The shipping industry has a long-standing carbon problem, and it’s finally doing something about it. The International Maritime Organization has identified ammonia, biofuels, electric power, fuel cells, hydrogen, methanol, and wind as potential solutions for cutting shipping emissions, and in 2026, several of those options have moved from concept to commercial reality. Transportation consultant Thomas Witt breaks down the current state of each major alternative fuel and what it means for shippers choosing low-carbon options. Read the full analysis from Across the Ocean Shipping here.

Methanol: The Frontrunner

Of all the alternative fuels currently in commercial use, methanol has the most visible momentum. According to Maersk, 10 dual-fuel methanol vessels joined its vessel lineup during 2025, with six additional vessels scheduled for delivery in 2026. The company also completed fuel-saving initiatives on 230 of its own vessels and 150 time-chartered vessels. Methanol is easier to store than hydrogen, works in dual-fuel engines alongside conventional marine diesel, and has attracted substantial investment from the major container lines. It is no longer theoretical. Methanol-powered ships are entering commercial service now.

The trade-off is cost. Shippers on green methanol corridors currently note a 12 to 18% cost premium compared to conventional fuel. That premium is becoming more justifiable as ESG disclosure requirements tighten.

LNG: Widely Used, but a Bridge Fuel

Liquefied natural gas remains the most widely adopted alternative fuel in the maritime industry today, with 1,488 vessels powered by LNG, 846 currently in operation and 642 on order, as of January 2026. LNG produces significantly lower sulfur and particulate emissions than conventional heavy fuel oil, but it still produces CO2 and carries some methane slip risk. Most industry analysts consider it a bridge fuel, useful now, but not the long-term answer.

Ammonia: High Potential, Early Stage

Ammonia produces zero CO2 emissions when burned, making it one of the most compelling long-term options for deep-sea shipping. The challenge is that it is toxic, corrosive, and requires significant infrastructure investment at both ports and on vessels. Ammonia corridor pilots launched in January 2026 are showing a 78% reduction in well-to-wake CO2 emissions, a compelling figure, but commercial-scale deployment is still years away for most routes.

Hydrogen: Central to the Long-Term Picture

Hydrogen is central to several long-term green shipping pathways, both as a direct fuel and as a feedstock for producing green ammonia and green methanol. The European Maritime Safety Agency expects e-ammonia, e-hydrogen, e-diesel, e-methane, and e-methanol to see major scaling through the 2030s. For now, hydrogen faces significant cost and storage challenges that limit near-term commercial viability at scale in deep-sea shipping.

What This Means for Shippers

Thomas Witt emphasizes that the most practical near-term action for shippers is not necessarily switching fuels. It is asking the right questions of carriers. Which vessels in a carrier’s vessel group are dual-fuel capable? Which routes are served by green corridors? What emissions documentation is available for a given shipment? The answers to those questions will matter more each year as carbon disclosure requirements expand. The fuel shift in shipping is real and accelerating, and shippers who understand it will be better equipped to navigate both the costs and the compliance expectations ahead.