Dual-fuel fleet passes 500 ships as $200bn bet awaits fuel market

More than 500 dual-fuel containerships and vehicle carriers are now operating worldwide, and total investment in dual-fuel tonnage delivered and on order has passed $200 billion, according to the World Shipping Council's latest Dual-Fuel Fleet Dashboard, released Thursday.

The count stands at 503 ships in service as of September. That's up more than 40% from 358 a year earlier. Another 849 ships sit in the orderbook, putting the total delivered or on order at 1,352 vessels, WSC said.

Dual-fuel ships can burn either conventional marine fuels or alternatives, including renewable and lower-emission fuels. The design lets operators hedge: run on today's bunkers while keeping the option to switch as cleaner fuels become commercially available.

What's driving the numbers?

Carriers are ordering alternative-fuel-capable tonnage at strikingly different rates depending on segment. Measured by deadweight tonnage:

• Alternative-fuel ships account for 65% of containership orders
• They account for 97% of vehicle carrier orders
• Across the rest of the global fleet, the share is just 23%

The container and ro-ro segments, in other words, are carrying the decarbonization transition almost single-handedly. These are also the trades most exposed to brand-sensitive retail and automotive cargo, where shippers track emissions data in their supply chain reporting.

WSC President and CEO Joe Kramek put the investment case plainly. "The container ship and vehicle carrier industry have committed more than $200 billion to ships that can run on cleaner fuels, with more than 500 already sailing and hundreds more on the way," he said in a statement. "The investment is happening, but these shipowners need commercially competitive alternative fuels to deliver their full potential to reduce emissions."

Why are conventional orders rising too?

The dashboard shows a wrinkle: orders for conventional-fueled ships have increased compared with a year ago. WSC attributes the shift to continued uncertainty over global greenhouse gas regulation at the International Maritime Organization.

For shippers and forwarders, that matters commercially. Fuel choice feeds directly into freight rates, and a fleet split between conventional and dual-fuel tonnage complicates emissions accounting for cargo owners with scope 3 commitments. It also raises the risk of uneven surcharge structures as carriers pass through different fuel costs.

The industry is building the ships anyway, despite what industry watchers say is a lack of regulatory guidance that would accelerate the move to cleaner fuels.

What is WSC asking for?

WSC backs a global GHG measure through the IMO, in line with the organization's 2023 GHG Strategy. Such a measure would close the cost gap between conventional and alternative fuels and give international shipping clear, consistent rules, the group said.

Absent that framework, the industry faces a patchwork of regional emissions regulations — a scenario WSC says would add cost and complexity to global trade. That's a live concern for multinationals already juggling EU and Asian emissions regimes across their networks.

Kramek pressed the point. "We need a global measure with clear rules and strong, consistent enforcement that gives companies the confidence to invest in the production of cleaner fuels and the infrastructure needed to supply them," he said. "We trust IMO member states can come together to deliver that framework. Every delay means increased uncertainty, making the transition harder and costlier for the global economy."

The math behind that warning is straightforward. Ships ordered today deliver into the 2030s. If the IMO framework lands late or weak, a growing share of the orderbook — conventional and dual-fuel alike — will trade under rules nobody priced in, and the $200 billion already committed will chase a fuel market that doesn't yet exist at competitive scale.