Connect with us

Uncategorized

Integr8 Fuels: Decarbonisation to transform shipping and bunkering

While the car industry has embraced electric technology for power, shipping remains in limbo and has not ‘decided’ on the technology that will take it forward.
Admin

Published

6 years ago

on

Integr8 fuels 2

Integr8 Fuels, the bunker trading and brokerage arm of Navig8, on Monday (18 January) published an summary on the various ways the decarbonisation of shipping will impact the bunkering industry and the various opportunities it presents; it was written by Anton Shamray, Senior Research Analyst:

 

Last year was tough and the spread of Covid-19 has had a massive impact on all industries, including shipping. As we are seeing the light at the end of the pandemic tunnel with the vaccination programmes being rolled out, the focus is shifting towards what happens next. Clean energy and decarbonisation are again in the headlines with the governments increasing spending, announcing new projects and bringing ambitious environmental targets forward. This poses a number of questions for shipping – what technology to use and what fuel to burn as well as in what shape and form energy will be shipped in what looks like the not so distant future.

Cleaning up shipping

Despite not being the fastest industry to transform and adapt, a major change happened in shipping just over a year ago. The IMO2020 legislation introduced a much lower limit on the amount of sulphur in the bunker fuel that ships can burn. While there are plans to reduce NOx emissions that ships produce, shipping is now facing an ever-increasing pressure to contribute to the global push for decarbonisation.

While the car industry is already embracing the new technology, in the form of electric vehicles powered by batteries and increasingly looking into fuel cells, shipping remains in limbo and has not “decided” on the technology that will take it forward. The main question is what type of technology will be able to fit into the limited space on a ship, provide for a good range and not impair a ship’s carrying capacity. While traditional power plants can be replaced with hectares of solar panels or wind farms to generate the equivalent energy, this cannot be achieved on a vessel. Below is an overview of the potential solutions for shipping and how they may transform bunkering.

Carbon footprint offset / carbon capture and storage

Offsetting emissions or using carbon capture would mean that shipping may continue using the current fuels (with further abatement technology but with the ever growing pressure to change) or transition to the next generation of fuels, which could have lower SOx, NOx, and CO2 emissions. These fuels could be LNG (10-20% less carbon emissions), which is already gradually taking off and methanol. Both have lower energy density than conventional fuels and require certain handling conditions.

Offsetting carbon emissions could potentially be done by either buying carbon credits from other businesses, using alternative “green” investments such as carbon capture or by planting trees although calculations suggest that offsetting a single voyage requires planting and growing hundreds of thousands of trees.

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is a solution similar to planting trees, although the emitted carbon will not be captured by the trees but rather by the CCS facilities. There are a number of projects being developed whereby salt caverns and decommissioned oil and gas fields will be used to store carbon dioxide.

If this is the preferred way going forward, then bunkering is unlikely to change dramatically. Bunker fuel will still likely be delivered by a tanker barge, truck or pipeline.

Ammonia

Ammonia is a gas that could be a good solution as it doesn’t produce any carbon when burnt. While currently most of ammonia is produced using hydrogen from natural gas, ammonia projects using “green” hydrogen obtained by electrolysis also exist meaning the entire chain could potentially be carbon neutral. Ammonia has lower energy density, so it requires either more frequent refuelling or more storage capacity on board compared to fuel oil. It also needs certain storage conditions and generally is not pleasant to handle due to its pungent smell.

Bunkering ammonia would not look very different from taking on LNG as it is typically carried by LPG/ammonia tankers.

Batteries

This is already a viable option for road vehicles, and we are seeing faster than expected uptake. While batteries may be a viable option for short-haul shipping, including ferries and small craft, this technology is unlikely to be able to produce enough energy to power a seagoing vessel in the near future. There is hope that solid state batteries may change this situation at some point in a more distant future.

Integr8 fuels 2

A pioneering electric ferry

Should battery technology develop to allow them to be installed on seagoing vessels, bunkering may look very different to what it looks now. Ship’s batteries could be recharged by a floating charging barge or at the jetty or potentially swapped to allow a quicker turnaround.

Fuel Cells

Fuel cells were invented almost 2 centuries ago, although until now their application has been mostly limited to power generation, space and military. However, they are increasingly being used in the automotive industry and several JVs have been concluded to extend its application to marine technology.

