Clean Marine Fuels Are an Enormous Market Opportunity for U.S. Biofuels and Ag—Don’t Let It Sink

October 13, 2025

Print This Article Share it With Friends

by Geoff Cooper (Renewable Fuels Association) There’s an old saying in politics that suggests “if you’re not at the table, you’re on the menu.” Sure, the adage is overused and a bit cliché. But it aptly describes events that will be occurring in London this week, the outcomes of which could have important long-term consequences for the future competitiveness of America’s renewable producers and farmers.

Diplomats from around the world will meet in England’s capital city October 14–17 to vote on whether to adopt a new set of international regulations focused on reducing GHG emissions from oceangoing ships. And whether the interests of U.S. fuel producers, farmers, and shippers are at the table—or on the menu—remains to be seen.

This proposed regulatory program, developed by the International Maritime Organization (IMO), is known as the “Net-Zero Framework” and operates similarly to a low carbon fuel standard for on-road fuels (like those already in place in California, Oregon, Washington, and Canada). In accordance with annual standards, ships must gradually reduce their GHG emissions over time by using lower-carbon fuels in place of traditional fossil-based marine fuel. Ship operators who use fuels with lifecycle carbon intensity values below the annual standard will generate tradeable and bankable credits, while ships that exceed the annual carbon intensity threshold will generate deficits. Those deficits must be offset by acquiring credits from over-compliant shippers and/or by paying into a proposed IMO Net-Zero Fund, which will be used to financially reward low-emission ships, support research and innovation, and for other purposes. Marine shipping companies around the world, including U.S. businesses, have voiced their support for the IMO program.

The U.S. ethanol industry sees the IMO Net-Zero Framework as an enormous potential market opportunity for American-made renewable fuels produced from American-grown crops like corn, sorghum, and soybeans. How enormous? Well, the ships that would be subject to the IMO regulations typically consume roughly 70–80 billion gallons of fuel per year worldwide. To put that in perspective, total U.S. ethanol production last year was 16.1 billion gallons. Even if U.S. ethanol captured just 5 percent of the global maritime fuel market, it would equate to a game-changing demand boost of 4–5 billion gallons, while simultaneously increasing corn demand by 1.5 billion bushels or more. Just imagine the economic impact that this sort of new demand would have on the rural communities where ethanol is produced and corn is grown.

Today, most (roughly 93 percent) marine fuel is petroleum-based fuel oil and diesel/gas oil (“bunker fuels”), while about 6 percent is liquified natural gas (LNG). Meanwhile, considerably less than 1 percent of current maritime fuel needs are met with biofuels or other low-carbon alternative fuels. Adoption of the Net-Zero Framework would change that—and change it quickly.

According to Department of Energy (DOE) analyses, U.S. corn ethanol used for maritime fuel could reduce GHG emissions by 61 percent compared to the traditional fossil-based marine fuels being used today. DOE’s research also shows a 66 percent GHG reduction for U.S. soy biodiesel used as marine fuel and a 60 percent reduction for soy-based renewable diesel. That means ships using low-cost, American-made ethanol, biodiesel, and renewable diesel could generate credits and easily comply with the annual IMO standards (which, if approved, are set to take effect in 2027), through at least 2038. U.S.-produced LNG and biogas would also serve as attractive options under the Net-Zero Framework.

The IMO program represents an unprecedented opportunity for ensuring American energy dominance in an emerging global market, leveraging existing infrastructure and investments, and enhancing the economic resiliency of U.S. agriculture and rural communities.

Thus, we were more than a little surprised when Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick, Secretary of Energy Chris Wright, and Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy issued a statement in August stating that the Trump Administration “unequivocally rejects this proposal before the IMO.” The statement also encouraged other IMO member countries to vote against the proposal this week.

The administration’s opposition appears rooted in its notion that the IMO framework would “preclude the use of proven technologies such as liquefied natural gas (LNG) and biofuels.” We don’t see it that way. Again, according to DOE’s own analysis, U.S. ethanol—the lowest-cost alternative fuel available at scale worldwide—would be an incredibly competitive marine fuel option under the program. Major players in the marine engine and shipping industries are already acknowledging ethanol’s potential. Indeed, one marine engine manufacturer recently called adoption of the Net-Zero Framework “a beautiful case for those who have ethanol capabilities installed already” due to ethanol’s “handling benefits, growing availability and competitive pricing.”

But if U.S. leaders leave the table, they will most certainly cede this important market opportunity to our biofuel and agriculture competitors in Brazil, China, and Europe. They’ll also leave a leadership void that proponents of uneconomical, unproven, fantasy fuel technologies will be all too happy to fill.

