Shipowners can no longer treat bunkering as a last-minute decision, as Middle East conflict disruptions fragment the global marine fuel market and push refueling demand toward unfamiliar ports from Mauritius to Brazil.

Attacks in the region, including on vessels transiting the Strait of Hormuz, have forced ships onto longer journeys around Africa and into the Atlantic Basin to avoid hostilities near Hormuz and the Red Sea. That geography has rewritten the bunkering map: vessels now cannot always refuel at familiar ports, and alternative locations have emerged as de facto hubs with markedly higher prices.

"No one can treat bunkering as a routine, last-minute decision anymore," said Frederik Guttormsen, Asia Pacific president at Stolt-Nielsen, operator of a 167-tanker chemical fleet. "We're securing fuel earlier and tracking availability and lead times at key ports because the risk is now as much about prompt supply as about price."

Guttormsen spoke on the sidelines of Sibcon, the shipping conference held in Singapore, and said the disruptions are pushing both oil and bunker prices higher.

Where is refueling demand shifting?

Singapore, the world's largest ship-refueling hub, continues to grow. The clear loser is Fujairah, the UAE east coast bunker port located south of Hormuz, which vessels are tending to avoid as regional risk climbs.

Since the US-Iran war began, Sibcon participants reported higher bunkering demand at:

• Port Louis, Mauritius
• South Africa
• West Africa
• Brazil
• Sri Lanka
• Pakistan

For carriers and forwarders, the shift carries commercial weight beyond geography. Bunkering at less familiar ports can expose owners to smaller or less reputable sellers, plus wider price disparities between locations, according to the conference participants. Those differences reflect fuel sourcing, access to on-spec feedstock, and the availability of support services needed to guarantee quality and compliance — a compliance risk that lands squarely on operators' plate.

How is procurement changing?

The answer, from trading and owner executives alike, is structure. "In this market, procurement needs to be much more structured," said Kenneth Dam, executive director and global head of bunkering at TFG Marine, a major trader and supplier of ship fuels.

Dam said vessels are refueling more frequently and taking smaller volumes at each call. The logic is hedging: owners avoid locking in too much fuel at a single price and a single port when the market can move sharply between stops.

Disruptions themselves are becoming more frequent, driving vessel diversions that shift fuel demand from one location to another, said Peter Grünwaldt, head of bunkering at tanker owner Hafnia and co-CEO of bunker trader Seascale Energy. "We're making sure we have fuel available at these ports," he said.

What does this mean for costs and capacity?

For a 167-tanker operator like Stolt-Nielsen, the operational change is concrete: fuel is now secured earlier, with availability and lead times tracked port by port rather than assumed. For the wider market, the fragmentation implies wider spreads between hubs, higher delivered fuel costs on diverted routings around Africa, and elevated quality and counterparty risk at emerging ports with thinner support infrastructure.

Singapore's continued growth suggests the established hub is absorbing part of the displaced demand, but the breadth of the new locations — spanning the Indian Ocean, African coasts and South America — indicates demand is spreading rather than concentrating.

With Middle East oil flows under renewed strain from recent attacks, including strikes on vessels near Hormuz, the trajectory points to continued price pressure and further diversions. Until hostilities near the Strait of Hormuz and the Red Sea ease, shipowners should expect the fragmented bunker map — and the early procurement discipline it demands — to remain in place.