China’s growing role in the marine fuels market is reshaping the competitive dynamics between Chinese bunkering hubs and established centres such as Singapore.

 In this interview with Manifold Times, Dr Kang Wu, Energy Economist specialising in China and Southeast Asia at Global Energy Research and Educational Training Pte. Ltd., discusses the impact of China’s bonded bunker fuel tax rebate, domestic refining and import trends, the adoption of LNG and methanol, and pricing differentials with Singapore, while also examining China’s surplus of UCOME:

MT: How has China’s 2020 VAT rebate policy for bonded bunker fuel, especially for low-sulphur fuel oil, affected the competitiveness of Chinese ports like Zhoushan in comparison to traditional hubs like Singapore?

The impact has been significant, mainly because the rebate extends beyond the VAT. Effective February 2020, the Chinese government introduced a rebate policy for the 13% VAT on China’s fuel oil exports (including bunker fuels) to bonded areas. More importantly, the rebate also covers the fuel oil consumption tax, which amounts to 1,218 yuan per metric tonne (mt), or roughly $27/bbl. This policy has fundamentally transformed the economics of China’s fuel oil exports to bonded areas. However, as discussed below, China still needs to import large volumes of bunker fuel because domestic supply remains insufficient to meet demand. 

MT: With China’s independent refiners (teapots) now producing more compliant low-sulphur fuel oil, what share of China’s bonded bunker demand is now met domestically vs. imported from places like  Malaysia or Russia?

Although independent (“teapot”) refiners cannot export bunker fuels directly as they do not have export quotas, their increased production helps quota-holding national oil companies (NOCs) as well as Zhejiang Petroleum & Chemical Co., Ltd. expand their exports. However, it is worth noting that China’s overall fuel oil production has been declining in recent years because refiners increasingly use deep conversion processes to maximise the production of lighter products and petrochemical feedstocks. In 2025, China exported a record 376,000 b/d of fuel oil, the vast majority of which was shipped to bonded areas. At the same time, China imported 396,000 b/d of fuel oil, primarily from Russia, Malaysia and Singapore, down from the record 514,000 b/d imported in 2024. These imports and exports together form the foundation of China’s bonded-area fuel oil market.

MT: Given China’s push for LNG bunkering and its IMO 2030/2050 decarbonisation targets, how quickly are Chinese ports and shipowners adopting LNG or methanol bunker infrastructure compared to conventional VLSFO?

Indeed, China has made a major push to promote LNG and green methanol as marine bunker fuels, and progress has been steady. However, given the relatively low starting base, their rising impact on VLSFO consumption is expected to be gradual.

MT: How do fluctuations in China’s industrial production and coal imports (via dry bulk carriers) directly correlate with bonded bunker fuel demand at major Chinese ports?

Bonded bunker fuel demand at major Chinese ports is indeed influenced by China’s overall import and export activities. Although China’s coal imports have declined since reaching a record high of 543 million mt in 2024, the country’s total merchandise trade volume has continued to grow year by year. At the same time, China’s GDP growth has slowed compared with a decade ago. In addition, structural changes in trade patterns and shipping routes (such as a decline of exports to the US and a surge of exports to other countries) have also affected bunker fuel demand. A more detailed analysis is needed to determine the precise relationship between trade activity and bonded bunker fuel demand.

MT: What is the typical price spread between Chinese bonded bunker fuel and Singapore’s delivered bunker prices, and how do factors like China’s export quotas or refinery maintenance create arbitrage opportunities?

Following the introduction of the tax rebate policy discussed above, Chinese ports have gained a pricing advantage in the bunker fuel market, as more competitively priced bunker fuel produced domestically has become available. As a result, China’s delivered bunker fuel prices have typically traded at a discount of $15–30/mt to those in Singapore. However, prices fluctuate, and China’s bonded bunker fuel prices are not always lower than Singapore’s for three main reasons. First, China still needs to import large volumes of fuel oil, including VLSFO, into its bonded areas. Consequently, prices in these markets remain closely linked to Singapore’s delivered bunker prices. Second, the volume and timing of export quota allocations to the NOCs play an important role in determining the availability of domestically produced bunker fuel in bonded areas. At times, limited quota availability can tighten supply, resulting in shortages at China’s bonded ports. Third, during periods of geopolitical or market disruption, such as the Iran conflict since February 2026, market fundamentals can change rapidly, leading to heightened price volatility.  The bottom line is that, regardless of the absolute price spread between China and Singapore, fluctuations in the spread and China’s need to import bunker fuels continue to create arbitrage opportunities for traders.

