Why oil can’t hold its ground in future of maritime fuel

In a recent opinion piece published by Bloomberg, the author examines the slow but inevitable decline of oil’s dominance in global maritime shipping, despite resistance from political forces such as the administration of US President Donald Trump.

The Bloomberg piece argues that although Trump managed to delay a global carbon pricing scheme for shipping emissions through intense diplomatic lobbying, the broader trends in the shipping industry, technological, economic, and regulatory, are moving toward a lower-carbon future that Washington’s intervention cannot reverse.

In this vein, the most significant changes in shipping emissions are not coming from the International Maritime Organization (IMO), which recently voted 57-49 to delay a carbon pricing measure, but rather from developments on the ground — in shipyards, ports, and corporate strategies. Marine fuel oil, which accounts for roughly 5% of global crude demand, is in steady decline. The energy data firm Argus, cited in the piece, forecasts a reduction of 7.1 million tons in consumption by 2027 compared to current levels.

The opinion emphasises that this shift is being driven primarily by changes in vessel orders. Bloomberg points out that roughly a third of new ships are being built to run on liquefied natural gas (LNG), with another 18% designed for methanol and other alternatives.

Traditional fuel oil, once universally stocked in ports, now only accounts for around half of the inventory. Data from DNV, referenced in the article, shows nearly 1,800 alternative-fuel vessels already in operation, with over 1,500 more on order. These figures underscore a market-led transition that is outpacing regulatory mandates.

Furthermore, Bloomberg notes that major ports are adjusting to these shifts. In Singapore, the world’s top refueling hub, conventional fuel demand has declined about 1% annually over the past three years. Rotterdam, the second-largest hub, now sees about 13% of its bunker fuel demand met by LNG, biofuel blends, or methanol. The piece also acknowledges the role of regional policies like the EU’s FuelEU initiative, set to take effect in May, which compels ships calling at European ports to reduce emissions, regardless of whether global rules are in place.

The Trump administration’s trade policies are also cited as contributing factors to declining fuel demand. Bloomberg argues that the U.S.'s increasingly isolationist trade stance has dampened sea freight volumes. While 2025 is expected to see a modest increase in global trade, the WTO projects a slowdown to just 0.5% growth in 2026 as tariffs take full effect. With trade routes shifting increasingly toward intra-Asian commerce — typically shorter distances — fuel use is further constrained.

While the article concedes that clean shipping is still far from being economically dominant, it likens the current moment to the 1860s transition from sail to steam. Infrastructure is still catching up, but the technology for a cleaner future is already on deck. In the long term, the Bloomberg piece argues, no amount of political obstruction can prevent the decline of oil’s reign over the seas.

The opinion piece concludes with a clear stance: the energy transition in shipping is not speculative — it is underway. Despite attempts to delay it, such as the Trump administration’s opposition to maritime decarbonisation, the momentum toward cleaner alternatives is unmistakable and irreversible.

By Sabina Mammadli