As of 1 May 2025, the Mediterranean Sea has effectively become an Emission Control Area (ECA) for sulphur oxides (SOx) under MARPOL Annex VI Regulation 14, followed by both the Canadian Arctic and the Norwegian Sea ECA for SOx and PM taking effect on 1 March 2027.

Julie Nielsen, Global Head of Bunker Sales at StormGeo, shared with Singapore-based bunkering publication Manifold Times on the implications of the new and upcoming ECAs to the bunker market, her recommendation to navigate the development of new ECAs in a digital era, and the role StormGeo could play in being part of the digital transition to overcome new regulations like ECAs:

MT: The Mediterranean Sea and two upcoming ECAs will raise the total number of global ECAs to seven. What are the implications of these ECAs to the overall bunker market including fuel prices? 

This new ECA area marks a significant shift in the global regulatory landscape. As you mention, the total number of ECAs globally will rise to seven, signalling an intensified commitment to environmental protection and emissions reduction, which is good for our environment. However, the complexity of operating a vessel will increase significantly to navigate fuel sourcing and compliance, as these ECA areas are not connected. This means that a vessel may be sailing in and out of ECA multiple times on a voyage and with the limited tank availability on board the vessel and the shifting between grades, it will be a challenge for every operator and Master.

It will create regional fluctuations in bunker prices, especially in the Mediterranean where the implementation is imminent. Ports that are well-equipped to handle compliant fuels and have strong refining infrastructure may see a competitive advantage, whereas others may struggle with supply constraints, leading to price volatility and potential bottlenecks.

In the short term, bunker costs are expected to rise for vessels operating in or near the new ECAs due to the premium on low-sulphur fuels. However, this also reinforces the industry’s direction towards cleaner alternatives, and may further accelerate the shift to LNG, methanol, biofuels, and other emerging fuels—especially in regions with strong environmental regulation.

The scrubber fitted vessels may however benefit from this new regulation, as the cost differential between 0.1% and 3.5% fuel likely will increase. The question is though, if the suppliers will change their infrastructure and leave 3.5% sulphur out, to make space for 0.1%.

MT: How will these ECAs affect bunker fuel switching operations? Do you think frequent fuel switching operations will raise operational, safety and legal issues?

There’s no doubt that yet another ECA area, not connected to the remaining areas, will have a huge impact on how to plan and buy bunkers, how the vessel treats the bunkers, and how they burn the bunkers on board.

The ECA areas are not connected leading to a vessel potentially sailing in and out of multiple ECA areas on one voyage. This is naturally resulting in extra work for the crew on board, as they have to adhere to MARPOL ensuring that once they enter the restricted area, then they have fully changed to compliant fuel. There’s a risk of contamination of the fuel, human errors and heat and temperature control, just to name a few, and this of course also risks the safety and the legal issues coming with these risks.

So there is no doubt that the increase of complexity will rise, and every operator and chief engineer need to take the right decision on bunker planning at all times, to ensure smooth operation.

MT: Once the Mediterranean Sea becomes a MED SECA, what do you forecast for the shift in Mediterranean bunker fuel demand for VLSFO, HSFO, ULSFO, MGO and other alternative marine fuels? Could the same shift in demand apply to the Canadian Arctic and the Norwegian Sea once the ECAs come into full force there too?

It’s hard to say with certainty, but I would be surprised if the MED SECA doesn’t impact bunker fuel demand in the region. Interestingly, we’re seeing a comeback of ULSFO, which had largely faded with the rise of VLSFO after IMO 2020. With stricter sulphur limits, ULSFO may regain a foothold, and it will be interesting to see how infrastructure adapts to support this shift.

HSFO availability could decline, especially since only around 15% of the global fleet is currently scrubber-fitted. While that percentage will grow with newbuilds, it’s still a relatively small share, meaning demand for HSFO in ECAs is likely to remain limited.

Meanwhile, alternative fuels like biofuels, LNG, methanol, and ammonia are gaining momentum. The market now sees demand for more than eight different fuel grades – more than ever before. However, infrastructure and refinery capacity are not scaling at the same pace, which could become a bottleneck or even lead to certain fuels being phased out in specific regions.

Ultimately, these shifts point to a broader transformation in fuel supply chains and storage strategies – not just in the Mediterranean, but also in the Canadian Arctic and Norwegian Sea as those ECAs come into force, and potentially in ARA as well.

MT: Since we are in the digital era, what strategies do you recommend for shipping companies and bunker buyers to navigate the development of new ECAs? 

In the digital era, proactive planning and real-time visibility are essential for navigating the increasing complexity of ECAs. At StormGeo, we recommend a data-driven, integrated approach that helps shipping companies and bunker buyers stay compliant, optimise costs, and reduce risk. The time where you could handle your bunker planning and procurement with pen and paper, or if you were very advanced – excelsheet, is over.

Operators need to use solutions that can simulate different route scenarios and fuel consumption profiles, factoring in ECA zones, weather, and fuel availability. This helps operators make smarter routing and procurement decisions – balancing compliance and cost-efficiency.