MT: Anti-dumping duties and policies introduced by the European Commission and western regulators have resulted in overcapacity of UCOME in China; given the material cannot obtain ISCC EU certification to be blended as bio-bunker fuel (i.e. EU ETS, carbon credits), what will be your advice to Chinese holders of excess UCOME?

Like many other renewable energy products (such as solar panels) and electric vehicles, China’s UCOME industry has expanded rapidly and now faces growing trade barriers in Western markets because of its strong export growth. While there are no easy solutions for producers with excess capacity, several strategies could help.  First, producers should continue improving efficiency and reducing costs to remain competitive despite the import duties and other trade measures imposed by the EU and some other developed economies. Second, they should diversify export markets beyond the EU by targeting emerging opportunities in advanced economies such as Singapore. In particular, Singapore could leverage China’s surplus UCOME supply to accelerate the development of its sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) and bio-bunkering industries. Finally, China’s UCOME industry could encourage the Chinese government to expand domestic blending mandates, including greater use of SAF and bio-bunkering fuels, to stimulate domestic demand and help absorb excess production.

Dr Wu will be leading a two-day executive briefing, China Oil Market Dynamics, held on 26 to 27 October in Singapore. The intensive briefing will provide a comprehensive outlook on China’s oil market through 2035, covering the key market, policy, economic and structural forces shaping its future. More information on the event and registration can be found here.

Photo credit: Kang Wu
Published: 28 August, 2026

Höegh Autoliners on Wednesday (26 August) announced that it has decided to order six additional new dual-fuel LNG and zero-carbon-ready Aurora class pure car and truck carriers (PCTCs) for delivery in 2029 to 2031.

This decision will extend Höegh Autoliners’ Aurora class newbuilding programme to a total of eighteen vessels, all of which will be built by China Merchants Heavy Industry (Jiangsu) Co Ltd (CMHI).

Höegh Autoliners has further secured an option to build four additional vessels on the same terms, as well as slot reservations for another four vessels at the same yard.

The option vessels may be exercised within six months, while the four slot reservations are held for the Company, with notice to be given on or before 31 December 2027. This decision allows Höegh Autoliners to accelerate its green fleet renewal programme, with flexibility to extend the programme up to a total of twenty-six Aurora vessels, including the twelve vessels already delivered or on order.

The Aurora vessels will have DNV’s ammonia and methanol ready notation, with the main engine provided by Everllence and the bridge system supplied by Kongsberg Maritime. With the capacity to carry up to 9,100 cars, the Aurora class is reducing carbon emissions by up to 58% compared to conventional PCTCs.

Andreas Enger, CEO of Höegh Autoliners, said: “The Aurora class newbuilds have demonstrated very strong earnings potential, carbon performance, cargo flexibility and future-proof conversion capability. 

“Through our newbuild programme, we secure capacity costs at a competitive level, supporting profitable operations even during potential periods of lower freight rates. 

“Further expanding our fleet strengthens our ability to capture growth in the Asian market and meet evolving customer demand, while giving us greater strategic flexibility, supporting long-term fleet renewal and positioning us to capture commercial opportunities in the years ahead.”

Related: Höegh Autoliners secures funding for ammonia-fuelled PCTC project

Photo credit: Höegh Autoliners
Published: 27 August, 2026

Nantong CIMC Sinopacific Offshore & Engineering Co., Ltd. (CIMC SOE) on Friday (21 August) held a groundbreaking ceremony for two 20,000-cubic-metre LNG bunkering vessels being built for GSX Energy.

The two vessels are the third and fourth in a series of four 20,000-cbm LNG bunkering vessels that CIMC Pacific Offshore is constructing for GSX Energy.

Construction of the first vessel began in May, while the second vessel commenced construction on 10 August.

The vessels are 159 metres long, with a beam of 25 metres and a design speed of 13 knots. Each will be equipped with a Wärtsilä dual-fuel main engine and a 1,300 kW shaft generator to meet power requirements during normal operations. A high-voltage shore power system can also be installed at a later stage.

“The simultaneous commencement of construction on both vessels marks a new phase of accelerated construction for this series of projects, fully demonstrating CIMC SOE’s construction capabilities and project management expertise,” CIMC SOE said.

Photo credit: Nantong CIMC Sinopacific Offshore & Engineering
Published: 26 August, 2026