Connect with us
DNV Decarbonization Insight Series August 2026 - What maritime professionals should know about AI Training

Bunker Fuel

ENGINE: Americas Fuel Availability Outlook (27 August 2026)

VLSFO and LSMGO tight at West Coast; Panama records healthy bunker demand; HSFO tight in Callao.

Admin

Published

on

RESIZED ENGINE Americas

The following article regarding bunker fuel availability in the Americas region has been provided by online marine fuel procurement platform ENGINE for post on Singapore bunkering publication Manifold Times:

  • VLSFO and LSMGO tight at West Coast
  • Panama records healthy bunker demand
  • HSFO tight in Callao

North America

Bunker fuel demand is steady in Houston, and fuel availability at the port is normal. VLSFO and LSMGO can be delivered within lead times of 4–5 days.

“In Houston, around five days’ lead time is advisable for VLSFO and LSMGO. Shorter lead times are possible, but suppliers are then limited and prices tend to be less competitive,” a bunker trader told ENGINE.

HSFO is a bit tight at the port, and suppliers are recommending at least 7 days of lead time for deliveries.

Weather conditions are normal and port operations are running normally.

In New Orleans, Louisiana (NOLA), all three fuel grades are available, with a recommended lead time of 6–7 days amid steady demand. The shortest time in which HSFO and VLSFO can be delivered in NOLA is under 5 days.

In Bolivar Roads, VLSFO and LSMGO can be delivered within lead times of 7–8 days, a source said.

Availability is okay at the Galveston Offshore Lightering Area (GOLA), where suppliers can offer HSFO and LSMGO with lead times of 3–4 days. VLSFO is also available at the anchorage but requires a longer lead time of around 5–6 days.

With hurricane season ongoing, a rough patch of weather can be expected, a source said.

In New York, bunker fuel demand is normal, and availability is good for all three grades. Lead times for HSFO have come down this week, with suppliers now recommending anywhere between 3–7 days.

VLSFO and LSMGO can also be supplied within the same lead times at the port.

On the West Coast, bunker demand has been strong in Los Angeles and Long Beach this week, a source said.

VLSFO and LSMGO availability is tight at both ports, with lead times ranging from more than a week to 10 days. HSFO availability is relatively better, but suppliers would require at least a week’s notice, a trader said.

Vancouver’s bunker availability is steady, with HSFO available within 5–7 days, while VLSFO and LSMGO require around 6–8 days’ lead time.

Latin America and the Caribbean

In Panama, bunker fuel demand has seen a slight uptick compared to the previous week, and availability is good at both Balboa and Cristobal.

“Panama, in particular, has been busier than in prior weeks. HSFO supply is tighter, so I’d definitely recommend allowing for more lead time there,” a source said.

VLSFO and LSMGO can both be supplied within 3–6 days. HSFO requires longer lead times of 7–8 days. The shortest time within which two suppliers can deliver VLSFO at Balboa is 1–2 days.

VLSFO and LSMGO remain readily available across Colombia’s Cartagena, Santa Marta, and Barranquilla, with prompt delivery windows of 3–4 days.

In Freeport, Bahamas, HSFO and LSMGO can typically be supplied within 5–6 days, though some suppliers may deliver in as little as 2–3 days.

In Chile, HSFO is no longer available, while VLSFO and LSMGO availability is okay, with lead times of 4–7 days.

At Callao, HSFO availability is tight and under prior consultation, with lead times around 8–10 days. VLSFO and LSMGO remain okay, with lead times of 4–7 days, a trader said.

Fuel availability is okay in Brazil, with demand reported as steady, though several ports are dealing with congestion.

Santos and Rio de Janeiro currently have normal fuel availability, with lead times of 4–7 days. “Santos looks congested over the next 5–7 days, but it’s been okay,” a bunker trader said.

Availability is also okay in Paranaguá and Belem/Vila do Conde for both the grades, with lead times of 4–7 days. Rio Grande has okay availability for VLSFO, also within 4–7 days, though LSMGO is not promptly available there.

In Argentina’s Zona Común, both VLSFO and LSMGO are available via barges. A brief delay is anticipated due to strong winds at the anchorage location. Market conditions remain normal, with prices holding steady this week.

“Deliveries are normal, and most suppliers are asking for 5–7 days lead time,” a source said.

By Gautamee Hazarika

 

Photo credit and source: ENGINE
Published: 28 August, 2026

Continue Reading

Methanol

Wallenius Wilhelmsen, EUKOR secure green methanol bunker fuel supply from EcoMethanol

Under a MoU, Hyundai Corporation will buy the methanol produced in Taebaek and sell it on to the two carriers, which will burn it as fuel in their own fleets.

Admin

Published

on

By

Wallenius Wilhelmsen, EUKOR secure green methanol bunker fuel supply from EcoMethanol

South Korean firm EcoMethanol on Wednesday (26 August) signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) on the supply of green methanol with Taebaek City, Hyundai Corporation, Wallenius Wilhelmsen Ocean AS of Norway and EUKOR Car Carriers. 

The signing took place at EUKOR’s head office in Seoul.