Additionally, companies should choose to have a procurement platform that provides price transparency, availability insights, and quality data for compliant fuels at key ports – helping them align procurement with their operational and regulatory needs. Further, as environmental regulations tighten, having digital systems that track fuel consumption and emissions across voyages will be vital – not just for compliance, but for ESG reporting and future carbon pricing schemes.

MT: Do you foresee any challenges for this digital transition and what solutions can StormGeo provide to solve these issues?

The biggest challenge I see in this digital transition is the hesitation to break old habits. I’ve been there, as a former operator and bunker purchaser – I know how intimidating it can feel to suddenly have full transparency into your performance. But I also know from experience that transparency is the key to optimising the largest cost driver in OPEX: bunkers.

Many still believe optimisation happens primarily in the procurement phase, when in fact, the greatest opportunity lies in planning. And with the increasing number of new regulations like ECAs, digital planning and procurement is without a doubt the only sustainable way forward.

StormGeo is uniquely positioned to support this transition. Our platform offers one of the most advanced planning tools in the market, accounting for factors such as tank capacity, speed/consumption curves, fuel availability, ECA regulations, and vessel-specific technical limitations – calculating optimised bunker plans daily.

StormGeo end-to-end bunker management platform

This planning module is seamlessly integrated with a sophisticated procurement system that delivers real-time prices, manages preferred supplier/trader/broker lists, handles claims, includes a fuel testing module, generates reports, and even automates communications to all counterparties involved in a bunker chain.

By bringing everything into a single, connected platform, StormGeo empowers operators and bunker buyers to stay ahead of regulatory complexity, improve cost efficiency, and free up time to focus on higher-value tasks.

Additionally, our environmental solutions manage the evolving challenges around environmental regulation, and we are actively working on linking these capabilities into our Bunker Management solution.

By bringing everything into a single, connected platform, StormGeo empowers operators and bunker buyers to stay ahead of regulatory complexity, improve cost efficiency, and free up time to focus on higher-value tasks.

Related: DNV: New ECAS for the Canadian Arctic, Norwegian Sea and North-East Atlantic Ocean

Photo credit: StormGeo
Published: 2 May, 2025

Advisory, research and energy intelligence company Rystad Energy on Wednesday (30 April) gave an insight on the bunker market following the Mediterranean Sea effectively becoming an Emission Control Area (ECA) for sulphur oxides (SOx) under MARPOL Annex VI Regulation 14 from 1 May:

The Mediterranean Sea is fast approaching a deadline to reduce bunker fuel sulfur limits required by the International Maritime Organization (IMO). Nearly a year ago, the Mediterranean Sea was designated as an Emission Control Area (ECA), but in order to maintain this status, very low sulfur fuel oil (VLSFO) will have to virtually be eliminated from vessel fleets in the region. Rystad Energy estimates that ultra-low sulfur fuel oil (ULSFO) will dominate the Mediterranean Sea moving forward, should the IMO’s requirements be met. 

Rystad Energy’s oil market update from Valerie Panopio, Vice President, Commodity Markets Analysis – Oil: 

The inclusion of the Mediterranean Sea to the existing ECA zones leaves very little room for VLSFO in Europe. Now, vessels operating in the Mediterranean Sea must reduce sulfur limits to 0.1% from the previous level of 0.5%. We believe that VLSFO will be displaced by ULSFO, marine gas oil (MGO), and high sulfur fuel oil (HSFO) resulting in a reshuffling of bunker fuel flows and optimization of vessel fleets.

We believe that this regulation of bunker fuel will result in a surge in compliant fuel demand, particularly in MGO.

This will fill in any expected gaps and encourage more flow of MGO from Northwest Europe to the Mediterranean and ultimately from the US and the Middle East.

The rerouting of fuel flows will open an arbitrage of VLSFO from Europe to the East of Suez, catering to Asia’s shortage and depressing VLSFO cracks in the short term. 

Tighter emission controls in the Mediterranean will force vessel operators to revisit strategies on fuel supply and fleet routes, investment on exhaust gas cleaning systems, or “scrubbers”, and exploration of alternative fuels.” 

Vessels plying the Mediterranean have the following options to respond to the tighter emission standards: 

• Complete switching to 0.1% sulfur bunker fuel such as ULSFO or MGO 
• Use of separate fuels depending on prevailing regulation 
• Retrofitting with scrubbers 
• Exploring alternative fuels such as liquefied natural gas (LNG), biofuels, hydrogen 
• Bypassing the Mediterranean 

These options come with their own challenges.  

Ships fitted with open-loop scrubber system need to adhere to local regulations on the discharging of their scrubber wash water. 

Meanwhile, the use of separate fuels requires intensive crew training to ensure proper segregation and flushing procedures are followed to avoid stability issues and cross contamination.  

In the past year, vessel traffic by the Mediterranean Sea has reduced – a consequence of the sporadic Houthi attacks along the Bab-el-Mandeb strait. 

Rystad Energy analysis found that in the first four months of 2025, large tankers such as VLCC’s and Suezmaxes comprised only 10% of vessels using the Mediterranean Sea.  

