Australian metal mining company Fortescue is set to charter up to 12 Newcastlemax vessels – giant dry bulk carriers with a deadweight tonnage of 210,000 metric tons – capable of running on ammonia from Bocimar, the pioneer in green propulsion with the Belgian shipping company CMB.TECH.
Ammonia is seen as a promising alternative fuel for zero-emission shipping. The ships are part of the fleet that Bocimar ordered from the Chinese shipyard Qingdao Beihai Shipbuilding, a state-owned entity backed by 10 billion in government support.
Transition to zero-emission shipping
Bulk carriers are the largest and most polluting category of ships. “This agreement is an important step toward establishing ammonia as a viable marine fuel and promoting the transition to zero-emission shipping,” says CEO Alexander Saverys of CMB.TECH, the maritime group owned by the Saverys family of Antwerp.
“It also sends a powerful signal to the market, particularly at a time when there is skepticism about the decarbonization of shipping: our sector can decarbonize on a large scale. All it takes is like-minded, determined partners who walk the talk.”
Of the 12 Newcastlemax vessels in Bocimar’s dry bulk division, 3 will be delivered with dual-fuel ammonia engines. They are expected to enter service by the end of this year. The remaining 9 vessels can be retrofitted to run on ammonia.
Once the entire fleet is running on ammonia, annual CO2 emissions are expected to be reduced by approximately 250,000 metric tons compared to traditional fuels.
Bunkering remains a bottleneck
Currently, green ammonia as a marine fuel is many times more expensive than conventional black fuel oil, the traditional marine diesel. However, estimates indicate that policy support, such as carbon pricing, will enable price parity between green ammonia and fossil fuels by 2035.
As of early 2025, there were 5 operational ammonia-powered ships and 30 ammonia-ready vessels. More than 146 ammonia-powered ships were on order, with deliveries expected between 2026 and 2029.
But the biggest bottleneck is that bunkering infrastructure is currently virtually nonexistent. Ports around the world are still conducting trials to determine the safest and most efficient methods for ammonia bunkering.
Because ammonia is highly corrosive to many common materials, ports must build entirely new storage tanks, pipelines, and loading systems that can withstand it. Rotterdam and Singapore are currently the most advanced in terms of ammonia bunkering.
Plus: Ammonia is toxic to humans even at low air concentrations, corrosive to the skin and eyes, and lethal at higher concentrations.
Ammonia also requires nearly three times the volume of conventional marine diesel fuel to produce the same amount of energy, reducing the range and taking up cargo space. This is a serious operational limitation for large bulk carriers that undertake voyages lasting several months.
The link to China is a sensitive issue
The ammonia bulkers, which will transport iron ore from the Pilbara in northwestern Australia, primarily to customers in China and the rest of the Asia-Pacific region, are part of the fleet that Bocimar has ordered from the Chinese shipyard Qingdao Beihai Shipbuilding.
Beihai is the leading specialist in Newcastlemaxes, with the world’s largest order book for this type of bulk carrier. The price per Newcastlemax currently ranges between 77.5 and 80.5 million dollars per ship.
Chinese shipyards can build these types of large-scale bulk carriers at a significantly lower cost than their Korean or Japanese competitors, thanks in part to lower labor costs and mass production.
One sensitive issue, however, is that the shipyard is a subsidiary of CSSC (China State Shipbuilding Corporation), which the Chinese government wholly owns through SASAC. This state agency oversees major state-owned enterprises. CSSC is one of China’s ten largest defense companies and builds both civilian and military ships.
CSSC is on the US sanctions list and has been designated by the US Department of Defense as a Chinese military company. US entities are prohibited from holding shares in CSSC-affiliated companies.
Chinese shipyards have received an estimated 91 billion dollars in direct subsidies, preferential loans, and tax breaks. European and Korean competitors, for example, have been complaining for years that they cannot compete fairly with Chinese shipyards, which can offer artificially low prices thanks to state aid.
A clear-cut pioneer
CMB.TECH has scaled up significantly in recent years. In 2025, it acquired the Norwegian bulk shipping company Golden Ocean for nearly 3 billion dollars, expanding its fleet to more than 250 vessels and making CMB.TECH is one of the largest publicly traded maritime groups in the world. Bocimar is growing alongside this as the core of the bulk operations.
At the same time, CMB.TECH is selling off older vessels and investing the proceeds in new, greener ships, with Bocimar’s ammonia carriers serving as the flagship of that strategy.
The fact that major, respected partners such as Fortescue and Japan’s Mitsui O.S.K. Lines (MOL), the world’s second-largest shipping company, have joined the effort lends credibility to the strategy.
Otherwise, the sector is divided into three camps: Maersk, which is a strong advocate of green methanol; and MSC, the world’s largest container line, which has invested heavily in an LNG-capable fleet and views LNG as a viable transition fuel that can be gradually replaced by bio-LNG.
Other major players, such as BW Group and Eastern Pacific, are consciously opting for a multi-pronged strategy, investing in both methanol and ammonia without naming a clear winner.
Of the more than 100,000 ships currently in service worldwide, the vast majority still run on heavy fuel oil (HFO) or marine diesel. But the transition is underway. Alternative-fuel ships accounted for nearly 40% of all orders placed in 2025, and the number of alternative-fuel ships is set to double over the next eight years.
