LNG Bunkering

WinGD: Where next for LNG bunker fuel after IMO carbon pricing pause?

Benny Hilström says NZF delay has made more operators consider LNG. Without a global carbon pricing policy, it remains the most affordable, widely available and well-established of all marine alternative fuels.

Published

7 months ago

November 21, 2025

Admin

WinGD: Where next for LNG fuel after IMO carbon pricing pause?

Benny Hilstroem, Vice President of Market Development at Swiss marine power company WinGD, in an article published on Thursday (20 November), highlighted that LNG remains a strong, credible transition pathway, especially as the industry navigates uncertainty around global carbon pricing and clean-fuel incentives:

With or without the IMO Net Zero Framework, LNG remains a viable transition pathway towards decarbonisation and, with X-DF technology, ultra-low air pollution.

Going into the extraordinary session of IMO’s Marine Environment Protection Committee in mid-October, many in the industry had high hopes that the Net Zero Framework (NZF) would be adopted. WinGD was and remains one of the believers; incentivising the production and uptake of clean fuels is the only way to meet both IMO emissions ambitions and wider global climate targets.

The NZF does not mean, as some have suggested, that the case for LNG fuel or for installing dual-fuel LNG technology is over. Just like our X-DF-A ammonia-fuelled and X-DF-M methanol-fuelled engines, our X-DF dual-fuel LNG engines are ready to use zero or near-zero emissions (ZNZ) fuels. In the case of LNG those ZNZ fuels are bio-methane and e-methane, produced using captured carbon and renewable electricity, which can be used without modification and in any blend in X-DF engines.

Had the NZF been adopted with reduction targets and penalties stringent enough to drive people towards bio-methane, and rewards high enough to encourage e-methane production and use, the transition towards those fuels would have come sooner. A pause in implementing the policy only pushes the transition from fossil LNG further down the road.

That is why the NZF delay has made more operators consider LNG propulsion. Without a global carbon pricing policy and immediate e-fuel incentives, it remains the most affordable, widely available and well-established of all marine alternative fuels. Even fossil LNG can push vessels a long way towards the 30% reduction in emissions sought by 2030—an intermediate checkpoint under IMO’s GHG reduction strategy (which remains in place even after the NZF vote postponement).

WinGD’s X-DF concept has been in service since 2016, with more than 900 engines sold. Over that time we have amassed more than 8 million running hours of experience and continuously refined fuel consumption and emissions performance via innovations including iCER and VCR technology.

Advancing GHG benefits

Take methane slip as an example. In less than a decade we have reduced slippage by 60%, thanks to iCER, VCR and other design adaptations. Combined with low fuel consumption, this means that X-DF outperforms current high-pressure LNG engines in total greenhouse gas emissions in several vessel applications. In even more applications, low opex and initial system costs mean that total vessel lifecycle costs remain lower for X-DF than for high-pressure counterparts, regardless of IMO penalties.

Time in the market and continuous improvement have enabled us to develop an engine platform that will yield the best performance whether operating in fossil LNG or biological or synthetic derivatives. Regardless of the status of NZF, those years of refinements will pay dividends for operators choosing methane.

What happens next is far from clear. If the global framework were to fail, a patchwork of regional regulatory regimes would likely follow. Across several regions, port authorities are working to lower air pollution in their communities. It is therefore possible that, as regions regulate, they expand the scope of emissions policy to include not only GHG but also air pollutants.

In such a case, X-DF again has benefits for operators, offering the best air pollution profile of any LNG dual-fuel engine. That includes SOx, NOx and particulate matter. While IMO’s threshold requirements for NOx and SOx hide X-DF’s advantages, under schemes where operators pay for polluting the air, its low emissions profile would translate to real cost savings.

The Net Zero Framework would not have killed the use of LNG, but its pause certainly enhances the business case. Regardless, WinGD’s near decade of optimising the X-DF platform mean operators will pay less, whether they use fossil LNG or transition to cleaner variants. And it opens up new opportunities for air pollution improvements that could also have a significant financial impact on operators.

Photo credit: WinGD
Published: 21 November, 2025

Up Next

China: Yangpu Port records total 1.16 million mt of bonded bunker fuel since 2021

Don't Miss

TMC selected as energy-efficient compressor supplier for 12 Hapag-Lloyd boxships

LNG Bunkering

CCEC and CMA CGM form joint venture to build and operate LNG bunkering vessel

Each party will hold a 50% ownership stake in the joint venture, which has been established for the purpose of constructing, chartering, and operating one 20,000 cbm dual-fuel LNG bunkering vessel.

Published

1 day ago

June 16, 2026

Admin

Capital Clean Energy Carriers Corp. (CCEC), an international owner of ocean-going gas vessels, on Friday (12 June) announced the formation of a joint venture company with CMA CGM.

Each party will hold a 50% ownership stake in the joint venture, which has been established for the purpose of constructing, chartering, and operating one 20,000 cbm dual-fuel LNG bunkering vessel.

The joint venture marks CCEC’s entry into the LNG bunkering segment, the company’s first vessel dedicated to marine fuel supply.

In connection with this transaction, the joint venture has entered into a shipbuilding contract with Nantong CIMC Sinopacific Offshore & Engineering (CIMC SOE) for the construction of the vessel at a contract price of USD 82.8 million, with delivery expected in the third quarter of 2028.

Incorporating the latest technologies, the vessel is designed to enable safe and reliable LNG transfers across a wide range of operating conditions. Advanced emissions reduction systems, combined with highly efficient dual-fuel power generation, are designed to help the vessel meet applicable environmental standards of the global shipping industry.

In addition, the joint venture is expected to enter into a 12-year time charter with a joint venture company formed between CMA CGM and TotalEnergies, commencing upon delivery of the vessel from the shipyard.