Fuel cells can reach 80-90% efficiency, although most currently rely on hydrogen storage and supply. Storing hydrogen can be tricky as it is prone to leakages and is very explosive. Fuel cells can also be developed to use LNG, methanol, ammonia and other fuels as the source of hydrogen. To achieve the maximum reduction in carbon dioxide emissions all these fuels will also have to come from “green” sources.

Integr8 fuels 3

The diagram of a fuel cell

A ship equipped with fuel cells in the future will likely be supplied by a tanker carrying hydrogen, LNG, ammonia, methanol or other fuels or from the jetty.

Nuclear

Fitting ships with nuclear reactors can, with correct maintenance and servicing, deliver enormous amounts of power and provide an almost limitless range. This technology has primarily been used by the military, although a small number of nuclear-powered merchant vessels have also been built. Concerns about safety and the long-term cost of deactivating and storing spent nuclear fuel have outweighed the benefits.

Integr8 fuels 4

Russian nuclear ice-breaker

Nuclear powered ships do not need to “bunker” frequently, however they also require the offloading of used nuclear fuel for recycling. Had ships made a switch to nuclear power, the bunkering industry would likely not exist in the current form. It is possible that only a handful of suppliers would be allowed to operate in the market, either run by or under very tight supervision from the international agencies.

Energy transportation by sea may not be the same

Decarbonisation will not only affect the type of fuel ships use but also how energy is moved around the globe.

As the share of wind and solar energy generation continues to increase, it increases the need for storing excessive energy. Batteries are one way to do it. Another way is to convert the electric energy into fuels, for example by separating hydrogen from water using electrolysis or going even further by reacting hydrogen with nitrogen (from the atmosphere) to produce ammonia. Hydrogen and ammonia can then be loaded and transported by gas carriers.

Out of the other two fuels mentioned in the article, LNG will continue to be transported by gas (LNG) carriers, and only methanol is transported in the liquid form and will require tankers. Should batteries dominate, it will likely require specialist carriers or be transported as a container good.

It goes without saying that new technologies and fuels, besides having technical feasibility, also need to make sense economically. There is no doubt that governments will increasingly support the green fuels initiatives, introduce legislation, provide subsidies and the current capital inflows will help make these technologies cheaper and ready for mass implementation.

This is a time of great change, but also great opportunity. The change in the energy landscape will no doubt transform shipping and bunkering, and we may have no other choice but to embrace this transformation and be part of it.


Photo credit and source: Integr8 Fuels
Published: 19 January, 2021

 

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

Bunker Fuel Availability

ENGINE: Europe & Africa Bunker Fuel Availability Outlook (1 April 2026)

East Mediterranean ports see high demand; Malta sees rough weather; high demand increases lead times in West Africa.
Admin

Published

4 months ago

on

April 2, 2026

By

RESIZED ENGINE Europe and Africa

The following article regarding Europe and Africa bunker fuel availability has been provided by online marine fuel procurement platform ENGINE for post on Singapore bunkering publication Manifold Times:

  • East Mediterranean ports see high demand
  • Malta sees rough weather
  • High demand increases lead times in West Africa

Northwest Europe

Availability of all fuel grades is stable in the ARA bunkering hub, but buyers are recommended to enquire about stems around five days ahead to get competitive offers from a wide selection of suppliers, a trader said.

The ARA’s independently held fuel oil stocks slumped 20% lower in March, according to Insights Global data.

The region imported around 160,000 b/d of fuel oil in March, down from 192,000 b/d imported in February, according to cargo tracker Vortexa. Most supplies have arrived from Denmark (21%), Poland (14%) and Libya (13%).

The region’s independent gasoil inventories – which include diesel and heating oil – have dipped 1% lower in March, compared to February.

The ARA imported 289,000 b/d of gasoil, down from the 304,000 b/d in February, according to Vortexa data. Around 27% of cargo volumes have come from Kuwait, while the US has sent around 24%.

In Germany’s Hamburg, buyers are being advised to book stems with a lead time of five days, a trader said.

Bunker fuel availability is very tight in Sweden’s Gothenburg and off Denmark’s Skaw, a trader told ENGINE.

Mediterranean

Securing supplies promptly is challenging in the Gibraltar Strait ports, and buyers are advised to book around seven days in advance to secure supplies of any fuel grade, a trader said.

Demand is stable in the Port of Gibraltar, with around 40 vessels expected to call for bunkers between 1-8 April, shipping agent A Mateos & Sons said.

