Good technical compatibility and growing engine availability.
A somewhat quieter ordering pattern can be a sign of market maturation.
Green methanol availability, price developments and yard capacity.
Focus less on headlines and more on the interplay of port profiles and crew competence.
The methanol order boom began in 2022/2023, when Maersk triggered the first wave of large container ship orders with methanol dual-fuel propulsion. At its peak, methanol orders in 2023 accounted for over 15 % of the total container ship orderbook. In 2024 and 2025, the ordering pace has slowed – not because interest is waning, but because the first wave of large orders has been absorbed and the market is entering a more selective phase.
As of the end of 2025, over 200 vessels with methanol propulsion were on order or in operation worldwide. The majority are container ships in the 8,000–16,000 TEU range, but chemical tankers, bulkers and RoRo vessels are also represented. The average delivery time is 30–36 months from order, meaning many of the vessels ordered in 2023 are being delivered in 2025/2026.
The engine platform is dominated by MAN ME-LGIM in the two-stroke segment. For four-stroke applications, Wärtsilä offers the W32 Methanol and is working on further platforms. The engine technology is considered mature: MAN has over 100 ME-LGIM engines on order or in operation. The pilot fuel share (HFO/MGO) typically sits at 3–5 %, enabling near-complete methanol utilisation in normal operation.
The critical question behind the order numbers is fuel supply. Green methanol (e-methanol from green hydrogen and captured CO2, or bio-methanol from biomass) is not yet produced in the required volumes. Global green methanol production for 2026 is estimated at approximately 1–2 million tonnes – the demand from ordered vessels alone is likely to be 5–10 million tonnes annually. This means: in the transition phase, many methanol vessels will run on grey methanol or a blend.
The price development of methanol is a central factor for economic viability. Grey methanol from natural gas currently costs approximately 300–450 USD/t. Green methanol sits at approximately 600–1,200 USD/t, with significant regional differences. The price differential between grey and green is the decisive factor for whether operators actually bunker green methanol or fall back on grey – the latter offers only minimal climate benefits (approximately 10–15 % CO2 reduction vs. VLSFO on a well-to-wake basis).
Bunkering infrastructure is growing rapidly. Rotterdam, Singapore, Shanghai, Ulsan, Antwerp and Gothenburg already offer methanol bunkering or have concrete schedules for 2026/2027. For the main trade routes (Asia-Europe, Transatlantic, intra-Asia), supply is increasingly secured. On secondary routes and tramp trades, gaps remain.
In daily operations, early operators (particularly Maersk with the first delivered methanol vessels) report smooth handling. Bunkering via conventional barge-to-ship procedures works, engines run stably, and maintenance requirements are manageable. The invisible methanol flame requires special fire detection systems (IR-based rather than optical), which must be addressed in the initial outfitting.
For spare-part planning, the growing orderbook means: the availability of ME-LGIM-specific components is improving as MAN and approved suppliers expand their capacities. Lead times for specialist components such as methanol-resistant seals and injector nozzles are currently approximately 4–8 weeks – with a declining trend.
The ordering slowdown has several causes. First: the Maersk wave has been absorbed – the 25 vessels are ordered and under construction. Second: other container lines (Hapag-Lloyd, MSC, Evergreen) are evaluating different fuel pathways and have not committed to methanol across the board. Third: uncertainty about green methanol availability is dampening the ordering willingness of operators who explicitly want to use green fuels.
In the tanker segment, interest is growing. Several medium-sized chemical and product tanker orders with methanol dual-fuel are in the pipeline. This makes sense: these vessels often already transport methanol as cargo and have corresponding safety infrastructure on board.
In the bulker segment, methanol remains a niche option. Margins are lower, and route profiles (often tramp) fit less well with the still patchy bunkering infrastructure. Here, LNG dominates as an alternative fuel option, supplemented by fuel-ready preparations.
The outlook for 2026/2027: we expect a moderate continuation of orders, driven by FuelEU Maritime compliance pressure, new methanol bunker locations and the operational experience from the first delivered vessels. A second ordering boom is possible if green methanol becomes available in larger volumes at lower prices – but this is realistically not before 2028/2029.
Your segment: Container ships and tankers have the strongest fit with methanol. Bulkers and tramp operations less so.
Your timeline: If you order in 2026/2027, delivery in 2029/2030 is realistic. By then, bunkering infrastructure will be considerably better than today.
Your fuel strategy: Plan with grey methanol as the baseline and a gradual increase in the green share. Long-term green methanol contracts at fixed prices are risky – prices will remain volatile.
Red flags: Distrust forecasts promising rapid normalisation of green methanol prices. Production is scaling more slowly than demand. Expect price volatility until at least 2030.
Free initial consultation – we analyze your situation and find the best path forward.
Request Consulting