Ammonia as a Marine Fuel and Ammonia Carriers: Technology, Fleet, and 2030 Outlook

The maritime industry is exploring ammonia (NH₃) as a promising zero-carbon fuel to meet decarbonization goals. Ammonia contains no carbon, so its use in engines produces no CO₂ emissions and virtually no sulfur oxides or particulate matter. When produced with renewable energy (so-called “green ammonia”), lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions can be reduced by up to ~90% versus conventional fuels. These characteristics make ammonia an attractive candidate to help achieve the International Maritime Organization’s (IMO) ambitious GHG reduction targets for 2030/2050. Ammonia also has a relatively high energy density compared to hydrogen gas, enabling longer-range voyages. However, significant engineering challenges come with adopting ammonia as a marine fuel. It is a toxic, corrosive, and combustible chemical requiring special handling, and its combustion properties differ markedly from fuel oils or LNG. This article delves into the technical aspects of ammonia-fueled vessels – from engine and fuel system developments to safety and emissions – and examines the role of ammonia carriers in transporting and bunkering this fuel. We also review the current global ammonia carrier fleet, ongoing pilot projects, and provide an outlook through 2030 for ammonia-fueled shipping, drawing on up-to-date insights from classification societies (DNV, Lloyd’s Register, ABS), the International Energy Agency (IEA), and industry reports.

Ammonia-Fueled Vessels: Engines and Fuel Systems

Internal Combustion Engines (ICE) for Ammonia

Major engine manufacturers are in the final stages of developing ammonia-capable internal combustion engines, anticipating first installations by 2025. Both two-stroke slow-speed engines (for large ships) and four-stroke medium-speed engines (for generators or smaller craft) are under development by companies like MAN Energy Solutions, Wärtsilä, and WinGD. Ammonia can be burned in these engines, often in a dual-fuel configuration where the engine can switch between ammonia and a conventional fuel (like marine diesel). In practice, ammonia combustion in diesel engines is challenging – ammonia has a high autoignition temperature (~650 °C) and a slow flame speed, making it difficult to ignite and sustain combustion. To ensure stable ignition, current designs require a pilot fuel (a small injection of diesel or another ignitable fuel) to ignite the ammonia . Ammonia’s flame has a narrow flammability range (about 15–28% by volume in air) and requires higher ignition energy than fuels like methane, so engine tuning and possibly additives (e.g. a bit of hydrogen in the mix) are used to improve combustion.

Engineering solutions being tested include specialized fuel injectors and ignition systems, as well as ammonia fuel supply systems with vaporizer units to introduce ammonia in gaseous form for better mixing. For example, Wärtsilä has developed an Ammonia Fuel Supply System (AFSS) and conducted lab tests feeding ammonia to engine testbeds. These test engines demonstrate that ammonia can be combusted in ICE reliably when the engine is optimized for it. Dual-fuel ammonia engines are typically operated in a mode where a small percentage of marine gas oil is injected as a pilot to ignite the main charge of ammonia. Engine developers aim to minimize the pilot fuel fraction over time. Once completed and proven, these ammonia-fueled engines will allow large ships (e.g. tankers, bulk carriers, container ships) to significantly cut CO₂ emissions. However, ammonia combustion can produce significant NOₓ emissions due to ammonia’s nitrogen content and high combustion temperatures, so exhaust aftertreatment (like SCR catalysts) is required to meet emission limits. Another concern is unburned ammonia “slip” in the exhaust, which is both toxic and a wasted fuel – engine designs and catalysts must address this to prevent ammonia release.

Fuel Cells and Alternative Power Systems

Besides burning ammonia in engines, another route is to use it in fuel cells to generate electricity for propulsion. Fuel cells would theoretically avoid the NOₓ emissions associated with combustion, since the reaction can be kept low-temperature. One approach is direct ammonia fuel cells, such as high-temperature solid oxide fuel cells (SOFCs) that can internally reform ammonia. In fact, the first ammonia-fueled ship project to be announced – the offshore vessel Viking Energy retrofit – originally planned a 2 MW SOFC system running on ammonia. By electrochemically converting ammonia to nitrogen and water, fuel cells produce power without combustion, thus no NOₓ at the point of use. This eliminates a key health and environmental hazard of ammonia engines. The Viking Energy project (part of the EU “ShipFC” initiative) encountered delays because the specialized SOFC units were not ready in time, causing the project to push its operational date to 2026. The interim solution has been to pursue a gas turbine capable of running on ammonia for that vessel, highlighting that multiple power technologies (engines, turbines, fuel cells) are being explored for ammonia.

Another strategy is cracking ammonia to hydrogen on board, then feeding the hydrogen to a fuel cell (typically a PEM fuel cell). This is the approach demonstrated by companies like Amogy. In 2023–2024, Amogy retrofitted a small tugboat (the NH₃ Kraken) with an ammonia-to-power system: ammonia is cracked into hydrogen, which then powers fuel cells to propel the vessel. In September 2024, this ammonia-fueled tug successfully completed its maiden voyage in New York, proving the concept of ammonia as a carbon-free power source for maritime use. While cracking incurs an energy penalty and adds system complexity (reformer unit, heat input, etc.), it leverages mature hydrogen fuel cell technology and sidesteps the combustion-related emissions challenges. Going forward, we can expect larger fuel cell systems (either direct ammonia SOFC or cracked-ammonia PEM) to be tested on ships. These could be especially attractive for vessels requiring flexible electrical power (e.g. offshore support vessels, cruise ships, or potentially future electric-drive ships) since fuel cells can integrate into electric propulsion architectures.

Engine and fuel cell development status: By 2025, the first ammonia-fueled ship engines are expected to be commercially available, and indeed multiple ammonia dual-fuel newbuilds have already been ordered (as detailed later). Classification society DNV notes that several major engine makers will have ammonia-capable two-stroke engines ready by 2025. Fuel cells lag slightly in maturity – the first 2 MW unit installation (Viking Energy) will likely be operational by 2026 after overcoming R&D hurdles. Thus, internal combustion engines will likely dominate early ammonia-fueled vessels, while fuel cells may become viable for certain niches by the late 2020s. In either case, the industry is gaining experience rapidly through prototypes and demonstrations.

