Mabux: Global Bunker Prices

LNG BUNKER PAGE
- LNG bunker indexes
- OIL/GAS futures settlements
- LNG bunker news
- LNG fuel energy content
SEE LNG BUNKER INDEXES
MARKET BUNKER PRICES (MBP)
- 400+ ports worldwide
- Bunker Price History available from 2002
- Supplier's contact details
- Price forecast short (1 day) and long (rolling forward 2 years)
- Differentials section: VLSFO/380 HSFO, VLSFO/MGO LS, MGO LS/VLSFO
See Market Bunker Prices
DIGITAL BUNKER PRICES (DBP:ICE/NYMEX)
- Price adjustments to the Bunker Market's volatility instantly
- Completely independent
- Free from price manipulations
- Unique tool to identify overcharge/undercharge prices
See Digital Bunker Prices for free

MABUX ARA LNG Bunker Index
Port LNG$/mton MGO LS$/mton Date
ARA
882.10
-32.11
790.00
-10.00
Nov 28
Click to see more LNG Bunker Indexes

Port	LNG$/mton	MGO LS$/mton	Date
ARA	882.10	-32.11	790.00	-10.00	Nov 28

MABUX Global Bunker Index

380HSFO$/mton		VLS FO$/mton		MGO LS$/mton		Date
527.62	-2.27	662.18	-3.38	906.76	-5.62	Dec 4

Click to see Regional Bunker Indexes

MBP INDEX vs DBP INDEX (ICE/NYMEX)

All Indexes in $/mton	380HSFO			VLS FO			MGO LS			Date
All Indexes in $/mton	MBP Index	DBP Index	Diff	MBP Index	DBP Index	Diff	MBP Index	DBP Index	Diff	Date
Rotterdam	480	501	-21	570	597	-27	790	878	-88	Dec 4
Singapore	472	515	-43	650	591	+59	775	887	-112	Dec 4
Fujairah	438	531	-93	640	587	+53	918	935	-17	Dec 4
Houston	483	473	+10	572	588	-16	788	829	-41	Dec 4