EcoMethanol is the special purpose company set up by South Korean clean energy firm Plagen to build a green methanol plant in Taebaek, Gangwon State. 

Under the MoU, Hyundai Corporation will buy the methanol produced in Taebaek and sell it on to the two carriers, which will burn it as fuel in their own fleets. Taebaek City takes part as an equity co-investor and will provide administrative and policy support. Production, trading and end use are tied together in a single chain, the first such arrangement in Korea.

Manifold Times previously reported Taebaek City and Plagen signing an investment agreement for a new green methanol production plant in the South Korean city that will be supplied as bunker fuel.

Wallenius Wilhelmsen, EUKOR secure green methanol bunker fuel supply from EcoMethanol

The plant will produce 15,000 metric tonnes (mt) a year from forestry residues, using dual fluidized bed (DFB) gasification, a process already proven in commercial operation. Total investment is KRW 120 billion.

EcoMethanol holds Korea’s integrated environmental permit, has secured its site in the Dongjeom Industrial Complex and has completed basic design. Construction is due to start in December 2026 and commercial production in January 2029. The plant will employ 36 people locally.

Taebaek’s role as a production hub is written into both national and provincial plans. The Taebaek Jangseong Colliery Economic Revitalization Project cleared preliminary feasibility review in 2025 with a green methanol facility included in its scope, and Gangwon State lists a green methanol cluster in its mid- to long-term investment plan for former coal-mining regions. Dongjeom will be the first of these facilities to be built, because its industrial site is already developed.

Carbon regulation in shipping is no longer a prospect. The EU Emissions Trading System now covers maritime transport, the FuelEU Maritime regulation on greenhouse gas intensity is in force, and the International Maritime Organization is moving toward adoption of its Net-Zero Framework.

Korean carriers are already buying green methanol. HMM’s methanol-fueled container ships HMM Green and HMM Forest took on 2,900 mt and 3,110 mt at Yangshan Port in Shanghai in March and May 2025. 

The car carrier Arctic Tern, operated by EUKOR, loaded about 2,800 mt in Shanghai in July 2026 before starting commercial service on the Asia-Europe route. All of that fuel was made in China.

Korea produces none of its own. Ulsan Port was the first port anywhere to bunker green methanol for a ship, in 2023, but the fuel had been imported. 

Korea consumes roughly 2 million mt of methanol a year, most of it imported and made from fossil feedstock.

The Taebaek plant would be the country’s first domestic source of clean marine fuel.

Related: Korea: Taebaek City and PLAGEN to build green methanol bunker fuel plant

 

Photo credit: EcoMethanol
Published: 28 August, 2026

Continue Reading

Alternative Fuels

DNV report: Regulatory uncertainty demands fleet strategies built for multiple futures

Report examines four regulatory scenarios, ranging from adoption of IMO NZF in its current form to its outright rejection, energy efficiency uptake, and long-term bunker fuel and technology strategies.

Admin

Published

on

By

DNV report: Regulatory uncertainty demands fleet strategies built for multiple futures

Regulatory uncertainty is increasing pressure on shipowners to make investment decisions that remain viable across multiple future scenarios, said classification society DNV on Thursday (27 August). 

According to DNV’s 10th Maritime Forecast to 2050, stronger global regulatory signals could accelerate the uptake of energy-efficiency measures, enabling the global fleet to consume up to 25% less energy by 2050 compared to a scenario where regulation is driven by regions.

The report examines four regulatory scenarios, ranging from adoption of the IMO Net-Zero Framework (NZF) in its current form to its outright rejection, which could lead to a period of prolonged regulatory gridlock, and explores the implications of these outcomes for fuel demand, energy efficiency uptake, and long-term fleet fuel and technology strategies.

Cristina Saenz de Santa Maria, CEO Maritime, DNV, said: “Ships ordered today will operate well beyond 2050, but many of the factors shaping their future performance remain uncertain. Regulatory requirements are advancing faster than the fuel, infrastructure, and technological systems needed to support them, making long-term investment decisions increasingly complex. The industry therefore needs greater clarity and alignment among all stakeholders to provide the confidence required for long-term investment. In the meantime, shipowners need strategies that deliver benefits today while remaining resilient across a range of regulatory and market outcomes.”

Energy efficiency is one of the most immediate and practical levers available to shipowners, delivering value across regulatory outcomes whether implemented at the newbuild stage or as a retrofit. A case study of a hydrodynamic measures retrofit on a 5,000 TEU container vessel showed potential annual fuel savings of 16%, with a payback time of around one to four years depending on future fuel prices. Retrofits can add similar value across many ship types and with sufficient planning can typically be completed during a standard class-renewal dry docking.

The development of the marine low-GHG fuel market remains a key challenge. While significant progress has been made in expanding alternative-fuel capabilities of vessels, scaling fuel production depends on confidence that demand will materialize. DNV projects shipping demand for low-GHG fuels to range from 4 to 22 Mtoe by 2030 and 33 to 185 Mtoe by 2050, depending on regulatory outcomes, with uptake also shaped by future uptake of shore power, plug-in hybridization, nuclear power, and onboard carbon capture systems.