Congestion caused in the port last week due to rough weather conditions has completely cleared as of Wednesday morning, port agent MH Bland said.

In Barcelona, buyers are usually requested to give a week’s notice for any delivery, but supplies can be arranged sometimes on a prompt basis, a trader told ENGINE.

Bunker availability is tight in the Canary Islands bunkering hub of Las Palmas, a trader said. Suppliers are giving earliest delivery dates around 10 days out for stems with competitive prices, the trader added.

Bunkering operations are currently being conducted in the inner anchorage and at the berth due to rough seas, port agent MH Bland said.

Malta is experiencing rough winds of more than 25 knots and waves of more than 2.5 metres, and the conditions are expected to persist until 3 February.

Bunkering operations off Malta have been currently suspended, port agent MH Bland said.

Some operations can be conducted in the sheltered Area 1 and Area 4, and operations are expected to resume normally in the offshore area around Saturday, shipping agent WMR told ENGINE.

Bunker demand has decreased recently off Malta, a trader said.

Fuel availability is steady in the Greece’s Piraeus, but high demand for bunkers is causing operational challenges related to barge and berth availability, a local supplier said. The port may face tight product availability around late April or early May if the conflict continues and crude flows through the Strait of Hormuz continue to remain disrupted, the supplier added.

Fuel availability is stable in Turkey’s Istanbul and demand is very strong, a local supplier told ENGINE. Buyers are securing bunkers as they anticipate tight availability next month, the supplier added.

Africa

Ships re-routing around the Cape of Good Hope have increased bunker demand in African ports, suppliers and traders told ENGINE.

West African ports are experiencing low product availability as demand is rising and supply is not able to keep up, a major supplier in West Africa said.

Lead times have increased significantly in many bunkering hubs due to the additional demand.

In Togo’s Lome and off Namibia’s Walvis Bay, buyers are recommended to enquire about stems around 10-11 days ahead, a trader said.

In Angola’s Luanda, one supplier has stopped supplying VLSFO, while LSMGO supplies may need around 7-10 days of notice, a supplier told ENGINE.

Getting VLSFO supplies in Nigeria’s Lagos anchorage also requires around 10 days of notice, a local supplier said.

In South Africa, availability is stable off Algoa Bay, a trader said. In Durban, LSMGO is priced around $3000/mt.

By Nachiket Tekawade

 

Photo credit and source: ENGINE
Published: 2 April 2026

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

IMO: Caribbean maritime leaders draft policy recommendations to decarbonize shipping

Participants focused on moving from analysis to implementation by aligning policy, infrastructure planning, energy systems and finance.
Admin

Published

6 months ago

on

February 5, 2026

By

IMO: Caribbean maritime leaders draft policy recommendations to decarbonize shipping

The International Maritime Organization (IMO) on Tuesday (3 February) said Caribbean policymakers and financiers have emphasized that decarbonization will not succeed through isolated projects or technologies alone, but through coordinated action across sectors and countries, supported by evidence-based planning and investment-ready pathways. 

Senior representatives from Caribbean governments, maritime administrations, ports, energy authorities, development banks and financial institutions met for a regional roundtable convened in Port of Spain, Trinidad and Tobago (29 – 30 January) by IMO’s GreenVoyage2050 Programme, in collaboration with Global MTCC Network (GMN Phase II). 

The event, under the theme Unlocking maritime decarbonization, resulted in key draft policy recommendations for the region, including proposals for: 

  • enhanced regional coordination to harmonize national policies; 
  • knowledge-sharing; 
  • capacity building; and 
  • investment facilitation.  

Participants focused on moving from analysis to implementation by aligning policy, infrastructure planning, energy systems and finance. The participation of multilateral and regional development banks alongside policymakers and industry linked technical ambition with financial realism at an early stage. 

Dr Jose Matheickal, Director of the IMO’s Technical Cooperation and Implementation Division, underscored the need to bridge global ambition and national delivery: “The IMO GHG Strategy sets a clear global direction, but implementation happens at country and regional level. What is critical is creating the conditions, policy, institutional capacity and credible project pipelines, that allow finance to flow and turn ambition into action.” 

The first day of discussions connected the 2023 IMO GHG Strategy with delivery through technical cooperation and regional collaboration.  

