LNG

Global LNG fleet growth is lagging behind upcoming export capacity, although IMO data indicates that 2026 deliveries will mark a record year. Yet the 234 newbuild LNG carriers scheduled for 2026–2030 could fall short of transporting the 229 mtpa of new liquefaction capacity due online by 2030, particularly if vessel retirements accelerate. 

Energy Aspects remains bearish against JKM–TTF Q1 26 spreads amid dwindling freight rates. Some recent fixtures for two-stroke LNG vessels in the Atlantic basin fell below $100,000 per day, opening the arbitrage for US LNG heading to markets east of Suez via the Cape of Good Hope.

Orders for LNG-fuelled vessels reached 14.2 million gross tonnes in H1 2025 alone, more than 70% of the total alternative-fuelled tonnage ordered during the period, data from DNV’s Alternative Fuels Insight (AFI) platform shows. 

This surge reflects industry’s confidence in LNG as a scalable transitional fuel. DNV analysts see a “concerted push by shipowners to future-proof assets” amid tightening emissions regulations.

Container segment in the lead

A total of 87 LNG-fuelled vessels were ordered between January and June 2025. The container shipping sector is in the lead by a wide margin, with 81 of the 87 LNG-fuelled vessels, amounting to 13.6 million gross tons, destined for global liner operators. Leading container carriers are locking in LNG dual-fuel capabilities to meet forthcoming IMO and EU decarbonisation targets, including FuelEU Maritime and the IMO’s Carbon Intensity Indicator (CII) framework.

“LNG is clearly not a fringe option anymore—it’s a mainstream fuel choice, especially in container shipping,” commented Knut Ørbeck-Nilssen, CEO Maritime at DNV. “The rise in LNG orders signals that shipowners are prioritizing compliance, optionality, and access to fuel infrastructure. Even as the broader newbuild market cools, investments in LNG-fuelled vessels remain resilient.”

Uptick in LNG bunkering

LNG bunkering capacity also expanded notably: 13 LNG bunkering vessels were ordered in the first half of this year, equivalent to more than 20% of the current global fleet of 62 operational LNG bunkering ships. February alone saw eight LNG bunkering vessel orders, the strongest month on record for this segment. According to DNV, this underscores how port infrastructure and supply chain readiness are evolving in tandem with vessel demand.

Though zero-emission fuels like ammonia and hydrogen are still in early development, LNG offers immediate CO₂, NOₓ, SOₓ, and particulate matter reductions compared to conventional marine fuels. When combusted in advanced engines and supported by bio-LNG or synthetic LNG blends, emissions can be y reduced significantly. That way, shipowner can comply with upcoming lifecycle assessment (LCA) rules currently being finalized by the International Maritime Organization (IMO).

Regulatory inflection point

As the maritime sector approaches a critical regulatory inflection point in 2026–2030, the strong pipeline of LNG-fuelled newbuilds ordered in 2025 signals not just a trend, but a decisive strategic shift.

“What we’re seeing is a pragmatic approach to decarbonisation. LNG offers a combination of technical maturity, global availability, and regulatory headroom. For many shipowners, it’s the safest bet in the current landscape—especially as fuel intensity metrics and lifecycle-based emissions standards take shape,” Jason Stefanatos, Global Decarbonisation Director at DNV noted.

LNG bunkering hubs spring up and expand across Europe, Asia, and the Americas. The adoption of the cleaner-burning fuel is hence being matched by real-world infrastructure deployment – reinforcing LNG’s role as the industry’s bridge to low- and zero-carbon shipping.

The American Petroleum Institute (API), whose members include Exxon Mobil, Chevron and Cheniere Energy, is calling on President Trump to exempt LNG tankers from a new rule. The novel regulation mandates producers to move 1% of their exports on US-built ships starting from April 2028, and that share would rise to 15% from April 2047 onwards.

The policy sent shockwaves through the industry when announced by the US Trade Representative on April 17. In a first response, API told the U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright and National Energy Dominance Council Chair Doug Burgum the ruling would risk to counteract progress of the Trump administration towards unleashing US LNG sales.

Individual US LNG vendors who do not comply with the rule risk to lose their export licenses, even though the percentages apply to the overall shipping industry and to vessels that LNG exporters do not own and control, API warns.

Quest to get rule abolished

The industry group has rushed to foster closer relation with USTR in a quest to get the rule amended, if not abolished. The aim is to ensure “feasible and durable policies that benefit consumers and advance American energy dominance," said Aaron Padilla, API's vice president of corporate policy.

Today, there are 792 LNG carriers in operation around the world, according to the AXS Marine shipping consultancy. Out of that total, the number of ships built in South Korea and Japan is 703 combined. Some 58 LNG carriers were built in China – and just five come from US shipyards and these 1970-era ships are laid up and currently not in operation, AXS Marine specified.

Unfeasible deadline

There is no way that US shipyards can churn out vessels fast enough to meet the deadline set by USTR and the Trump administration, market participants warn. "There are no such vessels in existence today, and building them would take decades, making compliance impossible for the industry," Charlie Riedl, executive director at the Center for LNG, told Reuters in a statement.

In fact, it would take five years to build one LNG carrier at either of the two American shipyards that have sufficiently long docks to build such a vessel. API CEO Mike Sommers hence urged the Trump administration “to exempt crude oil and refined product imports and exports - consistent with this Administration's approach to exempt these same products from baseline and reciprocal tariffs.”