Fuel Storage and Handling Challenges

Using ammonia as fuel introduces significant storage and handling challenges on board ships. Ammonia is most efficiently stored as a liquid – it liquefies at about –33 °C at atmospheric pressure. This is a much higher temperature than LNG (which requires –162 °C), meaning ammonia is easier to liquefy, but it is still a cryogenic substance. There are two main options for storage: fully refrigerated tanks at ~–33 °C and ~1 bar, or pressurized tanks at ambient temperature. At 20 °C ammonia’s vapor pressure is about 8–10 bar, so thick steel pressure vessels (Type C tanks) can hold liquid ammonia at room temperature under pressure. Many ammonia carriers today use prismatic or cylindrical tanks with refrigeration to keep ammonia cold (often drawing on boil-off vapor reliquefaction). For fuel tanks on an ammonia-fueled vessel, using smaller pressure vessels is feasible for modest volumes, whereas very large fuel tanks might employ refrigerated designs similar to LPG cargo tanks. In either case, tanks must be made of materials suitable for both low temperature and resistance to ammonia’s chemical effects. Material compatibility is critical: ammonia can cause stress-corrosion cracking in certain steels and is not compatible with copper, brass, or zinc (it attacks copper alloys). Thus, ammonia fuel tanks and piping are typically made of stainless steel or specialized low-temperature steel, and all components (valves, fittings) avoid copper alloys.

Toxicity and safety measures: Ammonia’s toxicity is a paramount concern in ship design. Even small leaks can create a toxic atmosphere for crew – ammonia gas causes severe irritation of lungs, eyes, and skin, and can be life-threatening at high concentrations. Therefore, ammonia fuel systems must be double-contained and equipped with robust leak detection and ventilation. Fuel tanks are usually located in cofferdam spaces or double-walled tanks; piping is routed through ventilated trunks. Gas detectors (ammonia sensors) are installed wherever a leak could occur, set to alarm at very low thresholds. Ventilation fans and scrubbers might be employed to manage any released ammonia. During bunkering (refueling) of ammonia, closed transfer systems are mandatory – meaning no venting of gas to atmosphere. Flexible hoses or loading arms with dry-break couplings, vapor return lines, and emergency shutdown (ESD) systems are utilized, similar to LNG bunkering practices but with even tighter control due to toxicity. A recent pilot ammonia bunkering test at the Port of Dampier demonstrated the safety protocols: the operation used emergency release couplings, full personal protective equipment for crew, and careful purging of transfer hoses to remove residual ammonia before disconnection. Crew training is another aspect – mariners must be trained in ammonia hazards, use of respirators, protective gear, and emergency response (such as water spray curtains to knock down ammonia vapors in case of a leak).

From an engineering standpoint, ammonia fuel systems also need fuel conditioning equipment. Liquid ammonia from the tank may need to be evaporated and superheated into gaseous ammonia before injection into an engine (to ensure consistent flow and mixing). Alternatively, in some engine concepts, liquid ammonia could be directly injected (but this requires managing the endothermic phase change in-cylinder). For fuel cells that crack ammonia, the system includes a reformer reactor, catalyst, and perhaps a small burner to provide heat for cracking. All such systems must be designed with redundant safety interlocks given ammonia’s hazards.

Despite these challenges, the maritime industry has decades of experience handling ammonia safely as a cargo on gas carriers. This experience is now being translated into designs for using it as fuel. Classification societies have been updating rules to address ammonia fuel systems – for example, Lloyd’s Register and ABS have published guidelines for ammonia-fueled ships, and tank technology firms like GTT have developed ammonia-ready tank designs (LR granted an “NH3-Ready” notation for GTT’s Mark III membrane tank system in 2025). These developments ensure that future ammonia fuel tanks can be built to appropriate standards of integrity and safety.

Combustion Characteristics and Emissions Profile

Ammonia’s combustion properties differ from conventional fuels, affecting engine performance and emissions. Pure ammonia has a lower energy density than fuel oil – roughly 18.6 MJ/kg (lower heating value) compared to ~42 MJ/kg for diesel. In liquid form, ammonia provides about 11-12 MJ per liter (since its density is ~0.68 kg/L), which is about one-third the volumetric energy of heavy fuel oil. This means a ship needs roughly 2–3 times the fuel tank volume to achieve the same range on ammonia as on traditional fuel. While this is a disadvantage, large ships can often accommodate bigger tanks or accept slightly reduced range between refueling if bunkering infrastructure is in place. Ammonia’s flame speed is quite low (on the order of 7 cm/s in air), which can lead to longer combustion durations in engines – potentially limiting engine power or efficiency unless the engine is carefully optimized (e.g. using higher compression ratio or supplementing with a faster-burning fuel). Its flammability range is narrow and shifted to the rich side: mixtures leaner than ~15% ammonia in air won’t ignite, and above ~28% ammonia the mixture is too rich to burn. This makes spontaneous ignition or accidental combustion of a leak less likely than for fuels like LNG (which has a wider flammability range). In fact, ammonia has a relatively high minimum ignition energy requirement (several times higher than methane), meaning from a safety perspective it is less prone to accidental ignition. Instead, the bigger risk of a leak is toxicity rather than fire. If ammonia does burn, its flame temperature is lower than hydrocarbons’, which actually can result in lower NOₓ in some conditions. However, ammonia can form NOₓ through fuel-bound nitrogen pathways even in cooler flames.

The emissions profile of burning ammonia is a double-edged sword. On one hand, carbon emissions are zero – no CO₂ is produced at the exhaust, and ammonia fuel contains no carbon to form soot or SO₂. This yields a major environmental benefit: ammonia-fueled engines emit virtually no CO₂, no SOₓ, and negligible particulate matter. On the other hand, the nitrogen chemistry introduces new pollutants: NOₓ (NO and NO₂) and potentially nitrous oxide (N₂O). NOₓ is formed at high temperatures when nitrogen (from air and fuel) reacts with oxygen. Ammonia-fueled engines must include strategies to limit NOₓ – for instance, using exhaust gas recirculation (to lower flame temperatures) and installing Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) systems. Ironically, SCR systems themselves use ammonia (or urea) injection to convert NOₓ to nitrogen and water; in an ammonia-fueled ship, the SCR could simply use a slipstream of the fuel as the reductant. Tests have shown ammonia engines can meet IMO Tier III NOₓ limits with aftertreatment, but careful control is needed. Nitrous oxide is a potent greenhouse gas (around 300 times the GWP of CO₂) that can form from ammonia combustion under certain conditions (for example, if combustion is incomplete or too low-temperature). Avoiding N₂O will be important to ensure the overall climate benefit of ammonia – catalytic converters may be needed to break down any N₂O formed.