Current project pipelines indicate a maximum global supply of 270 Mtoe by 2030, although actual volumes are likely to be lower due to project delays and other uncertainties, and shipping will need to compete with other industries for its share. However, the cost of reducing emissions varies significantly between fuel pathways, with abatement costs ranging from about 180 to 1,290 USD per tonne of CO₂ avoided, highlighting the importance of regulation and market incentives in enabling low-GHG fuel markets to develop.

Øyvind Sekkesæter, lead author of Maritime Forecast to 2050, said: “Scenarios explored in this year’s report show how different regulatory futures can lead to very different outcomes in energy efficiency uptake, fuel demand, and consequently, GHG emissions. By testing fuel and technology choices across multiple scenarios, shipowners can identify strategies that create value today while preserving flexibility as regulation, fuel availability, prices, and technologies evolve. Strategies that each owner chooses will also be dependent on their fleet type and operating context.”

Key findings from the report: 

  • Several regulatory futures remain possible as the IMO continues negotiations on the Net-Zero Framework, with these outcomes shaping investment decisions, low-GHG fuel uptake, and energy-efficiency deployment across the global fleet.
  • With global regulatory incentives in place, the world-fleet could consume 25% less energy by 2050 than under a scenario limited to regional regulations.
  • Energy efficiency can pay off regardless of regulatory outcome – 5,000 TEU container ship case study shows 16% annual fuel savings from hydrodynamic measures retrofit.
  • Shipping demand for low-GHG fuels could range from 4 to 22 Mtoe by 2030, and 33 to 185 Mtoe by 2050, depending on regulatory outcomes and the availability of these fuels in a competitive global market.
  • Current project pipelines indicate that a maximum of 270 Mtoe of supply could be available by 2030, though actual volumes are likely to be lower due to project delays and other uncertainties, and shipping will need to compete with other industries for its share.
  • Testing fuel and technology strategies across different scenarios can help shipowners identify robust choices for an uncertain transition. Testing, piloting, and verifying technologies can provide the trusted performance data needed to make investment decisions with greater confidence.

Note: DNV’s 10th Maritime Forecast to 2050 can be found here. 

 

Photo credit: DNV
Published: 28 August, 2026

Continue Reading

Alternative Fuels

Green fuel bunkering part of Australia’s maritime emissions plan

Government will encourage and support investment in storage and bunkering facilities for low carbon fuels, shore power infrastructure and expansion of port energy capabilities.

Admin

Published

on

By

Sydney, Dan Freeman on Unsplash

The Australian Government on Wednesday (26 August) released the Maritime Emissions Reduction National Action Plan (MERNAP), outlining practical actions government and industry can take to continue decarbonisation of the maritime sector.

One of the actions highlighted in the plan include that the Australian Government will further promote and support the use of low carbon fuels in shipping to reduce the carbon footprint of transporting Australia’s green energy exports and the acceleration of the low carbon liquid fuels (LCLF) industry under programmes such as the Future Made in Australia Innovation Fund.

Through a stocktake of programmes, the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications, Sports and the Arts, will flag the requirements of the maritime industry with relevant programmes. 

“This work will feed into the development of a bunkering strategy to help guide investment in green fuels,” it said. 

Announced in Budget 2026-27, the Australian Government is investing $4 million to develop a green fuel bunkering strategy, to prepare Australian ports to diversify the maritime fuel mix, supported by targeted industry trials and studies. It will help secure long-term resilience for the industry that carries more than 99% of Australia’s trade by volume.

The Government will also encourage and support investment in storage and bunkering facilities for low carbon fuels, shore power infrastructure and expansion of port energy capabilities.

The actions in the MERNAP have been deliberately developed to take account of the significant Australian Government investments in maritime and energy decarbonisation initiatives, including $4 million to develop a green fuel bunkering strategy. 

Stretching across ports, shipping, energy, domestic commercial vessels and skills and training, the MERNAP identifies key priority actions to support decarbonisation while recognising Australian shipping must remain competitive and prosperous in the international market

The MERNAP complements existing Australian Government incentives and policies including the $1.1 billion Cleaner Fuels Programme, the Green Fuel Bunkering Strategy, the $30 million Australia-Singapore Low-Emissions Technologies Initiative for Maritime and Port Operations, the $55 million Transport Resilience And Capacity Kickstart programme and the $13.8 million Maritime Skills and Training Initiative.

It also complements the country’s $100 million investment in a new Clean Energy Precinct at the Port of Newcastle, which is expected to facilitate production, storage, distribution and export of clean-energy products including hydrogen and ammonia.

Australia’s Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government Catherine King, said: “The recent conflict in the Middle East has demonstrated to us how critical it is to build resilience and sustainability within our maritime industry.

“In a nation where our maritime sector is responsible for 99 per cent of our international trade, the MERNAP is a vital piece of our journey toward a sustainable future.

“It also presents an unparalleled opportunity to be a low and zero-carbon energy exporter of choice internationally, while creating new jobs and industry within the sustainable maritime sector locally.”

Note: The Australian Government’s Maritime Emissions Reduction National Action Plan can be read here

 

Photo credit: Dan Freeman on Unsplash
Published: 28 August, 2026

Continue Reading

Trending