And so, as U.S. leaders descend on London this week, we are sending a simple but urgent message: Please, keep America’s renewable fuel industry at the table. And off of the menu. READ MORE

Related articles

Maritime industry shift to biofuels could open $10 billion revenue door (Brownfield Ag News; includes AUDIO)
Maersk Tests Adding Ethanol to Methanol to Enlarge Fuel Availability (Maritime Executive)
U.S. threatens global shipping over new carbon tax: Port fees, denied entry loom as nations gather for IMO vote (Freight Waves)
Taking Action to Defend America from the UN’s First Global Carbon Tax – the International Maritime Organization’s (IMO) “Net-Zero Framework” (NZF) (U.S. State Department)
US and EU Spar Ahead of Vote to Cut Global Shipping Emissions (Bloomberg)
Maritime biofuel regulations could increase crop prices -- Proposal would force ships to replace traditional fuel with low-carbon alternatives, lifting corn, soybean, canola prices (Western Producer)

Excerpt from Brownfield Ag News: A renewable energy company says the expanded use of biodiesel and biomethane in the maritime industry could be a game changer for the ag industry.

Ben Kruger, senior vice president with Roeslein Renewables says the market could grow to 25 million metric tons by 2030. “It’s possible it could create demand that is as much as $5 to $10 billion of revenues for rural economies for fuel.”

Next week, the International Maritime Organization will be voting to finalize its Net-Zero Framework, requiring large ocean-going vessels to cut greenhouse gas emissions starting in 2027. Kruger says BioLNG, a fuel produced from manure, crop residue and food wase, and biodiesel have shown to decrease GHG emissions.

He says the opportunity could not come at a better time to help improve the financial situation for ag producers. “You could have a market that is as big or bigger than the current amount of soybeans that our country had been exporting to China. It’s enough to cover the gap that we have from China choosing to take its demand to Brazil.”

Kruger tells Brownfield “On top of that, I think the demand could not only as big as that gap, but it could create demand that is as much as 2 to 3 times the entire Iowa soybean crop for biodiesel.”

He says production could begin to ramp up in 2027. In news release, the company says if the framework is finalized markets could generate $100 to $200 billion in new farm revenue by 2050. READ MORE; includes AUDIO

Excerpt from Freight Waves: Ocean carriers for years have been pro-active in reducing harmful emissions; the largest ships account for 85% of the sector’s GHG total. About 41% of container ships on order are designed to operate with alternative fuels such as liquefied natural gas or ammonia – more than half the tonnage of container ships on order.

Nearly all ocean-going ships are built outside the U.S., mostly in China, 51%; South Korea, 28%, and Japan, 15%.

“The Administration unequivocally rejects this proposal before the International Maritime Organization and will not tolerate any action that increases costs for our citizens, energy providers, shipping companies and their customers, or tourists. The economic impacts from this measure could be disastrous, with some estimates forecasting global shipping costs increasing as much as 10% or more. We ask you to join us in rejecting adoption of the NZF at the October meeting and to work together on our collective economic and energy security.”

The statement was signed by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Secretary of Energy Chris Wright, and Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy.

In the U.S. statement, retaliatory measures against nations voting for the plan could include:

Blocking vessels from U.S. ports;
Probes and possible regulations over those nations’ anti-competitive practices;
Visa restrictions for vessel crews;
Penalties covering U.S. government contracts for new commercial ships and liquified natural gas terminals;
Additional port fees on ships owned, operated, or flagged by those countries;
Sanctions on officials sponsoring activist-driven climate policies.

“The United States will be moving to levy these remedies against nations that sponsor this European-led neocolonial export of global climate regulations. We will fight hard to protect our economic interests by imposing costs on countries if they support the NZF. Our fellow IMO members should be on notice.”

Washington had previously worked closely with the IMO on GHG regulations. The reversal is not unprecedented: The U.S. was central to the development of the International Criminal Court, but has never ratified the treaty recognizing its authority.

The new measures come as the U.S. escalates its trade war with China. Costly fees on Chinese-built and -operated cargo ships calling American ports are slated to take effect Tuesday; new tariffs more than doubling the cost of Chinese-made container cranes and other equipment are set to take effect Nov. 1.

Beijing has retaliated with port fees on U.S. shipping, also effective Oct. 14. READ MORE

Excerpt from Western Producer: Thomson (Ian Thomson, past president of Advanced Biofuels Canada) said there is not much lobbying that needs to take place in Canada. Ottawa knows the biofuel sector supports the proposed framework, and the Canadian delegation voted in favour of it at the October meeting. READ MORE