Another concern is ammonia slip – unburned ammonia passing through the engine and out the stack. Not only would that represent wasted fuel (economic loss), it would lead to harmful ammonia emissions (caustic to ecosystems and human health). Engine designs aim to achieve complete combustion of ammonia, but SCR systems also typically include an ammonia slip catalyst at the tail end to oxidize any leftover NH₃ (converting it to N₂ and H₂O). In fuel cell systems, ammonia slip can be an issue if the cracker doesn’t fully convert NH₃ or if the fuel cell’s ammonia crossover occurs; again, catalytic post-processors are used.

Overall, when considering life-cycle emissions, ammonia’s benefit depends on how it is produced. Most ammonia today is made from natural gas (the Haber-Bosch process), which emits CO₂ – this “grey ammonia” would not solve the climate problem if used at large scale in ships. The vision for maritime use is to transition to green ammonia (made from renewable hydrogen and nitrogen from air) or at least blue ammonia (made from fossil sources but with carbon capture). Studies by the IEA and others foresee ammonia contributing significantly to shipping’s decarbonization by 2030 and beyond, but only if production is cleaned up. In the near term, a ship burning ammonia from a typical production plant might achieve ~60% GHG reduction versus heavy fuel oil, according to one study, largely because upstream CO₂ is still significant. In the best case (renewable production), ammonia can enable virtually zero-carbon shipping at the point of use, with the remaining challenges being NOₓ and ammonia slip control. Notably, ammonia as a fuel also eliminates sulfur emissions entirely (since ammonia has no sulfur), helping with compliance with IMO 2020 sulfur cap and improving air quality around ports. The lack of particulate emissions is another benefit – engine combustion of ammonia doesn’t produce soot, which is positive for public health (no smoke) and could help reduce black carbon deposits in the Arctic for ships operating there.

Safety and Regulatory Frameworks

The introduction of ammonia fuel is tightly coupled with the development of safety regulations and class rules. The IMO’s IGF Code (International Code of Safety for Ships using Gases or other Low-flashpoint Fuels) currently covers fuels like LNG and methanol; ammonia was not initially included. Recognizing the need, the IMO has moved quickly in recent years to create interim guidelines for ammonia. In late 2024, the IMO’s Maritime Safety Committee approved Interim Guidelines for the Safety of Ships Using Ammonia as Fuel. These guidelines (MSC.1/Circ.1687) build on the IGF Code principles and provide requirements for ammonia fuel systems, ventilation, detection, firefighting, and training on board ammonia-fueled vessels. They are a critical step to enable flag states to approve ammonia-powered ships on a uniform basis globally. The guidelines were developed through the IMO CCC Sub-Committee and include functional requirements tailored to ammonia’s hazards. They will serve as a bridge until the IGF Code is fully amended to include ammonia (expected by the later 2020s).

In parallel, classification societies have been issuing their own rules and approvals to facilitate early projects. DNV, for example, has published class notations for ammonia-fueled ships (e.g. “Gas Fuelled (Ammonia)” notation) and is working with industry on risk assessments. Lloyd’s Register has granted Approvals in Principle (AiP) for ammonia-fuel designs, such as an ammonia-fueled container ship concept (with SDARI and MAN Energy Solutions) and ammonia dual-fuel gas carriers for Trafigura. In April 2025, LR approved the design of a medium-sized gas carrier with WinGD ammonia dual-fuel engines for Trafigura, indicating that class societies are comfortable with proposed safety measures. ABS (American Bureau of Shipping) released a comprehensive guide for ammonia-fueled vessels in 2021, and in 2022 ABS issued an advisory on ammonia bunkering to guide port developers. These class guides cover technical requirements like double-walled piping, drip trays, toxic vapor management, emergency shutdown logic, and ventilation rates for ammonia systems.

Port regulations and bunkering: On the port side, authorities are beginning to plan for ammonia. The Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore, for instance, has been working on ammonia bunkering standards and expects to finalize standards to enable ammonia bunkering in the near future. Ports that handle ammonia as cargo (such as those near fertilizer plants) have experience with ammonia transfers, but bunkering a fuel in busy ports requires new safety distance guidelines, operational protocols, and emergency preparedness. The world’s first ship-to-ship ammonia transfer at anchorage was completed in 2024 at Port of Dampier (Australia) as a test for bunkering readines. In that trial, a controlled transfer between two gas carriers was done to simulate refueling, with participation from a port authority and a maritime decarbonization center – a model for how future ammonia bunkering operations can be conducted safely in a port environment. This and other pilots will inform the development of international standards (for example, ISO standards for ammonia bunkering equipment and procedures).

Regulators are keenly aware that ammonia’s “dangerous goods” nature means comprehensive rules are needed before widespread adoption. As one industry expert noted, until confidence is gained and risks controlled, many ship operators will be hesitant. Thus, ongoing work in the IMO, class societies, and collaborations like the Global Centre for Maritime Decarbonisation (GCMD) are focusing on closing the knowledge gaps. By 2025, we now have a clearer regulatory pathway and growing practical experience, which together lay the groundwork for the safe scaling of ammonia as a marine fuel.

The Global Ammonia Carrier Fleet

Vessel Types and Capacity Ranges

“Ammonia carriers” are ships designed to transport ammonia as cargo, typically as a liquefied gas. In practice, ammonia is often carried by vessels that also transport LPG (liquefied petroleum gas), since the storage conditions are similar. The global fleet includes a mix of gas carrier types: fully pressurized gas carriers (small ships with steel pressure tanks, carrying a few thousand cubic meters), semi-pressurized/refrigerated carriers (medium size, 5,000–20,000 m³, which can carry cargo either pressurized or cooled), and fully refrigerated gas carriers (large ships up to 80,000–90,000 m³ capacity, carrying ammonia or LPG at atmospheric pressure and low temperature). The largest of these are often referred to as Very Large Gas Carriers (VLGCs) when built mainly for LPG service (~80–85k m³ capacity). A subset of newbuilds are being designated VLACs (Very Large Ammonia Carriers) – essentially VLGCs constructed or modified to be ammonia-ready. As of 2024, typical ammonia cargo parcel sizes range from 1,000–3,000 tons on small coastal ships up to ~50,000–60,000 tons on a single voyage by a VLGC/VLAC. For instance, a state-of-the-art 93,000 m³ VLGC can carry roughly 50–60,000 tonnes of ammonia in one load (ammonia’s density is lower than LPG, so volumetric capacity translates to slightly less tonnage). Medium gas carriers (MGCs) around 20–30k m³ can carry on the order of 10–20,000 tonnes. Tank configurations vary: larger ships often have prismatic insulated tanks made of specialized steel inside the hull (similar to LNG carrier tanks but for warmer temperature), while smaller ones might have cylindrical pressure vessels on deck.