Click to see more details

Digital Bunker Prices
Reasons, Mechanism, Benefits
Click to view presentation

Try free for 3 days

Analytical Section
- Daily and Weekly Bunker analyses and Future Curves
- World and regional Bunker indices
- Bunker Price Forecast for 40+ ports
- Digital Bunker Prices
MABUX for Industry
- API for integration with your application, custom solutions available upon demand
- Bunker market analyses upon request for required region or port
- Bunker Price seminars that allow to learn how to use MABUX tools for bunker business
- MABUX Open Bunker Directory features contact details of bunker suppliers, traders and brokers worldwide.
Latest News
- 2023-12-04
  GLOBAL: SAMUEL CHEUNG JOINS TERMOIL
  Samuel Cheung (Chin Pang Cheung) has joined Termoil’s office in the UK. A well-known trader with 15 years’ experience, Cheung has worked in Hong Kong has now relocated to the UK. Direct email: scc@termoil.com; Mobile: +44 7801 298420. Termoil has... Read more
- 2023-12-04
  COP28: GMF CEO JOINS LEADERSHIP COUNCIL OF NEW INDUSTRIAL TRANSITION ACCELERATOR
  Johannah Christensen, the CEO of the Global Maritime Forum, has accepted an invitation to join the leadership council of the newly-formed Industrial Transition Accelerator (ITA), which aims to support decarbonisation by bringing together key stakeholders... Read more
- 2023-12-04
  COP28: TOTALENERGIES DONATES $25 MILLION TO GLOBAL FLARING AND METHANE REDUCTION FUND
  TotalEnergies has made a donation of $25 million over 2024-2030 to the Global Flaring and Methane Reduction (GFMR) trust fund, an initiative of the World Bank. The energy company announced the donation yesterday (3 December), on the occasion of the... Read more
- 2023-12-04
  ASIA PACIFIC: MAERSK’S $500 MILLION INVESTMENT PLAN FOR SOUTHEAST ASIA INCLUDES GREEN FUEL INFRASTRUCTURE
  A.P. Moller-Maersk has announced it will be investing more than $500 million to expand its supply chain capabilities in Southeast Asia, which will include plans to build ‘green fuel infrastructure’. In a statement issued today (4 December), Maersk... Read more
- 2023-12-04
  Oil down on persistent uncertainty over OPEC+ supply cuts
  Oil futures reversed course after rising briefly on Monday amid persistent pressure from the OPEC+ decision and uncertainty over global fuel demand growth, although the risk of supply disruptions from the Middle East conflict limited the losses. Brent... Read more Oil futures reversed course after rising briefly on Monday amid persistent pressure from the OPEC+ decision and uncertainty over global fuel demand growth, although the risk of supply disruptions from the Middle East conflict limited the losses.
  Brent crude futures were down 0.6%, or 49 cents, to $78.39 a barrel by 0406 GMT, while U.S. West Texas Intermediate crude futures were at $73.65 a barrel, down 0.6%, or 42 cents.
  "Crude seems to be under continued pressure from the OPEC+ decision ... Some degree of discounting of the deeper OPEC+ cuts is justified, but as of now, the crude complex has completely disregarded them," said Vandana Hari, founder of oil market analysis provider Vanda (NASDAQ:VNDA) Insights.
  Oil prices slumped more than 2% last week on investor scepticism about the depth of supply cuts by the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and allies including Russia, together called OPEC+, and concern about sluggish global manufacturing activity.
  OPEC+ cuts announced on Thursday were voluntary in nature, raising doubts about whether or not producers would fully implement them. Investors were also unsure about how the cuts would be measured.
  Geopolitical considerations were also front and centre of investors' minds as fighting resumed in Gaza. Three commercial vessels came under attack in international waters in the southern Red Sea, the U.S. military said on Sunday, as Yemen's Houthi group claimed drone and missile attacks on two Israeli vessels in the area.
  The resumption of the Israel-Hamas war fuelled the bullish momentum for oil prices, CMC Markets (LON:CMCX) analyst Tina Teng said.
  "However, oil prices may continue to be under pressure for the time being due to China’s disappointing economic recovery and the ramp-up of U.S. production," Teng said.
  U.S. oil rigs rose five to 505 this week, their highest since September, energy services firm Baker Hughes said in its closely followed report on Friday. [RIG/U]
  On Russian oil, western countries have stepped up efforts to enforce the $60 a barrel price cap on seaborne shipments of Russian oil it imposed to punish Moscow for its war in Ukraine.
  Washington on Friday imposed additional sanctions on three entities and three oil tankers.
  Separately, the White House said on Friday it was prepared to "pause" sanctions relief for OPEC member Venezuela in coming days unless there is further progress on the release of Venezuelan political prisoners and "wrongfully detained" Americans. Meanwhile, India has resumed Venezuelan oil purchases. Source: Reuters/Investing.com
- 2023-12-04
  What More OPEC+ Cuts Mean for the Market
  Following a chaotic day of OPEC+ meeting decisions that resulted in additional “voluntary” cut among cartel members, the dust is now settling, and the market is fairly disappointed, with Brent counterintuitively falling right after the announcement before... Read more Following a chaotic day of OPEC+ meeting decisions that resulted in additional “voluntary” cut among cartel members, the dust is now settling, and the market is fairly disappointed, with Brent counterintuitively falling right after the announcement before gaining slightly early on Friday.
  
  The cuts mean that the surplus everyone was forecasting for the first quarter of 2024 has now disappeared. In its place will be a deficit, though small.
  
  ING Bank sees this coming first-quarter deficit as lending some upside to oil prices. With that in mind, ING sees some upside in its current $82/barrel forecast for the quarter and its $88/barrel full-year 2024 forecast.
  
  Whether there is actually an upside, says ING, “largely depends on how OPEC+ goes about unwinding these cuts and obviously on how demand plays out next year”.
  