Vessels opt for the longer Cape of Good Hope route over the lofty risk premium of taking the Red Sea.  

This indicates that the majority of the ships operating in the region are smaller vessels that are most likely already using MGO as fuel.  

MGO bunkering has already been on the rise, signaling a likely increase in use of this fuel as regulations tighten. 

Based on bunkering data from the Port of Rotterdam, MGO bunkering has increased by 67,000 barrels per day (bpd) from the third quarter of2024 to the first quarter of2025, while VLSFO dropped by 48,000 bpd in the same period. 

The capability to produce ULSFO in the region, and in the broader European continent, is limited by a lack of refining complexity.  

ULSFO may be imported from other regions such as the Middle East into entry and exit points of the Mediterranean, such as the recent ULSFO deliveries from the UAE to Turkiye. 

Additionally, Rystad sees HSFO demand to be steady with potential upside as economics heavily favor the use of scrubbers over the more expensive ULSFO leading to a slow but steady rise in availability of scrubber-fitted vessels.

Photo credit: CHUTTERSNAP from Unsplash
Published: 30 April, 2025

Classification society DNV on Wednesday (23 April) published a statutory news article on the amendments to MARPOL Annex VI, which was adopted at MEPC 82 and entering into force on 1 March 2026, designating the Canadian Arctic and Norwegian Sea as new ECAs. 

The North-East Atlantic Ocean will also be designated as an ECA following MARPOL amendments approved at MEPC 83:

The initiatives for Emission Control Areas (ECAs) seek to reduce air pollution by nitrogen oxides (NOx), sulphur oxides (SOx) and particulate matter (PM), safeguard the environment in these sensitive regions, and improve public health.

The Canadian Arctic ECA and the Norwegian Sea ECA adopted by MEPC 82

The Canadian Arctic ECA will extend the existing North American ECA to include all of Canada’s Arctic waters.

The Norwegian Sea ECA will extend the existing North Sea ECA, beginning at 62° north and covering the Norwegian Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) up to 200 nautical miles beyond the territorial sea, reaching the Russian border.

Application:

Both the Canadian Arctic and the Norwegian Sea ECA for SOx and PM will take effect on 1 March 2027, one year after the amendments entered into force. From that date, fuel used in these ECAs must have an SOx content of less than 0.10%, unless an exhaust gas cleaning system (EGCS) is in use to achieve equivalent SOx emission levels.

The Canadian Arctic ECA for NOx is based on the construction (keel-laid) date, which is agreed to be 1 January 2025. This implies that ships with keels laid on or after this date must use Tier III certified engines when operating in the Canadian Arctic ECA, effective from 1 March 2026.

The Norwegian Sea ECA for NOx will follow the “three-date” principle as commonly used in MARPOL Annex I. This approach considers the contract date, construction (keel-laid) date and delivery date. By implementing this principle, ships can no longer circumvent Tier III engine NOx certification requirements by advancing the keel laying before the application date.

For the Norwegian Sea ECA, this means that ships with building contracts placed on or after 1 March 2026, or without a building contract, but with keels laid on or after 1 September 2026, or are delivered on or after 1 March 2030, must operate Tier III-certified marine diesel engines within the Norwegian Sea ECA.

The North-East Atlantic Ocean ECA approved by MEPC 83

Pending adoption, MEPC 83 recently approved MARPOL Amendments to include the North-East Atlantic as an ECA for NOx, SOx and PM. This ECA is scheduled for adoption at the extraordinary MEPC session in October 2025 and is expected to enter info force in 2027. It will basically cover the EEZs and territorial seas of Portugal, Spain, France, the UK, Ireland, Iceland, the Faroe Islands and Denmark (Greenland) that are not already part of any existing ECAs. The EEZs adjacent to Madeira, the Azores and Canary archipelagos will not be included. This will create a continuous ECA across the North-East Atlantic, connecting the Canadian Arctic, the Norwegian Sea, the North Sea and the Mediterranean Sea ECAs. While the 0.10% sulphur limit for fuel will take effect in 2028, one year after adoption, the requirement for NOx Tier III engine certification is expected to apply to ships contracted on or after 1 January 2027, or in the absence of a building contract, constructed (keel-laid) on or after 1 July 2027, or delivered on or after 1 January 2031.

Mediterranean Sea ECA effective from 1 May 2025

Lastly, it is important to note that the Mediterranean Sea ECA for SOx and PM will officially come into effect on 1 May 2025. From this date onward, the sulphur content of the fuel used on board vessels operating within the Mediterranean Sea ECA must not exceed 0.10%, unless an exhaust gas cleaning system (EGCS) capable of achieving an equivalent SOx emission level is utilized.

Recommendations

We recommend that ship operators and stakeholders familiarize themselves with the upcoming MARPOL Annex VI amendments and prepare accordingly.

Staying proactive by obtaining the correct engine certification, ensuring access to compliant fuel, and implementing effective fuel changeover procedures will enhance efficiency and prevent non-compliance.

Photo credit: Venti Views on Unsplash / DNV
Published: 24 April, 2025