Importantly, carrying ammonia as cargo requires materials and systems designed for its corrosiveness and toxicity. Cargo tanks for ammonia are usually made of steel with appropriate notch toughness for –33 °C, and piping systems avoid copper alloys. Ships that carry ammonia are equipped with gas freeing systems and scrubbing systems so that tanks and lines can be ventilated safely. They also have additional safety gear like water spray curtains (to mitigate any minor ammonia leaks during transfer) and comprehensive refrigeration plants to manage boil-off. These features differentiate ammonia carriers from oil tankers and require crew specialized in gas handling.

Size of the Fleet and Major Operators

The existing global fleet capable of carrying ammonia is significant, though not all these ships are dedicated solely to ammonia service. According to industry data, roughly 400–450 vessels worldwide are technically capable of transporting ammonia as of mid-2024. This includes many LPG carriers built with ammonia-compatible specs. However, in practice the number of ships actively trading ammonia is much smaller – fewer than 100 ships are engaged in ammonia transport at present. Ammonia historically has been a niche cargo (primarily for fertilizer industry), with about 20–25 million tonnes per year moved by sea. The war in Ukraine in 2022 shifted global ammonia trade flows (Russia being a major ammonia exporter), which actually increased demand for seaborne transport. Navigator Gas, a major gas carrier operator, noted that a few years ago only 3–4 of their ships were carrying ammonia, whereas in 2024 about 10 of their vessels regularly transport ammonia due to new trade routes and demand.

Major operators of ammonia carriers include specialized gas shipping companies and some larger diversified shipowners:

• Navigator Gas – operates a fleet of mid-sized gas carriers (approx. 20–40k m³). They are one of the largest operators in the handysize/MGC segment and carry ammonia for industrial clients.

• MOL (Mitsui O.S.K. Lines) – the Japanese shipping giant has several VLGCs and other gas carriers that are ammonia-capable. For example, MOL owns the Green Pioneer, a 35,000 m³ ammonia carrier used in pilot bunkering trials. Japanese lines (MOL, NYK, K-Line) have long carried ammonia to Japan for fertilizer and, looking ahead, for energy use.

• BW LPG/BW Group – one of the world’s largest VLGC owners (with dozens of 80k m³ LPG carriers). Many of BW’s VLGCs were built to be ammonia-capable or are being retrofitted to handle ammonia. BW and other VLGC owners (like Avance Gas, Dorian LPG) have declared readiness to transport fuel ammonia as demand grows.

• EXMAR – a Belgian gas shipping company with a fleet ranging from small pressurized ships to large refrigerated carriers. EXMAR has handled ammonia cargoes and is even building the first ammonia-fueled gas carriers (in addition to carrying ammonia, these will burn it as fuel).

• Navigator Holdings (Navigator Gas) – mentioned above, with ~50+ gas carriers, has been increasingly moving ammonia and is investing in new ammonia-ready ships.

• Petredec and Geogas – independent owners of LPG carriers that can carry ammonia, often active in spot trades.

• Eastern Pacific Shipping (EPS) – a large Singapore-based shipowner with diverse fleet, recently venturing into gas carriers and ordering ammonia-fueled vessels (including ammonia carrier newbuilds).

• Trafigura – while primarily a commodity trader, Trafigura charters and even orders vessels; they have commissioned ammonia dual-fuel gas carriers (45k m³ MGCs) to be built by 2027, indicating they will be both carrying and possibly bunkering ammonia.

• Yara (the fertilizer company) – not a shipowner per se, but Yara time-charters ammonia carriers to ship ammonia from its production plants. They have been closely involved in ammonia shipping for decades and in recent trials (providing the ammonia and vessels for the Dampier transfer).

Typical trade routes for ammonia today include shipments from production hubs like the Middle East (e.g. Saudi Arabia, Qatar), North Africa, Trinidad, Russia, and the US Gulf, to consumption markets in Europe, India, and East Asia. Ships range from smaller 5–10k m³ vessels distributing to regional ports, up to VLGCs on long haul routes. The “ammonia carrier” fleet overlaps heavily with the LPG fleet – indeed many vessels switch between carrying LPG and ammonia depending on market demand. In the early 2000s, most VLGCs were built ammonia-capable as a standard. Some later LPG ships in the 2010s optimized for LPG only (to save cost), but now shipowners are again opting to make new builds ammonia-ready given future expectations. Notably, new orders for ammonia carriers have surged: over 50 large ammonia-capable gas carriers were ordered in the 12-month period up to late 2024. Many of these will first operate in LPG trade but can carry ammonia when needed. This wave of “future-proofing” orders suggests owners anticipate a growing ammonia shipping market (either for fuel or chemical use). With an investment of only ~1% extra capital (≈$1–1.5 million on a $125 million VLGC newbuild) to make a ship ammonia-capable, it’s seen as a worthwhile add-on. By having this flexibility, owners can later switch the vessel to ammonia service – effectively these new multipurpose VLACs will bolster the ammonia transport fleet in coming years.

In summary, the existing ammonia carrier fleet is robust and growing. It spans a broad capacity range (from tiny 1,000 m³ coasters up to 90,000 m³ behemoths) and is operated by both dedicated gas shipping companies and big-name shipowners. These vessels form the backbone of any future ammonia fuel supply chain at sea – they will not only carry ammonia as cargo but may also serve as bunkering vessels to refuel ammonia-powered ships. The expertise of their crews in handling ammonia will be invaluable as the industry ramps up the use of ammonia as fuel.

Ammonia carrier vessels conducting the world’s first ship-to-ship ammonia transfer at Port of Dampier (September 2024). A 35,000 m³ carrier (left) and a 22,500 m³ carrier (right) safely transferred 4,000 m³ of ammonia, demonstrating bunkering techniques. Such existing gas carriers and their experienced operators will be crucial in developing ammonia fuel supply chains.

Current Industry Status (2025)

Ammonia-Fueled Ships on Order and Under Construction

Until recently, no commercial ship had been fueled by ammonia. This is quickly changing. The orderbook for ammonia-fueled vessels began to materialize in 2023, and by early 2024 at least 11 large vessels with ammonia propulsion had been ordered. DNV’s Alternative Fuels Insight data identified the first ammonia-fueled newbuild order as a pair of 40,000 m³ ammonia/LPG carriers for EXMAR, placed in October 2023. These ships, to be built at Hyundai Mipo, will have dual-fuel engines capable of burning ammonia. Since then, additional orders have been logged. A Reuters survey in late 2023 counted 25 ammonia dual-fuel ships ordered (covering all types, none delivered yet). This tally includes various ship types: gas carriers, bulk carriers, and tankers primarily. Some known projects and orders:

• Trafigura – 4 × 45,000 m³ Medium Gas Carriers (LPG/ammonia dual-fuel) at Hyundai Mipo, for delivery in 2027.