  Normally, that upside would have manifested itself immediately after the announcement on Thursday. Instead, the market reacted in the reverse most likely because of the nature of the cartel’s output cut delivery.
  
  The fact that the cuts will be voluntary remove a bit of the sting.
  
  “These voluntary cuts suggest it is becoming difficult for members to agree on OPEC+ cuts,” writes ING. “Therefore, if further action is needed in future, it will become increasingly difficult for the group to respond.”The meeting got off to a rocky start, delayed for four days as African cartel members haggled for higher quota targets, while the Saudis have been bearing the bulk of the burden of recent cuts. Once things finally got sorted out, the final decision on increased output cuts lost its weight due to the fact that everything is voluntary.
  Related: U.S. Oil Drillers See More Gains As OPEC+ Agrees to Cut Production
  
  In other words, the cartel seems to have lost the essence of a cartel, replacing it instead with a sort of gentleman’s agreement that may or may not have any impact on markets.
  
  If the markets were looking for direction here, it wasn’t forthcoming.
  
  Specifically, eight members of the expanded cartel announced voluntary cuts of around 2.2 million barrels per day for the first-quarter of next year. That volume already includes Saudi Arabia’s current voluntary cuts of 1 million barrels per day, as well as Russia’s 500,000 bpd voluntary cuts. That leaves us with “additional”, “voluntary” cuts of less than 900,000 bpd that hasn’t already been priced in. Additional voluntary cuts were pledged from Iraq, UEA, Kuwait, Kazakhstan, Algeria and Oman.
  
  As for the African nations–particularly Angola and Nigeria–who have been operating at diminished capacity lately–yet were loath to see their production quotas reduced further–Angola saw its quota cut to 1.1 million bpd and Nigeria saw its raised to 1.5 million bpd. Angola, however, says it won’t follow the quota, further undermining the cartel’s authority. Had the cuts been agreed across the entire group of OPEC+ members, they would have delivered a far greater punch to oil prices. Instead, the eight individual members were given a long leash to determine this on their own, in a non-binding manner. As it stands, the less-than 900,000 bpd set to be voluntarily taken off the market in the first-quarter, may never even happen. If the markets are strong, those barrels will simply be put back into the flow.
  
  The New York Times assessed the emerging situation succinctly when it described OPEC as “losing power in the oil market at a time when oil is losing power with cost-wary and climate conscious consumers”, noting that U.S. production accounted for a whopping 80% of the rise in global oil supply this year.
  
  What the Thursday OPEC+ meeting lays bare is the true nature of the power of the cartel to move markets.
  
  About a month prior to the Thursday meeting, the Cato Institute opined in a lengthy report that OPEC at large is just about politics, not actual oil fundamentals. It’s a convenient bit of political leverage, with “evidence” suggesting that “the attention paid to OPEC is mostly about political benefits to both OPEC members and Western leaders”. In other words, it’s not “an actual ability to control the oil market”. OPEC members, the Cato Institute notes, view oil output as an “international bargaining chip”. In turn, this “perception of influence” over the West lends it a certain legitimacy. But the West benefits, as well, because this same perception of influence allows it to set up OPEC as a scapegoat when oil prices are hypervolatile. This theory supports the New York Times’ note that the bulk of additional oil supply this year has come from the U.S. It also negates the theories behind the push for “NOPEC” (No Oil Producing and Exporting Cartels), for which a group of bipartisan U.S. senators in March reintroduced legislation. If passed, it would change U.S. antitrust law to revoke sovereign immunity protecting OPEC+ members from lawsuits over price collusion.
  
  The Thursday OPEC+ decision for voluntary cuts, which largely suggests that it’s now each cartel man for himself, might further erode the “legitimacy” on which the above-mentioned charade relies. Source: Oilprice.com
- 2023-12-04
  Surging LNG Exports Expose The U.S. To Natural Gas Price Swings
  Soaring U.S. LNG exports have made natural gas a global commodity and the United States vulnerable to global price volatility. As American exports of liquefied natural gas are set to grow further this decade, the once-isolated U.S. natural gas prices... Read more Soaring U.S. LNG exports have made natural gas a global commodity and the United States vulnerable to global price volatility. As American exports of liquefied natural gas are set to grow further this decade, the once-isolated U.S. natural gas prices will become increasingly linked to the pace of LNG exports and global supply and demand.
  
