Connect with us

LNG Bunkering

TT Club: Considerations for players mulling LNG bunkering ops

Evaluates LNG tank container, truck to ship, terminal to ship, and ship to ship refuelling methods.
Admin

Published

8 years ago

on

5be3a0094205e 1541644297

TT Club, a provider of insurance and related risk management services to the international transport and logistics industry, recently published an industry note summarising risk and points to note for players interested in entering the LNG bunkering sphere:

Significant coverage has been given to the debate in the maritime world concerning sulphur content in bunker fuel and reduction is CO2 emissions. One fuel solution is LNG, but what are the implications for the shoreside infrastructure?

LNG has grown in popularity as fuel for the ships, especially for use within the increasing number of emission control areas (ECA). As a result, port authorities and terminal operators, notably across Europe, are facing an issue of which method of LNG bunkering should be chosen to offer to ships. This problem extends beyond those ports which are obligated to provide such services, according to European and national regulations for TEN-T network, and the pure accessibility of alternatives fuels. Indeed, some ports may consider building LNG bunkering facilities in order to attract ships powered by LNG, as well as their cargoes.

Evaluating methods of implementation

There are four methods of bunkering LNG:

  • LNG tank container;
  • truck to ship;
  • terminal to ship; and
  • ship to ship

The least infrastructure investment is required in case of the truck to ship method and use of a tank container, but the transfer of LNG is slow. It is possible to increase the rate of transfer by connecting more tank containers into a hub installed on a berth, but that requires increased space for truck manoeuvring and an enlarged safety zone. The use of tank containers can be effective – loaded by crane or roll-on – but only for ships where the fuel is deployed from the tank containers rather than ship-board tanks. Both of these methods occupy a space on a berth and require safety procedures that may be impossible in the context of the physical environment and cargo or other operational requirements.

Planning a small scale LNG terminal requires building a storage tank and a transferring infrastructure. The storage tank can be located in a distance from the bunker berth, which may be beneficial for safety since it segregates the LNG infrastructure and the ship from cargo operations. Furthermore, this method can be used in ports where the berth construction is light and would not bear the weight of heavy tanks. Dependent on the size (LNG volume) of such a terminal, there are possibilities for the operation to be handled by few persons or even fully automated, leaving the ship’s crew responsible for bunkering operations, monitored remotely by the supplier.

The most flexible, but most expensive, method of LNG bunkering is deploying a bunker barge. However, aside from capital and operational costs, this method has only positives. This ship-to-ship method avoids on berth construction and space constraints. It also does not impede cargo operations because the bunkering operations and safety zone are held on the sea side. Furthermore, there is greater flexibility since the barge can serve all berths in a port. Additionally, fuel delivery to the barges can be made through other facilities, not impacting directly on port cargo operations at all.

Key considerations

Ports authorities and terminal operators should consider the following issues when deciding on the LNG bunkering method:

  • type of the ships, frequencies of bunkering, volume of LNG per ship, available time for bunkering etc.
  • availability of berths – permissible loads, port infrastructures and appropriate safety procedures
  • distance to the source of LNG
  • possibilities of cooperation with other ports
  • dimensions of safety zones

The table below presents key properties of above mentioned methods.

Summary table of bunkering considerations
 

  Tank Container Truck to ship Terminal to ship Ship to ship
Investment Cost Nil Nil or Low Significant Significant
Operational Cost Nil Nil Moderate Significant
Transfer rate Dependent on container exchange 40 t/h (dependent on balance between size of hub & available space) 200 t/h 300t/h
Safety zone N/A On berth side, impact on cargo operations; simultaneous operations may be prohibited On berth side, impact on cargo operations; simultaneous operations may be prohibited On sea side only; no impact on cargo operations
LNG availability Limited to berths equipped with a vertical or horizontal loading system and permissible loads of the berth Limited to space and permissible loads of the berths Limited to the berth with the LNG bunker installation Range of bunker barge
LNG handling Only a crane or a terminal tractor operator A truck driver preparing the installation on shore side (passes LNG hose to ship’s crew or connect to a hub) Terminal personnel preparing installation before ship’s arrival. In case of small installation it can be fully automated and operated by ship’s crew. Bunker barge crew responsible for preparing installation for bunkering.

Photo credit: TT Club
Published: 8 November, 2018
 

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

LNG Bunkering

PIL’s LNG dual-fuel boxship “Kota Elok” arrives in Singapore on maiden call

As the first of 13 new 13,000 TEU vessels joining its fleet, Kota Elok is equipped to operate on LNG and low-sulphur fuel oil that helps reduce our greenhouse gas emissions.

Admin

Published

1 day ago

on

July 21, 2026

By

PIL's LNG dual-fuel boxship “Kota Elok” arrives in Singapore on maiden call

Singapore-based Pacific International Lines Pte Ltd on Monday (20 July) said its first 13,000 TEU LNG dual-fuel container vessel, Kota Elok, recently made her maiden call to Singapore on 15 July.

As the first of 13 new 13,000 TEU vessels joining its fleet, Kota Elok is equipped to operate on liquefied natural gas (LNG) and low-sulphur fuel oil that helps reduce our greenhouse gas emissions. 

The vessel also incorporated energy-saving features and digital technologies to reduce fuel consumption and enhance operational performance, as well as a bow windshield to improve aerodynamics, contributing to improved fuel efficiency and lower emissions over the course of long-haul voyages.

“Following Singapore, Kota Elok will continue her voyage on our East Coast Service 1 (ES1) route to South America, calling at ports in Brazil, Uruguay, and Argentina before returning to Asia,” the company said in a social media post. 