• Eastern Pacific Shipping (EPS) – at least 6 ammonia dual-fuel vessels on order (a mix of ammonia carrier newbuilds and 210k DWT bulk carriers), in partnership with engine maker MAN and yards in China and Korea.

• Berge Bulk – 2 × 210,000 DWT Newcastlemax bulk carriers with ammonia dual-fuel engines, ordered from Qingdao Beihai Shipyard, delivering in 2025. These will be among the first large bulkers capable of running on ammonia.

• BHP – the mining company is planning an ammonia-fueled bulk carrier by 2026 (they were in the process of selecting a yard in 2023).

• MISC / AET – Malaysian shipowner MISC (via its tanker arm AET) is building 2 × Aframax crude tankers with ammonia dual-fuel capability, under charter to PETRONAS, for delivery around 2026.

• NYK Line – Not an order per se, but NYK has converted an existing tugboat to ammonia fuel (the “A-Tug”, see below) as a demo. They also have future concepts for ammonia-fueled ammonia carriers in development.

It’s worth noting that container ship operators, who have been ordering many methanol-fueled ships, have not yet ordered ammonia-fueled container ships as of 2025 (ammonia’s challenges and unclear fuel availability make it a longer-term option for that sector). However, design concepts exist (e.g. an 8,000 TEU ammonia-fueled container ship concept received LR’s AiP in 2022) and interest remains for the late 2020s. Likewise, the car carrier segment has been more focused on LNG or methanol so far. So the first wave of ammonia-fueled newbuilds is concentrated in energy shipping and bulk commodities, often supported by charterers in mining, oil, or chemical sectors who are interested in pioneering green shipping.

Crucially, none of these large ammonia-fueled newbuilds are in service yet in early 2025 – most have delivery dates between 2025 and 2027. The expectation is that 2026 will likely see the first ocean-going commercial ships running on ammonia entering operation. This timing aligns with engine availability (MAN’s two-stroke ammonia engine is due in 2024/25, WinGD and Wärtsilä engines around then as well). It also aligns with the development of supply: companies like Yara and Eni aim to have green ammonia production for fuel available by then, and ports are gearing up for ammonia bunkering by 2026–2027.

Pilot and Demonstration Vessels

While waiting for big ships to be built, several pilot projects and demos have been crucial to prove ammonia fuel at sea:

• NYK “A-Tug” (Sakigake) – In 2024, NYK Line completed retrofitting a harbor tugboat to run on ammonia, making it the world’s first ammonia-fueled vessel in actual operation. The tug, originally built as LNG-fueled, was modified with a two-stroke engine adapted for ammonia fuel (developed by IHI Power Systems). In July 2024 it was successfully bunkered with ammonia in Yokohama – the world’s first truck-to-ship ammonia bunkering. The tug was delivered in August 2024 and is slated to enter service assisting ships in port, running on ammonia as its main fuel. This project demonstrates ammonia propulsion on a small scale and provides invaluable real-world data on engine performance, bunkering, and safety procedures. Notably, NYK sourced a low-carbon ammonia called “ECOANN” (ammonia produced partly from recycled waste) for the trials. By all accounts, the ammonia-fueled tug is operating as intended and has become a showcase for Japan’s maritime ammonia ambitions.

• Fortescue’s “Green Pioneer” – Australian company Fortescue Future Industries retrofitted a 75 m platform supply vessel to run on ammonia fuel and undertook a bold demonstration voyage in early 2024. The Green Pioneer sailed from Singapore to Europe, arriving in London in March 2024 as the first ammonia-fueled ship to visit the UK. Its diesel engines were partially converted to dual-fuel (diesel/ammonia), and during port trials in Singapore it ran successfully on ammonia, earning a DNV “Gas Fuelled Ammonia” class notation. Fortescue’s project is as much a publicity and advocacy tour as a technical demo – the vessel visited multiple ports to raise awareness and urge infrastructure development for ammonia fuel. The Green Pioneer’s voyage showed that a ship can safely handle ammonia fuel across long distances. It also coincided with regulatory moves – by the end of 2024 the IMO had approved interim ammonia-fuel guidelines, as mentioned, smoothing the way for such voyages.

• Amogy ammonia tug (US) – As described earlier, Amogy Inc. retrofitted a 1950s tugboat in New York with an ammonia-to-electric propulsion system. This vessel (nicknamed “NH₃ Kraken”) completed testing on the Hudson River in mid-2023 and a publicized maiden voyage in 2024, proving out Amogy’s technology at the largest scale to date. Though it’s a one-off prototype, it provided proof of concept for ammonia cracking and fuel cell use in a marine environment. The success is a stepping stone toward larger powertrains; Amogy and partners like Hanwha are now working on scaling this tech to megawatt-class systems for future commercial ships.

• Eidesvik “Viking Energy” – Mentioned in the technology section, this offshore supply vessel in Norway is set to become a testbed for a 2 MW ammonia-fueled power system (now planned as a gas turbine after the fuel cell delay). Although its schedule slipped, by 2026 Viking Energy should operate routinely using ammonia fuel for a significant portion of its power. The project, backed by the EU, aims to validate ammonia in a demanding offshore environment (harsh weather, variable loads) and will be the first full-time ammonia-fueled ship in commercial service once it’s running. It will also generate operational procedures and lessons for future engine integration.

• Other initiatives: Many feasibility studies and lab-scale demos are underway globally. For example, South Korea’s shipbuilders (KSOE/Hyundai) have built a small prototype ammonia fuel cell ship for research. The European Union’s Horizon programs are funding projects like AmmoniaMove and GREEN RUN, targeting development of ammonia engines and bunkering demos. China has also announced its first ammonia-fuel ready vessel (a small bulk carrier) and is researching domestic ammonia fuel supply. These projects contribute to a growing body of knowledge and will likely yield more pilot vessels before 2030.

As of 2024, it’s reported that aside from experimental vessels, only two small ammonia-fueled vessels are actually in service – one being the NYK tug and the other presumably the Fortescue vessel or a similar demo. This highlights that we are still in the infancy of ammonia-fueled shipping. The next few years (2025–2027) will be critical as the first wave of larger newbuilds hit the water, moving ammonia from demo stage into early commercial adoption.