  As Europe has been scrambling to replace Russian pipeline gas supply since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, growing volumes of U.S. LNG are making their way to Europe instead of Asia. Exporters are also signing long-term deals to ship the gas from existing and future LNG export facilities to international markets to underpin final investment decisions for the new plants.
  
  With more domestically produced natural gas feeding export facilities and helping Europe stock up on LNG, U.S. natural gas prices rose last year, and gas home heating bills were high amid higher wholesale and retail gas prices, which utilities passed on to customers.
  
  This year, as the shocks of the energy crisis elsewhere subsided and gas prices fell, U.S. wholesale natural gas prices have fallen back to the levels from before the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
  
  However, “many residential utilities are still, to this day, charging their customers near-record fees for gas,” Clark Williams-Derry, energy finance analyst at the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA), wrote this week.
  Related: Oil Markets Confused and Underwhelmed by OPEC+ Cuts
  
  Residential gas prices have started to ease but remain well above their average for the previous decade. Utilities across America have said in the past year that the soaring U.S. LNG exports have raised domestic gas prices.
  
  “With U.S. LNG exports slated to almost double over the next 5 years, U.S. ratepayers should brace themselves for more volatility,” Williams-Derry says, and offers a solution, according to IEEFA:
  
  “Curtail new gas export projects. We’ve already dug ourselves into a hole. The smartest thing to do now is to stop digging.”
  
  But the U.S. is set for LNG capacity expansion this decade, and its exports will further increase next year as two export terminals come online—Golden Pass in Texas and Plaquemines in Louisiana.
  
  The U.S. already exported more LNG in the first half of 2023 than any other country, the EIA said earlier this year. With average LNG exports of 11.6 billion cubic feet per day (Bcf/d) during this period, or 4% more than in the first half of 2022, the United States was the world’s top LNG exporter ahead of Australia and Qatar.
  
  In October, U.S. LNG exports hit the second-highest monthly level on record, just below the record from April 2023, per estimates from data provider LSEG cited by Reuters.
  
  Still, the EIA expects lower average natural gas bills for U.S. consumers that heat their homes primarily with natural gas this winter heating season compared with last winter, when residential retail natural gas prices were higher than they had been in the previous ten winters.
  
  Natural gas is the primary heating fuel for 46% of U.S. homes, according to the Census Bureau’s 2022 American Community Survey. The retail price of natural gas and the amount of natural gas consumed determine how much consumers will pay.
  
  The wholesale U.S. natural gas spot price at the national benchmark Henry Hub started last winter heating season averaging $5.66 per thousand cubic feet (Mcf). This November, the EIA expected the Henry Hub price to be 45% lower than last year, averaging $3.12/Mcf.
  
  “The lower wholesale natural gas prices this year have led us to expect a 21% ($3.16/Mcf) decline in the U.S. average residential retail price for the 2023–24 winter,” the EIA said.
  
  Customers should still expect relatively high prices because lower wholesale prices do not immediately translate into lower retail prices for residential consumers. Changes in retail natural gas prices lag changes in wholesale natural gas prices, largely due to the nature of utility regulation, the EIA says.
  
  With LNG a global commodity, U.S. residential consumers are not as isolated from global price swings and supply and demand as they were just a few years ago. Source: Oilprice.com
- 2023-12-04
  MABUX: The irregular changes of bunker indices to prevail in Global bunker market on Dec. 04.
  MABUX World Bunker Index (as index calculated on current prices for 380 HSFO, VLSFO and MGO) demonstrated a slight downward trend on Dec. 01: 380 HSFO - USD/MT - 529.89 (-3.84) VLSFO - USD/MT – 665.56 (-3.36) MGO - USD/MT – 912.38 (-6.14) As of... Read more MABUX World Bunker Index (as index calculated on current prices for 380 HSFO, VLSFO and MGO) demonstrated a slight downward trend on Dec. 01:
  
  380 HSFO - USD/MT - 529.89 (-3.84)
  VLSFO - USD/MT – 665.56 (-3.36)
  MGO - USD/MT – 912.38 (-6.14)
  
  As of Dec. 01, the MABUX MBP/DBP Index (MDI), which tracks the correlation between market bunker prices (MBP) and the MABUX digital bunker price benchmark (DBP), has registered the following trends across four selected ports: Rotterdam, Singapore, Fujairah, and Houston.
  