Jerry Kalogiratos, CEO of Capital Clean Energy Carriers, commented: “This joint venture marks CCEC’s entry into LNG bunkering — a natural extension of our gas platform from carriage into marine fuel supply.

“Working alongside counterparties of the calibre of CMA CGM and TotalEnergies, we can help build the infrastructure that allows LNG to deliver a cleaner emissions profile, alongside security and diversity of supply, while opening a new, long-term contracted revenue stream for the Company through the Joint Venture.”

Christine Cabau, Executive Vice President Operations and Assets of CMA CGM, said: “Together with Capital Clean Energy Carriers and TotalEnergies, we are committed to building a reliable and high-performance LNG bunkering supply chain, which is essential to ensuring the availability and reliability of fuels such as LNG that represent the first step in the decarbonization of our industry.”

Photo credit: Scott Graham
Published: 16 June, 2026

Alternative Fuels

ENGINE on Fuel Switch Snapshot: Conventional fuels slump in major ports

HSFO becomes cheaper than B100 in Rotterdam; Singapore’s B100 flips to premium over LSMGO; Rotterdam LBM discounts to LNG widen.

Published

1 day ago

June 16, 2026

Admin

ENGINE on Fuel Switch Snapshot: Conventional fuels slump in major ports

Once a week, bunker intelligence platform ENGINE will publish a snapshot of alternative and conventional bunker fuel prices in the world’s two biggest bunkering hubs. The following is the latest snapshot:

HSFO becomes cheaper than B100 in Rotterdam
Singapore’s B100 flips to premium over LSMGO
Rotterdam LBM discounts to LNG widen

Brent’s price has slumped by $14.73/bbl ($108/mt) on the week after US President Donald Trump announced a preliminary peace deal with Iran yesterday. The sharp decline has dragged conventional fuel prices lower in both Rotterdam and Singapore.

Rotterdam’s B100 has shifted to a $14/mt premium over HSFO, from a $1/mt discount seen a week ago.

B100 discounts to VLSFO and LSMGO have narrowed by $54/mt and $89/mt to $50/mt and $343/mt, respectively.

In Singapore, B100 has shifted from a $79/mt discount to LSMGO to a $16/mt premium.

ENGINE on Fuel Switch Snapshot: Conventional fuels slump in major ports

Rotterdam’s liquefied biomethane (LBM) discounts to its LSMGO have narrowed by $21-28/mt in the past week, to $639-844/mt, depending on the LNG engine type.

Liquid fuels

Rotterdam’s HSFO (-$71/mt) and VLSFO (-$110/mt) prices have to some extent tracked a $14.73/bbl ($108/mt) drop in front-month ICE Brent futures. Its LSMGO benchmark has fallen by $145/mt, exceeding a $125/mt decline in front-month ICE low sulphur gasoil futures.

The port’s B100 price has dropped by $56/mt over the past week. Dutch ZRE A ticket prices have edged down by €2/mtCO2e to €108/mtCO2e.

Singapore’s conventional fuel prices have fallen by $112-167/mt, and its B100 price by $72/mt.

Liquid gases

Rotterdam’s LNG bunker prices have dropped by $77-83/mt in the past week, largely tracking a 12% decline in the front-month Dutch TTF Natural Gas contract.

Its LBM prices have fallen by $117-124/mt. LBM discounts to LNG have widened by $40-41/mt to $455-462/mt in the past week.

Singapore’s LNG prices have risen by $13-16/mt. The rises came amid spot market demand from India for fertiliser plants, power generation and households, noted ANZ Bank’s Daniel Hynes. Japan and South Korea tend to import more gas for power generation during their summer months, and China has been active in the market, Hynes said.

By Konica Bhatt

Photo credit and source: ENGINE
Published: 16 June, 2026

Bunker Fuel

Singapore: Bunker fuel sales drops by 6.8% on year in May 2026

4.55 million mt of various marine fuel grades were delivered at the world’s largest bunkering port in May, down from 4.88 million mt recorded during the similar month in 2025, according to MPA data.

Published

2 days ago

June 15, 2026

Admin

Singapore: Bunker fuel sales drops by 6.8% on year in May 2026

Sales of marine fuel at Singapore port dropped by 6.8% on year in May 2026, according to data from the Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore (MPA).

In total, 4.55 million metric tonnes (mt) (exact 4,548,000 mt) of various marine fuel grades were delivered at the world’s largest bunkering port in May, down from 4.88 million mt (4,878,100 mt) recorded during the similar month in 2025.

Deliveries of marine fuel oil, low sulphur fuel oil, ultra low sulphur fuel oil, marine gas oil and marine diesel oil in May (against on year) recorded respectively 1.79 million mt (-5.3% from 1.89 million mt), 2.29 million mt (-6.5% from 2.45 million mt), zero (-100% from 1,200 mt), 600 (35.2% from 1,700 mt) and zero (from zero).

Singapore: Bunker fuel sales drops by 6.8% on year in May 2026

Bio-blended variants of marine fuel oil, low sulphur fuel oil, ultra low sulphur fuel oil, marine gas oil and marine diesel oil in May, (against on year) recorded respectively 11,600 mt (-71.6% from 40,900 mt), 36,400 mt (-62.1% from 96,100 mt), zero (from zero), zero (from zero) and zero (from zero). B100 biofuel bunkers, introduced in February last year, recorded 12,800 mt (+573.7% from 1,900 mt).

LNG and methanol sales were 70,300 mt (+56.2% from 45,000 mt) and zero (from zero) respectively. There were no recorded sales of ammonia for the month and so far since 2025.

Photo credit: Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore
Published: 15 June, 2026