Fuel Supply and Infrastructure Status

Having ships capable of burning ammonia is only one side of the equation – the fuel must be available and deliverable. Currently, ammonia as a bunker fuel is not widely produced or sold, but momentum is building:

• Production projects: There are numerous green ammonia production projects announced, aiming for operation by the late 2020s. According to the IEA, nearly 8 million tonnes per year of near-zero-emission ammonia capacity is expected online by 2030. Regions like the Middle East (Oman, Saudi Arabia, UAE), Australia, Chile, Malaysia, and the North Sea (Norway/UK) are planning large plants to create ammonia from renewable power. Some of this output is earmarked for power generation or fertilizer, but significant volumes could go to shipping if the demand and bunkering are in place. Traditional ammonia producers (Yara, CF Industries, Sabic, etc.) are also pivoting to offer green ammonia to the market.

• Bunkering infrastructure: Early steps are being taken at major bunkering ports. Singapore (the world’s largest bunker hub) released a decarbonisation blueprint targeting multi-fuel availability by 2030, including ammonia bunkering facilities. Singapore’s MPA has partnered with industry and likely will have pilot ammonia bunkering by around 2027. Ports in Japan are gearing up since Japan intends to import ammonia for co-firing in power plants – we saw Yokohama conduct truck-to-ship bunkering for the A-Tug in 2024, and more permanent facilities will follow as demand grows (JERA, Japan’s power utility, is heavily involved in ammonia supply chains). In Europe, ports like Rotterdam and Antwerp have announced studies into ammonia bunkering, and Norway’s ammoniaport initiatives are linking to their green ammonia projects. The Dampier trials in Western Australia suggest that region (with its Pilbara renewable projects) could become an ammonia bunker hub for Asia-Pacific traffic. The development of ammonia bunker vessels is also on the horizon – likely small gas carriers adapted to deliver ammonia fuel ship-to-ship. No dedicated ammonia bunker barge exists yet, but it is reasonable to expect designs emerging by the later 2020s once there are enough ammonia-fueled vessels to serve.

• Fuel cost and availability: One challenge is that green ammonia today is very costly compared to fuel oil – several times more expensive on an energy basis. However, analyses suggest that with scaling and carbon pricing, ammonia could approach parity in the 2030s. Policy support (e.g. EU shipping emission rules, clean fuel mandates) could accelerate this. Companies like Maersk Tankers and others are even investing in future ammonia supply; a consortium of shipping interests reportedly has ordered $16 billion of ammonia-fueled vessels betting on ammonia’s availability (including participants from Greece and Japan). This indicates confidence that fuel will be there when these ships launch.

On the regulatory side for fuel, ammonia will be subject to the same MARPOL considerations as other fuels (e.g. it will have to be free of sulfur, which it inherently is, and any ammonia slip would likely be regulated as an emission). The IMO is also discussing how to account for carbon-free fuels in its carbon intensity index (CII) and emission trading schemes – ammonia-fueled ships should score very favorably in EEDI/EEXI since they have no CO₂ from combustion.

In summary, as of 2025 the groundwork is being laid: initial ammonia fuel demand from ships is small (just a handful of demos), but the supply side is mobilizing, and key bunkering locations are in planning stages. The industry “snapshot” is that we are at the cusp of the first real adoption – with ~25 big ships on order, a few pioneering vessels proving concepts, and safety/regulatory barriers being addressed one by one.

Outlook Through 2030

Adoption of Ammonia-Fueled Ships

Looking ahead to 2030, ammonia is poised to move from demonstration to an early adoption phase in the maritime sector. How quickly and widely it will be adopted depends on technology readiness, fuel availability, economics, and regulations. Several forecasts from credible sources can guide expectations:

• The International Energy Agency (IEA), in its Net Zero 2050 roadmap update, projects that ammonia will become the primary zero-carbon fuel for shipping by mid-century. In that scenario, ammonia grows from essentially 0% of ship fuel today to about 6% of the international shipping energy mix by 2030. This implies a few percent of the fleet – likely dozens of large ships – running on ammonia within this decade. By 2035, IEA sees ammonia at ~15% share, and by 2050 up to 44% of shipping energy coming from ammonia. These figures, while ambitious, highlight that ammonia could dominate long-term, but near-term uptake (a single-digit percentage of fuel by 2030) is relatively modest.

• Classification society DNV has also analyzed ammonia in its maritime forecasts. DNV’s models often show a slower start but a strong post-2030 acceleration for ammonia. For example, DNV estimated ammonia bunker demand of ~2.3 million tonnes per year by 2030. To put that in perspective, 2.3 Mt is roughly 1% of marine fuel consumption (which is ~250 Mt/year fuel). By 2040, DNV foresaw ~62 Mt/year ammonia demand – a huge jump – indicating that many ships would adopt ammonia in the 2030s if infrastructure and fuel ramp up. These forecasts underscore that 2025–2030 is a preparatory period, after which ammonia could scale rapidly.

• In terms of number of ships, by 2030 we can expect on the order of 50–100 ammonia-fueled vessels in operation, under optimistic assumptions. This would include the ~25 already on order plus additional orders in the next few years. Many newbuilds being labeled “ammonia-ready” (about 150 such vessels were on order by end of 2022) might be converted to use ammonia by the late 2020s if the economics justify it. Segments like tankers and bulkers, which often operate on long-term charters, may see fleet-wide adoption if one major charterer (like a mining company or oil major) commits to ammonia across their supply chain. By 2030, it’s plausible that ammonia-fueled tankers carrying ammonia (essentially “prototype” ships that both carry and burn ammonia) will be trading regularly – e.g. transporting green ammonia from producers to consumers and using some of the cargo as fuel for the return voyage.

• Fleet composition: Early ammonia-fueled vessels will likely be dual-fuel, meaning they can fall back to conventional fuel if ammonia isn’t available. This flexibility actually aids adoption, as it reduces risk for shipowners. Through 2030, virtually all ammonia ships will be dual-fuel designs (ammonia-capable engines that can run on VLSFO or MGO too). Perhaps by late 2030s, if ammonia is ubiquitous, some ships might be built pure ammonia-fuel (no diesel system), but not by 2030. Also, smaller vessels (tugs, offshore supply, possibly short-sea cargo ships) might increasingly trial ammonia-fueled fuel cell systems, especially if local emissions rules push ports to zero-emission harbor craft by 2030 (Singapore has a goal for all harbor craft to be on low-carbon energy by 2030, for example, which could include ammonia fuel for tugboats or pilot boats).

