

Weight of Freight: Size Matters – owners and charterers adjust to a changing tanker market
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
Vale’s Ni output rises 11pc after furnace rebuild
Vale’s Ni output rises 11pc after furnace rebuild
Sao Paulo, 16 April (Argus) — Brazil-based mining group Vale's nickel production rose in the first quarter by 11pc from the same period last year, when the company's Onça Puma mine's furnace was being rebuilt. Total nickel production rose to 43,900 metric tonnes (t) in the first quarter, up from 39,500t a year earlier, Vale said Tuesday. Brazilian operations produced 5,400t of finished nickel in the quarter, compared to none a year earlier. Canadian nickel production rose by 18pc to 20,000t, as Voisey's Bay's output climbed on the year by 47pc to 6,500t and Thompson mines output surged by 51pc to 3,600t. Higher production was intended to build inventories ahead of scheduled maintenance at its Canadian refineries during the upcoming quarters, Vale said. Vale plans as much as five weeks of maintenance at its Creighton mine in the third quarter, with shorter outages scheduled for Thompson and Long Harbour stretching into the fourth quarter. Nickel sales volumes stood 5pc below production at 38,900t but marked an 18pc increase from a year earlier. Vale's nickel prices averaged at $16,100/t in the quarter, down by 4.4pc year-on-year, reflecting lower London Metal exchange (LME) prices. Isabel Filgueiras Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
US' Chinese ship port fee decision Thursday: USTR
US' Chinese ship port fee decision Thursday: USTR
New York, 16 April (Argus) — The US Trade Representative's (USTR) office said it will release details Thursday on proposed fees for operators of Chinese-built ships calling at US ports. The closely-watched proposals — part of President Donald Trump's plan to kick-start a flagging US shipbuilding industry and challenge Chinese dominance in the sector — were the subject of hearings and public comments last month in Washington, DC. The original proposal included fees of up to $1.5mn per port call for ships based on the percentage of Chinese-built vessels in an operator's fleet. Shipping market participants said the proposals could significantly curtail US import and exports and hurt the broader economy. Higher costs for shipping would likely be passed on to US consumers . Since the public hearings, the USTR has signaled that the fees would likely be less onerous than under the original proposal, and that not all of them would be implemented . By Charlotte Bawol Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
Valero Benicia refinery closure latest Calif challenge
Valero Benicia refinery closure latest Calif challenge
Adds details on refinery operations, California regulations. Houston, 16 April (Argus) — US refiner Valero is planning to shut or re-purpose its 145,000 b/d refinery in Benicia, California, compounding the state's fuel market challenges. The company submitted a notice to the California Energy Commission (CEC) today of its intent "to idle, restructure, or cease refining operations" at the refinery by the end of April 2026. Valero also said it continues to evaluate strategic alternatives for its remaining operations in the state, namely its 85,000 b/d Wilmington refinery. Valero said previously west coast refinery closures were likely , citing the high cost of doing business in the state given its environmental and financial regulations. California refiners in recent years have faced what the industry views as a restrictive environment for processing crude. Phillips 66 last year said it would shut its 139,000 b/d Los Angeles refinery, saying that the long-term sustainability of the refinery was uncertain and affected by market dynamics. The Phillips 66 refinery will be shut by October. Growing legislative barriers California governor Gavin Newsom last year signed two laws, SB X1-2 and AB X2-1, which added regulations in an effort to reduce retail gasoline price volatility. The measures authorized the CEC to develop and impose requirements for in-state refiners to maintain minimum stocks of gasoline and gasoline blending components. They also authorized the CEC to determine an acceptable refining margin in the state and penalize companies that exceed it. The agency is currently in the rulemaking process on some of the measures including a requirement for refiners to submit "resupply plans" 120 days before planned maintenance that must be approved by the state. Non-compliance could carry a civil penalty of $100,000-$1mn per day. Separately, the city of Benicia recently approved a safety ordinance that applies to industrial facilities that handle hazardous materials including the Valero refinery. The ordinance included new air quality monitoring programs. California air regulators in October 2024 levied an $82mn fine against Valero for emissions violations at the Benicia refinery. The Bay Area Air Quality Management District and California Air Resources Board announced the penalty for "egregious emissions violations" stemming from a 2019 inspection that discovered unreported emissions coming from the refinery's hydrogen system. Since the 1980s, 29 refineries in California have been shut or integrated with other refineries that eventually closed or converted to renewable fuels production, according to CEC data. About half of the shut refineries were smaller operations, producing less than 20,000 b/d. Chevron, the US oil major that has long complained about a hostile regulatory environment in its home state of California, is relocating its headquarters to Houston. Valero said this week it recorded a pre-tax impairment charge of $1.1bn for the Benicia and Wilmington refineries in the first quarter as it evaluates strategic alternatives. The impairment will be treated as a special item and excluded from first quarter earnings, Valero said. The Benicia refinery produces jet fuel, gasoline, diesel, and asphalt and has more than 400 employees. By Eunice Bridges Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
Finco joins FuelEU compliance market
Finco joins FuelEU compliance market
London, 16 April (Argus) — Netherlands-based fuel supplier FincoEnergies has launched a pooling service to help shipowners comply with FuelEU Maritime requirements. The service will enable undercompliant ships to meet their FuelEU requirements by pooling them with vessels that run on marine biodiesel supplied by FincoEnergies' own GoodFuels brand. The pooling service is also based on a partnership with maritime classification organisation Lloyd's Register, the company said. FincoEnergies said it will take the role of "pool organiser". The FuelEU Maritime regulation, which came into effect this year, sets greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction targets of 2pc for vessels travelling in or out of Europe. The reduction jumps to 6pc from 2030 and gradually reaches 80pc by 2050. The pooling mechanism built into FuelEU Maritime allows shipowners to combine vessels to achieve overall compliance across the pool, enabling a system by which compliance can be traded. Argus assessed the values of FuelEU Ucome-MGO abatement and Ucome-VLSFO abatement, prices which can be used as a metric to value compliance, at an average of $302.56/t of CO2 equivalent (CO2e) and $337.46/tCO2e, respectively, so far this year. By Hussein Al-Khalisy and Natália Coelho Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