Findings from the Jamaica Maritime Alternative Fuels Study, supported by the GreenVoyage2050 Programme, were shared to ground the regional dialogue in a concrete country example. The study illustrated how Caribbean States can assess future fuel demand, supply pathways, infrastructure needs and policy implications to inform investment and planning decisions. 

Building on this evidence, participants discussed credible fuel pathways for the region, barriers to adoption and where regional coordination could accelerate progress. Interactive mapping exercises captured existing initiatives, infrastructure gaps and opportunities for collaboration across the Caribbean, while practical examples demonstrated how policy intent is already translating into action through green port development, fleet initiatives and pilot projects. 

 

The second day of the roundtable focused on unlocking investment, with development banks and financial institutions outlining what is needed to improve project bankability and mobilize public and private finance.  

Discussions explored financial instruments, risk-sharing approaches and policy signals required to support investment in ports, clean fuels and maritime infrastructure, reinforcing the importance of aligning national priorities with financier expectations. 

Ms Thandi McAllister, Director – Legal Services, Maritime Administration Department, Guyana, said: “This Regional Roundtable provided a vital platform for States and other maritime stakeholders to gain valuable insights into the impact and opportunities that are optimizable by Caribbean SIDs and LDCs in their pursuit of decarbonisation goals.” 

Finally, the participants visited the ammonia-fuelled ship Fortescue Green Pioneer for a first-hand look at alternative fuel technology in use onboard.

 

Photo credit: International Maritime Organization
Published: 5 February, 2026

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

ICS and 47 governments submit GHG pricing mechanism proposal to IMO

Key purpose of mandatory GHG charge will be to reduce cost gap between zero/near-zero GHG emission fuels and conventional bunker fuels to incentivise accelerated uptake of green energy sources.

Admin

Published

2 years ago

on

January 10, 2025

By

IMO

The International Chamber of Shipping (ICS) on Thursday (9 January) said it has joined 47 governments in a joint submission to the final round of negotiations at the United Nations’ International Maritime Organization (IMO) to adopt a maritime greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions pricing mechanism to achieve net zero GHG emissions from international shipping by 2050. 

The joint text is supported by major shipping nations such as Greece, Japan, Korea and the United Kingdom, the world’s largest flag States including Bahamas, Liberia, Marshall Islands and Panama, all EU States (and the European Commission), other African countries such as Nigeria and Kenya, plus Small Island Developing States from the Caribbean and the Pacific.

The joint submission by governments sets out convergent regulatory text for amendments to the IMO MARPOL Convention, which will require shipping companies operating ships on international voyages to make GHG contributions per tonne of CO2e emitted to a new “IMO GHG Strategy Implementation Fund”.

ICS said the key purpose of this mandatory GHG charge will be to reduce the cost gap between zero/near-zero GHG emission (ZNZ) fuels such as green methanol, ammonia and hydrogen and conventional bunker fuels, to incentivise the accelerated uptake of green energy sources. 

Revenue generated will be used to reward the production and uptake of ZNZ marine fuels, whilst also providing billions of US dollars annually to support the maritime GHG reduction efforts of developing countries.

International Chamber of Shipping Secretary General, Guy Platten, said: “The industry fully supports the adoption by IMO of a GHG pricing mechanism for global application to shipping.”

“The joint text put forward by this broad coalition is a pragmatic solution and the most effective way to incentivise a rapid energy transition in shipping to achieve the agreed IMO goal of net zero emissions by or close to 2050.”

“We are very pleased that such a large and diverse group of nations now firmly supports a common approach to maritime carbon charging. This proposed joint text has been hard fought and is broadly based on ideas which ICS has been advocating for the past ten years.

“While a large number of governments now support a universal flat rate GHG contribution by ships – or something similar – a minority of governments continue to have concerns. Working in co-operation with all IMO Member States we will do our best to allay such concerns during the final stages of these critical negotiations about regulatory text.”

This mature regulatory proposal will be considered by a critical IMO meeting in February – in the week of 17 February 2025 at ISWG-GHG 18. 

If the MARPOL amendments are approved by IMO in April 2025, they should enter into force globally in early 2027, with the collection of annual GHG contributions from ships commencing in 2028.

Note: The joint proposal to IMO for a maritime GHG emissions pricing mechanism can be found here.

 

Photo credit: International Maritime Organization
Published: 10 January, 2025

Continue Reading

Trending