Expansion of Ammonia Carrier Fleet and Trade

If ammonia becomes a widely used fuel, there will be a need for significantly more ammonia transport capacity – essentially a new “bunkering supply chain” on a global scale. We already see signs of this expansion:

• Over 50 large ammonia-capable gas carriers (VLACs) were ordered in 2023–2024 as noted. These will be delivered between 2025 and 2027, and initially many will carry LPG. But as green ammonia production projects come online (late this decade), these vessels can switch to ammonia cargo. By 2030, the global ammonia carrier fleet could easily double in number/tonnage compared to today. Industry analyses indicate that to meet projected hydrogen-import needs (in ammonia form) for countries like Japan and South Korea, hundreds of new ammonia carriers will be required by 2050. For nearer term, the International Chamber of Shipping estimated that about 70 new ammonia/hydrogen carriers will be needed by 2030 just to start moving the first 5 million tonnes of hydrogen-equivalent ammonia trade. This suggests a major build-up in the late 2020s.

• Infrastructure build-out: Along with ships, export/import terminals for ammonia are being built or expanded. For example, in the Middle East (Oman, Saudi) and Australia, large ammonia export hubs are planned, with special loading jetties and storage for bunker-grade ammonia. On the import side, Japan is investing in port facilities to receive ammonia (to co-fire in thermal power plants as well as for future ship fuel bunkers). Europe’s big ports (Rotterdam, Hamburg) are also planning ammonia import terminals as part of their hydrogen economy strategy. By 2030 we are likely to see a half-dozen major ammonia trade routes established – e.g., Middle East to Japan, Australia to Singapore/Japan, Middle East to Europe, Chile to Europe, U.S. Gulf to Europe/Asia. Each of these routes will employ dedicated ammonia carriers. Some of those carriers may themselves consume a bit of their cargo as fuel (especially if they are ammonia-fueled). The concept of “Ammonia shuttle tankers” might emerge, analogous to LNG shuttles that also use boil-off gas for fuel.

• If ammonia bunkering at ports becomes common by late 2020s, some existing ammonia carriers could serve double-duty as bunker suppliers. For instance, a coastal ammonia tanker could deliver a cargo to an industrial client, then call at a port to bunker an ammonia-fueled ship before returning. Alternatively, purpose-built bunker barges (likely small pressurized ammonia vessels) will operate in ports. Japan’s A-Tug has already shown truck-to-ship bunkering, but for larger volumes, ship-to-ship will be needed. By 2030, key bunkering hubs (Singapore, Rotterdam, Fujairah, maybe Shanghai) might each host a couple of ammonia bunker vessels and associated storage tanks.

In terms of fleet operators, those who have invested early (Navigator, MOL, BW, etc.) will probably expand their fleets further. We might also see new entrants focusing on ammonia transport, perhaps backed by energy companies (e.g., an oil major could form a shipping arm for ammonia transport to ensure supply to its refueling stations). The major operators in 2030 will likely be those major LPG players who converted to ammonia – given LPG and ammonia might both be part of the energy mix for some time. Also, some tanker companies may pivot to ammonia transport (for example, Maersk Tankers reportedly is interested in ammonia carriers as a future business.

One can envision by 2030 a global ammonia carrier fleet of ~200+ ships, with a total capacity well above 5 million m³, in active service. This is still small relative to the oil tanker fleet, but it’s a sizable specialized fleet. The pace of orders in 2024–2025 will be a good indicator: if orders continue at the recent clip (50+ per year), that doubling will happen even sooner.

Bunkering Infrastructure and Fuel Availability by 2030

By 2030, the supporting infrastructure for ammonia as a marine fuel is expected to reach a basic but operational state at least in key regions:

• Bunkering hubs operational – We anticipate at least a handful of major ports offering ammonia bunkering by 2030. Singapore’s goal implies they will be ready, possibly even ahead of 2030, to fuel ships like EPS’s ammonia dual-fuelers that will call there. Northwest Europe will also likely have ammonia bunkering (Rotterdam has many pilot projects, and nearby Antwerp and Hamburg with their hydrogen plans). In the Middle East, a port like Neom or Dubai might become an ammonia bunker point given local production. Japan will certainly have one or more ports (possibly Yokohama or Kobe) equipped for domestic ammonia-fueled ships and for bunkering vessels on international voyages. North America might see ammonia bunkering in the Gulf of Mexico (where there’s ammonia production and export) and perhaps on the West Coast if imports start for energy. These bunkering sites will have safety zones and trained personnel – likely starting with fueling happening at designated terminals or anchorages rather than alongside normal cargo ops, due to the safety distance needed.

• Global ammonia fuel network – The vision by 2030 is that a vessel could plan an ammonia-fueled voyage knowing that every few thousand miles there’s a port to refuel. It won’t be as ubiquitous as oil bunkers by 2030, but possibly a network connecting Asia-Pacific, Middle East, and Europe exists. The Southern Hemisphere routes (e.g., Chile to Asia) might lag behind, unless specific projects (like Chilean green ammonia exports) materialize and include bunkering facilities.

• Standards and training – By 2030, we expect comprehensive standards for ammonia bunkering and fuel systems to be published. ISO would likely have a standard for ammonia bunkering similar to the ISO 20519 for LNG. Crew training programs and simulator modules for ammonia emergencies will be available, aided by work like LR’s human factors research on ammonia. The maritime colleges will include ammonia fuel handling in their curricula for engineers and deck officers, ensuring a pipeline of crew knowledgeable in these operations.

In terms of fuel availability, several large-scale green ammonia projects aim to start producing by 2026–2028. For example, projects in the Middle East (like NEOM’s 1.2 Mt/y plant in Saudi Arabia) could dedicate a portion to bunker fuel. The price of green ammonia may still be relatively high in 2030 (perhaps $500–$700/tonne or more, whereas energy-equivalent HFO would be ~$300/tonne if no carbon cost), but regulatory pressures (carbon pricing, fuel standards) could narrow the gap. Additionally, blue ammonia (made from natural gas with CCS) could be available at larger scale and somewhat lower cost as a transition fuel in the 2020s. Countries with cheap gas and CO₂ storage (like Qatar, UAE, maybe the US) are eyeing blue ammonia exports to meet early demand.

Thus, by 2030, a ship owner choosing an ammonia-fueled vessel should be able to bunker along major trade lanes, though careful voyage planning will be needed. We likely won’t yet have ammonia available in every smaller port or in all regions (some developing regions may not have it until the 2030s progress further). But the groundwork for a global ammonia bunkering ecosystem will be in place.

