Asia maritime decarbonisation faces fuel dilemma: Panel

: Emissions, Fertilizers, Hydrogen, Metals, Natural gas, Petrochemicals
22/11/30

Alternative fuels are the way to go to decarbonise the maritime industry, but the various fuel options create uncertainty and the risk of stranded assets for ports like Singapore's Jurong Port, according to panellists at a maritime seminar on 29 November.

Alternative fuels available to the maritime industry range from biofuels to methanol to ammonia and liquid hydrogen, each with their respective pros and cons. This creates a risk for port operators when they choose what fuel infrastructure to invest in, Singapore port operator Jurong Port's chief technical officer and chief sustainability officer Tan Wee Ming said at the Maritime Energy and Sustainable Development Centre of Excellence (MESD) seminar in Singapore. Singapore is the world's largest bunkering hub.

Tan added that should ports wait to observe the market direction, they would not only have to wait for engine manufacturers to give the go-ahead, but also for vessel owners to trial such engines, test the vessels in water, among other logistical issues, before ports are able to start building infrastructure. By then, the response time to do so is very short, Tan said, which adds to the challenges that ports face.

Fuel uncertainty is also complicating decision-making at marine services firms. "Not all types of alternative fuels will be applicable across the board," Singapore marine services provider PSA Marine's head of fleet management Bernard Wong said at the seminar on 29 November. "There will be a need to differentiate," he added, referring to a need to cater to flexibility and options within the industry.

Singapore-based business unit Rolls-Royce Solutions Asia's Asia-Pacific director of sales marine and offshore Chew Xiang Yu agreed. "Where are we going to invest our resources to?" he asked, referring to the breadth of alternative fuels available. He also added that development projects need to run for many years to come, as assets or engines are being developed to operate for 10-15 years and not shorter durations like five years.

But when it comes to selecting which fuels to focus on, especially given that Singapore has little available space to adopt different green fuels, Wong is of the opinion that the key question is about "what is most practical", referring to safety standards and the ease of bunkering. He also added that the business aspect still remains pertinent when it comes to answering who will pay the premium if there is indeed one.

But Tan said it is important to "find a way to lock it in" and prove that Singapore is able to handle these alternative fuels, even if some of them are potentially dangerous. He also noted the importance of a "strong leadership" to foster collaboration. There could be many unknowns when undertaking new studies, but giving up on a promising idea in favour of one that is sub-par because of high costs is "not doing justice to the collaboration", Tan said.

By Tng Yong Li

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.

25/04/11

Recycled resin importers caught in tariff uncertainty

Houston, 11 April (Argus) — US President Donald Trump's evolving tariff policies have created tremendous uncertainty for US importers of recycled polymers, and constant halts and flip-flopping from the administration have led some to pause their US operations. Multiple importers told Argus that the constantly changing US tariffs on goods have upended business plans, and forced them to pause their US operations for the time being due to uncertainty about the taxes their material will face when it reaches US shores. "You have to have some confidence that conditions will hold in order to import," one trader told Argus . Trump's tariff rollout began on 1 February, when he announced that China would face a 10pc universal tariff, and the US's two largest trading partners, Mexico and Canada, would face 25pc universal tariffs. At the time, market participants speculated that the 25pc tariffs on Canada and Mexico would make operations and sales more expensive for Mexican and Canadian recyclers, particularly those that trade bales or finished resin across the US border. After some negotiations between world leaders, the tariffs on Canada and Mexico were delayed for 30 days, though the 10pc tariff on China went into effect as planned. The 25pc universal tariffs on Canada and Mexico were pushed back again on 6 March, but tariffs on aluminum — a significant competitor to rPET packaging — went into place on 12 March. The tariffs on aluminum have not been rescinded or paused, and the extra cost for imported aluminum as a result of the tariff could incentivize US consumer goods companies to use more PET in their packaging. On 9 April, the US put into place varying reciprocal tariffs on a number of countries that export recycled resin to the US, including India, Malaysia and Vietnam. While rPET and vPET pellets were excluded from the reciprocal tariffs, importers of rPE, rPP and PET waste were not excluded from the tariff. The same day, the reciprocal tariffs were pushed back 90 days in favor of a 10pc universal tariff that excludes Canada and Mexico. China and the US's reciprocal tariffs have escalated into a trade war, and currently material from China faces a 145pc tariff. Since the price is too high for most importers to be willing to pay, in essence all recycled resin imports from China are halted. China is one of the largest buyers of US virgin polyethylene https://direct.argusmedia.com/newsandanalysis/article/2675420), and the current trade war with China has the potential to increase domestic supply as exporters are forced to find new buyers for resin. Increased competition from oversupplied virgin resin could pull down recycled resin pricing. Until some stability in tariff policy returns to the US, traders and importers will continue to turn to other destinations outside the US to sell their recycled resin. By Zach Kluver Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

US MAP-DAP premium primed to return on tariffs

25/04/11

US MAP-DAP premium primed to return on tariffs

Houston, 11 April (Argus) — The period of MAP and DAP prices trading near parity will be short-lived because newly-imposed US import tariffs could amplify MAP supply woes, market participants told Argus . MAP and DAP prices have traded in close proximity since early January, diverting from the significant MAP premium seen last spring and summer when a surplus of DAP was imported into the US. After limited MAP barge trading in March, activity accelerated at Nola this week as it became clearer that all non-North American phosphate imports would face at least 10pc import tariffs imposed by President Donald Trump starting last week. The Nola MAP price was assessed at a midpoint of $636.50/st fob this week, up by $9/st from last week, while DAP was assessed $12.50/st higher at $632.50/st fob Nola. Despite the "reciprocal" tariffs on certain phosphate producing countries being lowered to a universal 10pc this week by Trump for 90 days — in line with the original tariff imposed on other countries such as Saudi Arabia and Australia last week — the remaining levy is still enough to deter vessels from coming to Nola, sources said. In response, the Nola MAP price has averaged a $5.75/st premium to the Nola DAP price for April so far, flipping from a $3.88/st average discount in March. That is still a far cry from October 2024, when the Nola MAP price averaged a $61.45/st premium over the Nola DAP. From August through November, the Nola MAP price was 13pc higher on average than DAP. US market participants expect the premium to expand in the coming months as MAP is the preferred product of most farmers during the fall application season, potentially impacting buying decisions for that period. The US from July through February has imported 759,000 metric tonnes (t) of DAP, down by 26pc from the same period last year, according to US Census Bureau data. This lapse in imports for the start of 2025 was an initial driver in DAP's rising premium over MAP. In comparison, MAP imports for the same period have totaled roughly 853,000t, up by just 5pc from the year before. But at least 290,000 t of MAP will need to be brought into the US between now and the start of the summer to equal out with the tonnage imported for the full 2023-24 fertilizer year ahead of fall applications. That is a task that may not be easily achieved given the new tariff on most phosphate imports. One buyer this week said they could consider switching usual MAP demand toward an alternative NPS product heading into October and November given the difficult supply outlook for the US. "We are very much in wait and see mode, trying to see how tariffs evolve and how it works its way into the market in terms of price," another buyer said. The significant premium MAP held last fall also limited overall phosphate applications conducted by farmers, therefore raising the bar for the amount of phosphate fertilizer farmers will need to put into the ground later this year to replenish soil nutrients. By Taylor Zavala US DAP/MAP barge prices Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

US tariffs cast a shadow on global gas market

25/04/11

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.

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

25/04/11

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.

IMO approves two-tier GHG pricing mechanism

25/04/11

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