The European Union’s new FuelEU Maritime regulation set for 2025 aims to drastically reduce greenhouse gas emissions in shipping, favouring bio-LNG as a practical and scalable low-carbon fuel option amid regulatory and market challenges.

The European Union’s FuelEU Maritime regulation, which is scheduled to come into force in 2025, marks a major step forward in setting up a regulatory framework aimed at sharply decreasing the greenhouse gas (GHG) intensity of marine fuels. Basically, the plan calls for a phased reduction—starting at 2% in 2025 and aiming to reach an impressive 80% cut by 2050 compared to 2020 levels. Ships that go over these GHG thresholds will be hit with hefty fines—up to €2,400 per tonne of fuel burned beyond the limit. This tough stance really highlights the EU’s strong commitment to decarbonising maritime transport, a sector that has traditionally relied heavily on high-carbon fuels.

Now, FuelEU Maritime’s approach to tracking emissions from “well-to-wake” (that is, from the fuel’s production right through to its combustion) seems to favor bio-liquefied natural gas, or bio-LNG, because it tends to have lower upstream emissions. Honestly, this could open some pretty big doors for bio-LNG producers. Projections suggest that, by 2050, the demand for marine fuel could gobble up over 12 billion cubic meters of bio-LNG—more than half of Europe’s expected biomethane production capacity. Plus, bio-LNG has the advantage of being compatible with existing LNG infrastructure, which is a big plus. This stands in contrast to options like ammonia and methanol, which would need entirely new supply chains and bunkering facilities, making them less immediately practical right now.

Speaking of production, Europe currently employs two main routes for making bio-LNG. The first involves dedicated liquefaction plants set up right next to anaerobic digestion facilities that produce biomethane. These plants take the biomethane and turn it into bio-LNG, mainly for use in transport and maritime applications, but their capacity is still pretty modest—about 0.15 billion cubic meters as of 2024. The second pathway depends on gas-grid-based production, which relies on certification systems to confirm the renewable credentials of the gas. This method involves either physically liquefying green gas at terminals or using a process called reverse nomination with green gas certificates. While this second approach offers the potential for scaling up more easily, it depends heavily on establishing trustworthy cross-border certificate trading systems and clear regulatory frameworks—something still very much a work in progress.

Now, policy support plays a crucial role here—especially given the high costs of producing bio-LNG and the barriers to scaling up. It’s estimated that to meet the EU’s 2030 targets, over 1,000 biomethane plants will need to be built each year, and that kind of expansion would require roughly $80 billion in investment. Currently, the costs to produce bio-LNG—ranging between $7 and $50 per million British thermal units—are still significantly higher than fossil natural gas. But, interestingly enough, the penalties in FuelEU Maritime might motivate maritime operators to accept these higher prices, at least until bio-LNG becomes more cost-competitive.

That said, fragmentation in the market remains a real challenge. Different EU member states have varying subsidy programs and inconsistent approaches when it comes to trading biomethane certificates. Some countries allow companies to count traded certificates towards their compliance, while others impose restrictions that make it tougher to develop transparent, liquid markets for biomethane. Achieving some level of regulatory harmonisation and boosting market transparency will be key if we’re to move away from subsidies and towards a sustainable, market-driven growth model—that’s pretty clear, isn’t it?

Plus, the competitive landscape within the maritime industry will influence where bio-LNG goes. Countries like Italy and the Netherlands, which already have strong biomethane industries and well-established LNG infrastructure, are probably best positioned to lead on bio-LNG production and demand. Meanwhile, bio-LNG now faces stiff competition from alternative low-carbon fuels like ammonia and methanol. Its practical advantage—being compatible with existing LNG systems—really helps, but producers will need to focus on scaling up and reducing costs if they want to stay competitive as the market evolves, no doubt about it.

All in all, the FuelEU Maritime regulation clearly lays out a path for decarbonising Europe’s maritime industry. And bio-LNG, in this context, appears to be a key transitional fuel. Its role as part of this regulatory landscape underscores just how important coordinated policy efforts, infrastructure investment, and market mechanisms are—not to mention, the ongoing push for sustainability—to unlock bio-LNG’s full potential as a low-carbon fuel for shipping in the coming years. It’s pretty interesting, right?

Source: Noah Wire Services

Verification / Sources

Noah Fact Check Pro

The draft above was created using the information available at the time the story first emerged. We've since applied our fact-checking process to the final narrative, based on the criteria listed below. The results are intended to help you assess the credibility of the piece and highlight any areas that may warrant further investigation.

Freshness check

Score: 10

Notes: The narrative is dated September 12, 2025, and appears to be original content, with no evidence of prior publication or recycling.

Quotes check

Score: 10

Notes: No direct quotes are present in the narrative, indicating original content.

Source reliability

Score: 8

Notes: The narrative originates from Energy Connects, a reputable platform focusing on energy industry news. However, it is important to note that this is an opinion piece authored by Kateryna Filippenko, Research Director at Wood Mackenzie, which may introduce a degree of bias.

Plausability check

Score: 9

Notes: The claims regarding the FuelEU Maritime regulation and its impact on bio-LNG are plausible and align with existing industry knowledge. The narrative provides specific figures and projections that are consistent with current understanding of the sector.

Overall assessment

Veredict (FAIL, OPEN, PASS): PASS

Confidence (LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH): HIGH

Summary: The narrative is original, with no evidence of recycled content or disinformation. While it is an opinion piece, the information presented is consistent with current industry knowledge and is sourced from a reputable platform. The absence of direct quotes and the presence of specific, plausible claims further support the credibility of the content.