Technology Maturity and Industry Outlook

On the technology front, by 2030 we expect ammonia-fueled engines to be a mature product. Multiple makers will offer ammonia engine models with power outputs covering most ship needs (from small 4-stroke gensets up to large 2-stroke main engines over 60 MW). The initial bugs and teething issues (materials, NOₓ control, fuel injection hardware) should be largely worked out within the first few years of operations (2025–2028). Engine efficiency on ammonia may improve, closing the gap with diesel operation. It’s possible by 2030 engine makers will achieve zero-carbon combustion with minimal pilot fuel – perhaps using ignition technologies like plasma ignition or hot surface ignition to reduce pilot fuel to near-zero. Emission control systems for ammonia ships (SCR, etc.) will also improve in compactness and reliability. Continuous emissions monitoring might be employed to ensure no NOₓ or NH₃ exceedances.

Fuel cell technology, while still emerging, could see its first commercial deployments by the late 2020s. If the Viking Energy ammonia gas turbine proves successful, that opens another pathway: small gas turbines burning ammonia for power, which could be used in electric-drive ships or as auxiliary power units. In any case, by 2030 the industry will have a much clearer idea of which technical approach is optimal for which vessel types (e.g., maybe large two-strokes for deep-sea, fuel cells for short-sea or auxiliary power).

Regulatory certainty should be firmed up by 2030. The interim guidelines are expected to be absorbed into a fully revised IGF Code by perhaps 2028, giving ammonia-fueled ships a permanent regulatory framework. Environmental regulations might also start favoring fuels like ammonia – for instance, IMO could adopt lifecycle GHG requirements in the 2030s that effectively push ships towards zero-carbon fuels, thus accelerating ammonia uptake after 2030.

One can also expect that competition from other alternative fuels will influence ammonia’s trajectory. In the 2020s, LNG gained traction (though it’s fossil and transitional), and methanol has surged with big orders from container lines. By 2030, we’ll see how ammonia stacks up against methanol and hydrogen. Methanol is easier to handle (liquid at ambient conditions, less toxic) but contains carbon (though can be made carbon-neutral from CO₂ capture). Hydrogen is clean but extremely low-density and requires cryogenic storage even colder than LNG. The general consensus in industry forecasts is that ammonia will take a leading role for long-range, large ship applications, whereas methanol might dominate in certain sectors (like container ships in the 2020s) and hydrogen (in liquid or compressed form) might find use in short-range or special applications. The IEA’s forecast of ammonia 44% versus methanol 3% of shipping energy by 2050, while just one scenario, exemplifies a view that ammonia ultimately wins out for deep-sea shipping.

That said, the late 2020s will be a critical proving period. If unforeseen obstacles with ammonia emerge (for example, if a major accident were to occur or if NOₓ emissions prove harder to control, or if fuel costs remain prohibitively high), shipowners might remain cautious. The adoption may then be slower, with more incremental “ammonia-ready” ships that only convert once the kinks are solved. Conversely, if early vessels perform well and regulators start penalizing carbon fuels more heavily, ammonia-fueled newbuild orders could accelerate dramatically by 2030.

In terms of sheer numbers: by 2030 the world commercial fleet will still be predominantly oil-fueled. Ammonia’s share might be small in percentage, but it will have gone from zero to a tangible presence. Perhaps dozens of ammonia-fueled deep-sea ships and a few hundred thousand tonnes of ammonia bunkered in 2030 – small compared to tens of thousands of ships using oil, but a vital beachhead for growth. The learnings, infrastructure, and confidence gained by 2030 will set the stage for rapid scaling in the 2030s, which is essential if shipping is to reach near-zero emissions by 2050.

Conclusion

Ammonia has emerged as a frontrunner in the quest for carbon-free marine fuels, offering the tantalizing benefit of zero CO₂ emissions at the point of use and a pathway to truly green shipping. Technically, ammonia fueling is feasible: engine manufacturers are delivering ammonia-capable engines, and prototypes from tugboats to offshore vessels have shown that ships can run on ammonia. The engineering challenges – from on-board storage and fuel handling to combustion optimization and emissions control – are being addressed through innovation in fuel systems, materials, and catalysts. At the same time, the long experience of safely transporting ammonia as cargo is being leveraged to develop robust safety protocols for using it as fuel.

The role of ammonia carriers is pivotal. They are not only the workhorses that will carry ammonia energy across oceans, but also the likely intermediaries to bunker ammonia-fueled ships. The existing ammonia-capable fleet (on the order of a few hundred vessels) provides a foundation, and rapid fleet expansion is already underway to meet expected demand for both industrial ammonia and bunker fuel transport. Major shipping companies and energy traders are investing in ammonia-fueled and ammonia-carrying newbuilds, effectively kickstarting the transition.

As of 2025, we stand at the threshold: the first ammonia-fueled commercial ships are being built, interim safety guidelines are in place, and pioneering demonstrations have proven concept. By 2030, we expect ammonia-fueled ships to be a reality on key trade routes, supported by initial bunkering infrastructure. Perhaps only a small fraction of the global fleet will be ammonia-powered by that time, but their numbers will be growing. If industry and regulators stay on course, ammonia could account for a notable share of newbuilds in the late 2020s and set the stage for exponential uptake thereafter – especially as green ammonia supply scales up and costs come down.

In the broader context, ammonia is not a silver bullet – it must be produced cleanly, and safety can never be taken lightly. Other solutions (like methanol, hydrogen, electrification) will also play roles in a diversified future fuel mix. Yet, ammonia offers a compelling combination of energy density, existing distribution experience, and climate impact that makes it uniquely suitable for decarbonizing long-haul shipping. The engineering journey to make ammonia a mainstream marine fuel is underway, blending caution with bold innovation. By 2030, the maritime world will have a much clearer answer as to how far ammonia can go in transforming shipping – and all signs indicate that it will be a major part of the solution for deep-sea decarbonization, driving new ship technologies, new fuel infrastructure, and a cleaner future for global trade.

Sources: Recent analyses and reports from Lloyd’s Register, DNV, ABS, the Ammonia Energy Association, IEA, and industry news have informed this outlook, providing data on fleet developments, engine R&D, and fuel projects (Fuel for Thought Ammonia Marine Fuel | LR) ( INTERVIEW: Navigator, GCMD bullish about ammonia carrier fleet, bunkering potential | S&P Global ) (Which Shipowners Are Choosing Ammonia?) (IEA sees ammonia as shipping's go-to solution for reaching net zero by 2050 - Splash247) .