  - HSFO segment: Houston moved to the overcharge zone with premium rising by $6. The other three selected ports remained undercharged. The underpricing margins narrowed by $2 in Rotterdam, bur widened by $11 in Singapore and $3 in Fujairah.
  
  - VLSFO segment: Rotterdam and Houston were both underpriced, with premiums decreasing by $2 in Rotterdam and $9 in Houston. Singapore and Fujairah were in the overcharge zone, with overpricing margins decreasing by $2 in Fujairah. The MDI Index in Singapore remained unchanged.
  
  - MGO LS segment: All four ports continued to be undercharged. The underpricing ratio decreased by $13 in Rotterdam, $6 in Singapore, $16 in Fujairah, and $13 in Houston. The MDI index in Singapore fell below the $100 mark.
  
  We do not expect a firm trend in Global bunker market on Dec. 04. The irregular changes of bunker indices to prevail: 380 HSFO – minus 1-7 USD/MT, VLSFO – minus 1-10 USD/MT, MGO LS – plus-minus 5-18 USD/MT.
  
  Source: MABUX
- 2023-12-04
  Is the Global Energy Transition Simply Too Expensive?
  The energy transition has been estimated to cost more than $100 trillion by 2050. In fact, according to the calculations of the Energy Transitions Commission, a grouping of business leaders, it will cost $110 trillion. That would translate into $3.5... Read more The energy transition has been estimated to cost more than $100 trillion by 2050. In fact, according to the calculations of the Energy Transitions Commission, a grouping of business leaders, it will cost $110 trillion.
  
  That would translate into $3.5 trillion annually and represent 1.3% of the projected global GDP for the period. As a percentage of GDP, the figure does not look particularly impressive or frightening—a Deloitte estimate pegs the transition cost at $5-7 trillion annually.
  
  There are many estimates of the transition cost and different outlooks for global GDP, but it is safe to say that when we talk about the transition, we are talking about trillions that need to be spent every year. And it seems that many investors and most regular consumers are unwilling to shoulder the burden.
  
  Ahead of this year's COP28, which began in Dubai on Thursday, Reuters reported that transition advocates were worried about high interest rates, which made the cost of capital more expensive, threatening to shrink transition enthusiasm among potential funders.
  
  "I'm very worried. What used to be available at Libor plus 50 (basis points) or Libor plus 100 is not available at those rates anymore," Gauri Singh, deputy director general at the IRENA, told Reuters.
  
  Indeed, higher interest rates have been blamed by wind and solar companies for their higher costs and increasingly problematic economics, especially in offshore wind. They have also been blamed for companies asking for higher subsidies from governments and also higher prices for their electricity—higher rates have made it a challenge to turn in a profit on many of these.
  
  Capital will be discussed copiously at COP28. Whether the parties involved in the discussion would be able to come to an agreement remains highly uncertain. Meanwhile, the different wheels of the transition seem to be acting like the wheels of a defective shopping cart.
  
  In the U.S., carmakers are losing money on EVs because demand is weaker than expected. In Europe, the industry is optimistic, anticipating a surge in EV sales thanks to the launch of many new affordable models. On the other hand, a phase-down of EV subsidies in Germany from January 1st has led to warnings of lower EV sales, and Consumer Reports just came out with a report that found EVs are less reliable than ICE cars. Both could affect the sales outlook.
  
