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

Bunker Fuel

ENGINE: East of Suez Fuel Availability Outlook (14 July 2026)

VLSFO availability tight in Singapore; super typhoon Bavi-induced bad weather keeps bunkering halted in Zhoushan; bunker supply tight in several Japanese ports.
Admin

Published

2 months ago

on

RESIZED ENGINE East of Suez

The following article regarding regional bunker fuel availability outlook for the East of Suez region has been provided by online marine fuels procurement platform ENGINE for publication on Singapore bunkering publication Manifold Times:

  • VLSFO availability tight in Singapore
  • Super typhoon Bavi-induced bad weather keeps bunkering halted in Zhoushan
  • Bunker supply tight in several Japanese ports

Singapore and Malaysia

VLSFO availability in Singapore remains tight, with several suppliers facing low stock levels. Recommended lead times have widened from 13–17 days last week, to 15–18 days now.

By contrast, HSFO availability has improved slightly, with lead times narrowing to 10–12 days, from 11–19 days a week ago. LSMGO supply has also eased, as recommended lead times have shortened to 6–9 days, down from 8–10 days last week.

The port’s residual fuel oil inventories have averaged 10% higher so far this month than across June, Enterprise Singapore’s latest data shows. Fuel oil stocks have climbed above 19 million bbls amid a 105% surge in net fuel oil imports in July so far. Imports have increased by 1.92 million bbls, while exports have fallen by 206,000 bbls.

Singapore’s middle distillate inventories have also risen by 12% so far this month, reaching 8.91 million bbls.

In Malaysia’s Port Klang, bunker fuel availability remains mixed. VLSFO supply is generally adequate, particularly for smaller prompt stems. However, LSMGO availability remains constrained, while HSFO continues to face supply pressure, leaving both grades relatively tight.

East Asia

Bunker availability in Zhoushan has improved amid weaker demand. Recommended lead times for VLSFO have shortened to around eight days, down from 10–15 days last week. Lead times for both LSMGO and HSFO have also eased to about five days, compared with 7–10 days previously.

However, bunkering operations at Zhoushan’s outer and inner anchorages have been suspended since last Tuesday, as Super Typhoon Bavi continues to affect the region with adverse weather, according to a source. Operations are expected to resume on 15 July, once conditions improve.

Bunker fuel availability across northern China remains mixed. Suppliers in Dalian and Qingdao have ample stocks of VLSFO and LSMGO, although HSFO availability in Qingdao remains limited. In Tianjin, all major bunker grades continue to face supply constraints, while VLSFO and HSFO remain tight in Shanghai. LSMGO supply in Shanghai, however, is relatively stable.

Supply constraints also persist across several southern Chinese ports. Both VLSFO and LSMGO remain tight in Fuzhou. Xiamen has sufficient VLSFO availability but tighter LSMGO supply, while both grades remain constrained in Yangpu and Guangzhou.

Hong Kong’s bunker market remains steady, with recommended lead times for all major bunker grades holding at around seven days, broadly unchanged from recent weeks.

In Taiwan, bunkering has resumed at the ports of Keelung, Hualien, Taichung, Kaohsiung and Suao after temporary suspensions over the weekend caused by Super Typhoon Bavi, a Taiwan-based source said.

Recommended lead times for both VLSFO and LSMGO remain around two days in Hualien and Taichung, and about three days in Keelung and Kaohsiung, broadly unchanged from the previous week.

Across South Korea’s southern ports—including Busan, Ulsan, Masan, Onsan, Yeosu and Kwangyang—recommended lead times for VLSFO and LSMGO have widened to 4–12 days, from 4–6 days last week. HSFO now also requires 4–12 days, compared with being supplied on an enquiry basis a week earlier.

In the country’s western ports, including Incheon, Daesan, Dangjin, Pyeongtaek and Taean, recommended lead times for VLSFO and LSMGO have narrowed to 4–12 days from 9–14 days last week. HSFO also requires 4–12 days, whereas it was available on an enquiry basis previously.

In Japan, bunker demand has strengthened as expected, with inquiries increasing amid more competitive regional pricing. VLSFO availability remains extremely tight, while LSMGO supply has tightened sharply and July capacity is limited, according to a Japan-based trader.

The trader urged buyers to secure spot requirements as early as possible, citing a severe supply squeeze, limited July allocations, and expectations that Japanese refineries will prioritise domestic energy demand.

At major Japanese ports, including Tokyo, Chiba, Kawasaki, Kashima, Nagoya, Yokkaichi, Osaka, Kobe, Mizushima and Oita, VLSFO and LSMGO remain in short supply, with only a limited number of suppliers able to offer the grades. HSFO is comparatively more available, with recommended lead times of around 7–10 days.

By contrast, Indonesia’s bunker market remains well supplied. VLSFO availability is stable across Jakarta, Surabaya, Balikpapan and Cigading, where suppliers are generally quoting lead times of around 2–3 days.