Kota Elok also became PIL’s first vessel to receive Lloyd’s Register certification for compliance with the IACS UR E26 and UR E27 cyber security requirements.

Developed by the International Association of Classification Societies (IACS), UR E26 and UR E27 are mandatory cyber resilience requirements for newbuild vessels contracted from 1 July 2024. 

 

Photo credit: Pacific International Lines
Published: 21 July, 2026

Continue Reading

LNG Bunkering

CIMC SOE secures order for 12,000-cbm LNG bunkering vessel from Sinopec Clean Energy

Once operational, the vessel is expected to strengthen Sinopec’s domestic coastal LNG bunkering network and help address gaps in China’s alternative fuel bunkering infrastructure.
Admin

Published

1 day ago

on

July 21, 2026

By

CIMC SOE secures order for 12,000-cbm LNG bunkering vessel from Sinopec Clean Energy

China’s Nantong CIMC Sinopacific Offshore & Engineering Co., Ltd. (CIMC SOE) recently signed a contract with Sinopec (Beijing) Clean Energy Co., Ltd. to build a 12,000-cubic metre (m3) LNG bunkering vessel, according to Chinese maritime media.

The vessel is scheduled for delivery in 2028 and will support Sinopec’s efforts to expand its presence in the marine clean energy sector.

Once operational, the vessel is expected to strengthen Sinopec’s domestic coastal LNG bunkering network and help address gaps in China’s LNG bunkering infrastructure.

With this signing , CIMC Pacific Offshore Engineering’s LNG bunkering vessel orderbook is further strengthened, maintaining its leading position in the global market for small and medium-sized LNG bunkering vessels.

The contract also marked another milestone for CIMC SOE, which has seen a sharp increase in orders and business performance this year amid a surge in domestic LNG vessel demand.

 

Photo credit: Nantong CIMC Sinopacific Offshore & Engineering
Published: 21 July, 2026

Continue Reading

Alternative Fuels

ENGINE on Fuel Switch Snapshot: LSMGO surges to greater premium over biofuel

B100 discount to LSMGO widens to $541/mt in Rotterdam; Singapore’s B100 drops to $106/mt below LSMGO; Rotterdam LBM at $639-833/mt discounts to LSMGO.
Admin

Published

1 day ago

on

July 21, 2026

By

ENGINE on Fuel Switch Snapshot: LSMGO surges to greater premium over biofuel

Once a week, bunker intelligence platform ENGINE will publish a snapshot of alternative and conventional bunker fuel prices in the world’s two biggest bunkering hubs. The following is the latest snapshot:

20 July 2026

  • B100 discount to LSMGO widens to $541/mt in Rotterdam
  • Singapore’s B100 drops to $106/mt below LSMGO
  • Rotterdam LBM at $639-833/mt discounts to LSMGO

B100’s premium over HSFO in Rotterdam has narrowed by $50/mt over the past week to $64/mt, while its discount to VLSFO has widened by $83/mt to $105/mt.

B100 has become far more competitive against LSMGO in Rotterdam, with its discount widening by $180/mt over the past week to $541/mt, as a surge in conventional fuel prices left B100 broadly unchanged by comparison.

B100’s price has risen by $109/mt in Singapore, but its discount to LSMGO has still widened by $102/mt to $106/mt, as LSMGO surged by an even greater $211/mt.

Rotterdam’s LNG premium over VLSFO has widened by $35/mt to $201/mt for vessels with Otto medium speed (Otto MS) engines. For vessels with diesel slow speed (diesel SS) engines, LNG has flipped to a $15/mt premium over VLSFO, from a $22/mt discount the prior week.

Liquefied biomethane (LBM) discounts to VLSFO in Rotterdam have narrowed by $50-52/mt to $203-396/mt over the past week. Against LSMGO, LBM discounts have widened by $45-47/mt to $639-833/mt, depending on engine type.

In Singapore, LNG is now $42/mt cheaper than LSMGO for vessels with Otto MS engines, and $134/mt cheaper for vessels with diesel SS engines.

ENGINE on Fuel Switch Snapshot: LSMGO surges to greater premium over biofuel

Liquid fuels

HSFO and VLSFO prices in Rotterdam have jumped by $66/mt and $99/mt respectively over the past week, while LSMGO has surged by an even steeper $196/mt. A $9.69/bbl ($71/mt) rise in front-month ICE Brent futures, to $87.94/bbl ($645/mt), drove bunker prices sharply higher across the board.

Bunker fuel availability is tight for prompt delivery dates in the ARA ports, with buyers advised to enquire about stems between 5-7 days ahead to get good coverage, a trader said.

Rotterdam’s B100 price has risen by $16/mt over the past week. Dutch ZRE A ticket prices were unchanged at €107.50/mtCO2e.

Singapore’s HSFO and VLSFO prices have risen by $130/mt and $132/mt respectively, while its LSMGO price has gained an even steeper $211/mt over the past week.

VLSFO availability in Singapore has been tight, with several suppliers reporting low stock levels. Recommended lead times have widened from 13–17 days last week to 14–19 days now.

Liquid gases

Rotterdam’s LNG prices have surged by $134-136/mt over the past week, while its LBM prices have climbed by $149-151/mt.

LBM discounts to LNG in Rotterdam have narrowed by $15/mt to $404-411/mt.

Singapore’s LNG bunker benchmarks have surged by $196-197/mt over the past week.

By Erik Hoffmann

 

Photo credit and source: ENGINE
Published: 21 July, 2026

Continue Reading

Trending