• 4 min de lectura
• 4 min de lectura
Alternative fuels have long carried the burden of uncertainty, being too costly today, too unpredictable to plan around or best deferred until the green transition matures. Conventional fuels, meanwhile, have been seen as the stable default and the familiar variable. Recent months have challenged that assumption in fundamental ways.
Since the escalation of the war in the Middle East, Brent crude has traded across a $46 range. ICE Gasoil front-month moved more than $400/mt within a single fortnight. LSMGO availability in Singapore contracted sharply. Export infrastructure across Iraq, Oman, Bahrain and the UAE experienced simultaneous disruption, while the Strait of Hormuz, through which approximately one-fifth of global oil supply transits, has operated at severely reduced capacity for over a month with no clear timeline for normalisation. This is the market environment in which every shipowner has been operating.
A narrowing conventional and alternative fuel price spread and what it means
Throughout this conflict, conventional bunker prices have been subject to sharp, largely unhedgeable swings driven by geopolitical developments. Biofuel and methanol pricing has also moved, but within a narrower band and substantially decoupled from the specific supply-side risks affecting conventional fuel.
The spread between alternatives and conventional has narrowed materially. On a compliance-adjusted basis under EU ETS and FuelEU Maritime, that spread has in a number of cases flipped in favour of alternative fuels. The window to secure alternative fuels on terms more favourable than any point in the past eighteen months has been open. It remains open today. Despite this, uptake of both fuels has remained subdued
The LNG context
LNG remains one of the leading alternative fuels in shipping and continues to play an important role in the industry’s transition pathway. Qatari export capacity took a significant blow at the start of the war and faces a multi-year recovery timeline which represents a genuine disruption. However, substantial new US export capacity is coming online through 2026 and 2027, and incremental supply is already contributing to rebalancing availability for European and Asian buyers. The broader lesson from the Qatari experience is that no single fuel source is geopolitically immune, and that a diversified fuel position rather than concentration in any one option, is key. An owner with LNG alongside biofuel and methanol optionality is structurally better positioned than one weighted toward any single fuel.
What the Iran War has taught us about marine fuel strategy
The longer-term picture is encouraging. Alternative fuels begin expensive. Production scales, supply chains mature, and regulation creates demand certainty – lower prices follow. This trajectory has played out in solar energy, in battery technology, in road biofuels. Marine alternatives are at an earlier stage of the same trajectory, and the direction of travel is clear. Today’s premium reflects first-mover economics, not the permanent cost profile of the system at scale.
There is also an important financial aspect that deserves more attention. Under EU ETS and FuelEU Maritime, compliance is no longer just a future regulatory requirement, but a real annual cost that impacts the same budgets and credit lines used for fuel procurement.
By including alternative fuels in compliance planning while price spreads remain relatively narrow, companies can reduce their carbon-related costs and, in some cases, even generate additional value through FuelEU Maritime pooling mechanisms. This creates a strong commercial incentive to accelerate the transition toward lower-carbon fuels.
At the same time, for owners waiting on the International Maritime Organization to deliver regulatory certainty before committing to further decarbonisation action, the recent MEPC 84 meetings carried a clear message: that certainty is not arriving anytime soon. Technical work on fuel certification, GFI methodologies and reward mechanisms advanced at MEPC 84, and a broad majority of member states expressed support for the Net-Zero Framework as a foundation. However, the Net-Zero Fund remains undefined, key elements of energy efficiency regulation have been delayed, and further negotiation remains inevitable. This reflects the complexity of building global consensus within shipping and reinforces the need for companies to navigate the transition with flexibility and adaptability.
Building a fuel strategy that stands the test of uncertainty
The most resilient fleet position is one that distributes risk exposure across fuel, geopolitics and regulations to ensure risks do not move in the same direction simultaneously. A diversified fuel portfolio spanning biofuels, methanol, LNG and conventional achieves this.
The transition to alternative fuels is, increasingly, a commercial decision as much as a sustainability one, encompassing risk management, financial planning and compliance proactivity. Owners who are willing to engage with decarbonisation today can do so with the broadest range of options available to them. At KPI OceanConnect, we can help you make sense of market complexities and signals, provide industry insight and create opportunities that align with your commercial and operational realities.