Oceania

VLSFO availability remains steady in Western Australia, with suppliers in Kwinana and Fremantle typically recommending lead times of around seven days. Bunkering at both ports continue to be serviced by a single supplier, with all deliveries conducted by barge.

Supply conditions are more varied along Australia’s east coast. In New South Wales, VLSFO can be delivered by truck or pipeline in Port Kembla, while suppliers in Sydney have adequate stocks of both VLSFO and LSMGO. HSFO remains relatively tighter in Sydney, with suppliers generally requiring around seven days of advance notice.

In Queensland, VLSFO and LSMGO remain readily available in Brisbane and Gladstone, where recommended lead times are also around seven days.

Further south, suppliers continue to hold healthy VLSFO inventories in Melbourne and Geelong. However, bunker operations at both ports rely on a single barge, keeping lead times at approximately one week. HSFO availability has tightened further in both Melbourne and Brisbane.

Meanwhile, one supplier is offering all major bunker grades in Brisbane, Sydney and Melbourne with lead times of around five days. In Dampier, bunker deliveries continue to be carried out through truck-assisted pipeline operations, making advance planning and berth confirmation particularly important, according to a market source.

Across the Tasman Sea, bunker fuel availability in New Zealand remains broadly stable. VLSFO is readily available in Tauranga and Auckland, with suppliers recommending lead times of about four days. At Marsden Point, both VLSFO and LSMGO can be supplied directly to vessels through pipeline infrastructure.

Weather continues to pose operational challenges across New Zealand. Bunker deliveries remain especially vulnerable to disruption in Wellington and ports across the South Island, where adverse weather conditions can periodically interrupt supply operations.

South Asia

The monsoon is expected to disrupt bunker operations at several Indian ports over the coming days, with weather-related delays likely to affect delivery schedules. Bunkering is forecast to face disruptions at Kandla and Sikka between 14–18 July, while rough sea conditions could hamper operations in Mumbai, Cochin and Visakhapatnam over the same period.

In Sri Lanka, bunker market conditions remain stable, with adequate stocks of all major bunker fuel grades in Colombo and Hambantota. However, at least one supplier has increased its recommended lead times to around six days, up from about three days previously.

Weather conditions could also intermittently disrupt bunker operations in Colombo and Trincomalee between 14–18 July, potentially causing delays to bunker deliveries.

Middle East

Despite escalating US-Iran hostilities in the Strait of Hormuz, bunker fuel availability has improved in Fujairah, with VLSFO and LSMGO supply easing as several suppliers are now able to accommodate prompt delivery requests. HSFO availability, however, has tightened and is largely being offered on a firm enquiry basis.

Similar supply conditions are being reported in the neighbouring UAE bunker hub of Khor Fakkan.

Elsewhere in the UAE, port operations at Jebel Ali, Hamriyah, Dibba and Sharjah continue without disruption, according to Inchcape Shipping. Ports in Ras Al Khaimah are also operating normally.

In Kuwait, all ports remain fully operational. However, although inbound and outbound vessel movements at Shuaiba Port continue to be suspended for safety reasons, port access, as well as cargo operations alongside berthed vessels and other port activities are continuing as normal, the shipping agency said.

No official operational advisories have been issued for Saudi Arabian ports. In Jeddah, VLSFO and LSMGO availability remains relatively stable. However, adverse weather could disrupt bunker operations in Jeddah between 16–18 July and in Yanbu between 14–16 July.

Qatar’s Ministry of Transport has temporarily suspended sailing and maritime activities for private and recreational vessels—including leisure craft, fishing boats and jet skis—until further notice. According to port control, commercial vessel traffic and port operations remain unaffected, Inchcape Shipping said. However, VLSFO and LSMGO availability remains constrained at Ras Laffan.

In Oman, one supplier is recommending lead times of just 2–3 days at the major ports of Duqm, Muscat, Sohar and Salalah. High wave activity forecast in Salalah between 14–18 July could, however, temporarily disrupt bunkering operations, according to a source.

In Egypt, port operations continue as normal. At Port Suez, HSFO inventories remain tight, while VLSFO stocks are close to depletion.

Further south, both VLSFO and LSMGO remain difficult to secure in Djibouti.

The Iraqi High Maritime Authority has issued a circular requiring all vessels operating in its territorial waters to keep their AIS switched on at all times, the shipping agency said.

Meanwhile, port and bunker operations across Jordan, Cyprus, Pakistan and Lebanon continue to function normally, according to Inchcape Shipping.

By Tuhin Roy

 

Photo credit and source: ENGINE
Published: 15 July, 2026

Related Topics:
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

2 days ago

on

August 28, 2026

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

2 days ago

on

August 28, 2026

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

2 days ago

on

August 28, 2026

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