Orders for ships able to use alternative fuels are advancing faster than the port networks required to supply them, gCaptain reported, citing Lloyd’s Register’s Fuel for Thought: Ports report. The gap means shipowners must assess fuel availability on intended trading routes alongside their choice of propulsion technology.
The report cited Clarksons Research figures showing 1,942 alternative-fuel-capable vessels on order in January 2026, equivalent to 47% of the global orderbook by tonnage. LNG bunkering was available at 222 ports, while only 25 actively supplied methanol. Commercial ammonia bunkering had been recorded at just one port, following an initial operation at Ulsan in South Korea in April 2026. Orders included 385 methanol-capable ships and 45 ammonia-capable vessels.
LNG continues to dominate new contracting, supported by its established supply network and proven propulsion systems. According to DNV data previously reported by gCaptain, September brought 69 alternative-fuel vessel orders, including 48 for LNG, the strongest monthly total in almost two years. Alternative-fuel orders reached 311 vessels in the first nine months of 2026, an increase of 53% against the corresponding period a year earlier.
Methanol supply is expanding at major bunker hubs but remains geographically restricted, while ammonia development is still largely centred on trials, safety reviews and regulation. LR found alternative-fuel infrastructure clustered particularly in Northern Europe, North Asia and Singapore. Its ports advisory senior vice-president, Kamran Ul Haq, said fuel choices and vessel deployment could no longer be treated as separate decisions.
For ports, LR favours investment tied to demonstrable demand rather than preparing for every possible fuel. A joint assessment by Los Angeles and Long Beach similarly identified LNG and methanol as the most practical near- and medium-term options, gCaptain reported. It recommended using existing ship-to-ship LNG bunkering capabilities while developing methanol pilots and strengthening safety and permitting arrangements.
Biofuels provide a more immediate option because compatible blends can generally use existing bunker facilities. LR recorded drop-in biofuel deliveries at 90 ports over the preceding 12 months, although 13 ports handled 77.5% of recorded volumes and Singapore accounted for more than a quarter. Fuel availability alone does not establish climate benefits: methane slip affects LNG’s emissions performance, while methanol’s benefits depend heavily on production methods. LR also highlighted licensing, berth-level risk assessments, emergency preparedness and workforce training as requirements for routine commercial bunkering.