, with 63 nations in favor including EU states, the UK, China and India, and 16 members opposed, including Mideast Gulf states, Russia, and Venezuela. The US was absent from the MEPC 83 meeting, and 24 member states abstained. The proposal was accompanied by an amendment to implement the regulation, which was approved for circulation ahead of an anticipated adoption at the October MEPC. Approval was not unanimous, which is rare. If adoption is approved in October at a vote that will require a two-thirds majority, the maritime industry will become the first transport sector to implement internationally mandated targets to reduce GHG emissions. The text says ships must initially reduce their fuel intensity by a "base target" of 4pc in 2028 ( see table ) against 93.3 gCO2e/MJ, the latter representing the average GHG fuel intensity value of international shipping in 2008. This gradually tightens to 30pc by 2035. The text defines a "direct compliance target", that starts at 17pc for 2028 and grows to 43pc by 2035. The pricing mechanism establishes a levy for excessive emissions at $380 per tonne of CO2 equivalent (tCO2e) for ships compliant with the minimum 'base' target, called Tier 2. For ships in Tier 1 — those compliant with the base target but that still have emission levels higher than the direct compliance target — the price was set at $100/tCO2e. Over-compliant vessels will receive 'surplus units' equal to their positive compliance balance, expressed in tCO2e, valid for two years after emission. Ships then will be able to use the surplus units in the following reporting periods; transfer to other vessels as a credit; or voluntarily cancel as a mitigation contribution. IMO secretary general Arsenio Dominguez said while it would have been more preferable to have a unanimous outcome, this outcome is a good result nonetheless. "We work on consensus, not unanimity," he said. "We demonstrated that we will continue to work as an organization despite the concerns." Looking at the MEPC session in October, Dominguez said: "Different member states have different positions, and there is time for us to remain in the process and address those concerns, including those that were against and those that were expecting more." Dominguez said the regulation is set to come into force in 2027, with first revenues collected in 2028 of an estimated $11bn-13bn. Dominguez also said there is a clause within the regulation that ensures a review at least every five years. By Hussein Al-Khalisy, Natália Coelho, and Gabriel Tassi Lara IMO GHG reduction targets Year Base Target Direct Compliance Target 2028 4% 17% 2029 6% 19% 2030 8% 21% 2031 12% 25% 2032 17% 30% 2033 21% 34% 2034 26% 39% 2035 30% 43% Source: IMO Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. 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