  In offshore wind, as already mentioned, troubles abound. The more expensive form of wind power generation enjoyed several years of significant interest from transition-oriented governments, not least because project developers promised cheap electricity. Now, this is no longer the case. Instead, offshore wind developers are booking billions in impairments, canceling projects, or, as noted, asking for higher prices.
  
  It appears that higher interest rates—as well as expected shortages in some key materials—have affected the wind and solar industries more significantly than they have affected oil and gas. Oil and gas executives are also complaining about higher interest rates in the U.S., at least, but they seem to be managing to squeeze a record production out of oil fields despite that.
  
  The list of examples is long. The short of it is that the transition is turning out to be more expensive than most can stomach. For investors, the above developments are worrisome from a return perspective. For consumers, until those cheap EVs roll off the line, the switch from ICE to electric is not really something they'd gladly do. And when you see news such as this report saying German grid operators would be able to limit power supply to heat pumps and EV chargers, the switch begins to look even less appealing.
  
  Speaking of the above report, the supply limits would be necessitated by insufficiently large grids. Grid investment is a major element in the transition price tag. And people are already opposing new transmission lines in evidence that besides expensive, the transition is going to be problematic in other ways as well.
  
  "By putting a price—financial or implicit—on a free resource (the climate), the transition increases production costs, with no guarantee that the reduction in energy costs will eventually offset them, while the investments it calls for do not increase productive capacity but must nevertheless be financed."
  
  That's according to French economist Jean Pisani-Ferry, who is a senior fellow at energy think tank Bruegel, as quoted by the Wall Street Journal. Pisani-Ferry added, in a recent report, that if the switch to EVs and heat pumps to support the transition cost more than their hydrocarbon versions and if the government raises taxes to pay for heat pump and EV subsidies, the end consumers would end up worse off. It would be hard to spark enthusiasm about the transition in such a context.
  
  What would be even more challenging is to convince investors that there would be no change in climate policies as governments come and go. So far, the evidence, at least in Europe, points to the opposite. Sweden's new government went back on the climate commitments of the previous one. Elsewhere, conservative parties are gaining popularity, not least with anti-climate policy rhetoric. The transition advocates really do have their work cut out for them.
  
  Source: Oilprice.com
- 2023-12-04
  U.S. Oil Drillers See More Gains As OPEC+ Agrees to Cut Production
  The total number of active drilling rigs in the United States rose by 3 this week after rising by 4 last week, according to new data that Baker Hughes published Friday. The total rig count rose to 625 this week. Since this time last year, Baker Hughes... Read more The total number of active drilling rigs in the United States rose by 3 this week after rising by 4 last week, according to new data that Baker Hughes published Friday.
  
  The total rig count rose to 625 this week. Since this time last year, Baker Hughes has estimated a loss of 159 active drilling rigs. This week’s count is 450 fewer rigs than the rig count at the beginning of 2019 prior to the pandemic.
  
  The number of oil rigs rose by 5 to 505. Oil rigs are now down by 122 compared to this time last year. The number of gas rigs fell by 1 this week to 116, a loss of 39 active gas rigs from this time last year. Miscellaneous also fell by a single rig.
  
  The rig count in the Permian Basin rose by 3 rigs this week, and is now 36 rigs below this same time last year. The rig count in the Eagle Ford stayed the same at 50, which is 21 fewer than this time last year.
  
  Primary Vision’s Frac Spread Count, an estimate of the number of crews completing unfinished, rose in the week to November 22 to 281, up from 276 in the week prior. The frac spread count is 23 more than where it started the year.
  
  Oil prices were trading slightly up on Friday as the market attempted to digest what OPEC+ delivered: a voluntary cut of another 600,000+bpd starting in January, with Russia and Saudi Arabia extending their 1.5 million bpd in cuts through the first quarter. At 12:36 a.m. ET on Friday, the WTI benchmark was trading up $0.13 (+0.17%) on the day at $76.09, up roughly $1 per barrel from this time last week. The Brent benchmark was trading up $0.09 (+0.11%) at $80.95, up $0.30 per barrel from a week ago. Source: Oilprice.com