Ships capable of using methanol and ethanol fuel have been added to the dry cargo order list. These ships have gradually entered this market since 2023 and gained more popularity since May 2026, reaching a total of 19 ships by September. This trend indicates significant changes in fuel choice among ship owners.
Development of Flexible Fuel Ships
These changes are due to uncertainty regarding the best alternative fuel in terms of price, availability, and legal advantages. Ship owners and charterers are seeking solutions to this uncertainty, which is why they have turned to ordering new ships capable of using various fuels. Currently, there are 19 ships capable of using methanol and ethanol fuel on the dry cargo order list, which is related to Vale's move towards mineral transport ships with flexible fuel.
Read more: Attack on Emirati Ship in the Persian Gulf with Unknown Missiles
Impact of Fuel Prices and Infrastructure Availability
While some owners prefer conventional ships with standard fuel, Pacific Basin has replaced four new dual-fuel methanol ships with conventional fuel ships. This change has reduced the total program cost from $186 million to $156.8 million. In this context, Drewry has also noted an increase in methanol retrofitting activities driven by the development of conversion packages by engine manufacturers. However, high fuel prices and limited availability still hinder the actual consumption of methanol.
Drewry's analyses indicate that alternative fuels will only account for 9.5% of transportation energy demand in 2025, with methanol making up only 0.3% of alternative fuel consumption. Therefore, building ships with more capabilities alone cannot facilitate the transition to new fuels.
Considering that dry cargo ships are usually moved between different regions, access to alternative fuels is crucial. If owners have to pay higher costs to use alternative fuels, they will have less incentive to adopt these fuels.
In the future, if the prices of alternative fuels decrease, refueling networks expand, and carbon costs increase the prices of conventional fuels, flexible fuel ships may gain a competitive advantage. Large cargo owners may also influence chartering decisions based on fuel capabilities and greenhouse gas emissions.
Conclusion
While 19 ships capable of using methanol and ethanol fuel are on the order list, this does not mean a rapid shift towards ethanol. Instead, it indicates that some owners have invested in flexibility, while the industry still lacks clarity regarding the economics and future regulations of fuels. The coming years will be critical in determining whether this flexibility translates into a commercial advantage.
Read more: OSRL Emphasizes the Importance of Preparedness and Technology in Underwater Crisis Management
