Xylenes

HOUSTON (ICIS)–The US is taking steps that could lead to tariffs on imports of up to 50 critical minerals, many of which are used to make catalysts for key processes used by refiners and chemical producers. If the US ends up imposing the tariffs on the critical minerals, then they would take the place of the reciprocal tariffs. REFINING CATALYSTS AND AROMATICS MARKETSFluorspar is used to make hydrofluoric acid, a catalyst used in alkylation units. These units convert isobutane and propylene into alkylate, a high-octane blendstock. Cerium and lanthanum are used to make catalysts for fluid catalytic cracking (FCC) units. These units convert gas oils into gasoline and refinery grade propylene (RGP). If the US imposes tariffs on these catalysts and if the tariffs cause large enough price increases, then refiners could alter their operations to reduce their costs. If refiners lower alkylation operating rates, they may rely on other high-octane blendstock such as toluene or mixed xylenes (MX). Changes in alkylation and FCC rates would concurrently affect supply and demand for RGP. ANTIMONY AND PETChinese restrictions on antimony already have led producers to propose price increases for polyethylene terephthalate (PET), which relies on the mineral as a catalyst. If the US imposes tariffs on antimony, then it would further increase prices from the other countries that export the mineral to the US. BISMUTH AND POLYURETHANESBismuth is used as a catalyst for making polyurethanes. One such bismuth-based catalyst won an innovation award. OTHER CATALYSTSIridium, neodymium, rhodium, ruthenium, ytterbium and yttrium are all used to make catalysts, according to the US Geological Survey (USGS). Palladium and platinum are used in catalytic converters in automobiles. TIO2 AND PAINTS MARKETSThe US also considers titanium and zirconium as critical minerals. It is unclear if the US would impose tariffs on titanium metal or titanium oxide. However, the US list of critical minerals implies that the tariffs could include titanium oxide. Titanium oxide is the feedstock that is used to make titanium dioxide (TiO2), a white pigment that is used to make paints opaque. Producers of paints and coatings are already facing higher costs from US tariffs on steel. In 2023, Sherwin-Williams estimates that plastic and metal containers made up 15% of its product's costs. A tariff on titanium oxide would further increase costs for paints and coatings producers. Zirconium is a byproduct of processing mineral sands that contain titanium. TiO2 producers Tronox and Chemours operate such mines. Tronox's are in Australia and South Africa, and Chemours has mines in the US states of Florida and Georgia. FLUORSPAR AND FLUOROMATERIALSFluorspar is also the upstream feedstock for fluorochemicals and fluoropolymers. Polyurethane foams use fluorochemicals as blowing agents. Fluoropolymers include Teflon. These are becoming increasingly important in 5G equipment, semiconductor fabrication plants and lithium-ion batteries. Fluoropolymers are also used as membranes in hydrogen fuel cells and chlor-alkali plants. BARITE, CESIUM USED IN OIL PRODUCTIONBarite is used to make drilling mud. Cesium is used to make cesium formate drilling fluids, which are used by oil and gas producers. FLAME RETARDANTSAluminum and antimony are used to make flame retardants. INVESTIGATION TO PRECEDE ANY TARIFFSBefore the US imposes any tariffs on critical minerals, it will conduct an investigation under section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962. The US has used that section to impose tariffs on other products such as steel and aluminium. The scope of the investigation will include the 50 minerals deemed critical by the USGS, processed critical minerals and derivative products. Derivative products include semi-finished goods and final products "such as permanent magnets, motors, electric vehicles, batteries, smartphones, microprocessors, radar systems, wind turbines and their components and advanced optical devices", according to the order. The secretary of commerce will have 180 days to submit a final report of the investigation to the president. Recommendations will include tariffs and policies the US could adopt that would promote more production of critical minerals. LIST OF CRITICAL MINERALSThe following table shows the minerals that the US considers critical. Aluminium Magnesium Antimony Manganese Arsenic Neodymium Barite Nickel Beryllium Niobium Bismuth Palladium Cerium Platinum Cesium Praseodymium Chromium Rhodium Cobalt Rubidium Dysprosium Ruthenium Erbium Samarium Europium Scandium Fluorspar Tantalum Gadolinium Tellurium Gallium Terbium Germanium Thulium Graphite Tin Hafnium Titanium Holmium Tungsten Indium Vanadium Iridium Ytterbium Lanthanum Yttrium Lithium Zinc Lutetium Zirconium Source: USGS Insight article by Al Greenwood (Thumbnail shows a fuel pump that dispenses gasoline, which relies on critical minerals for production. Image by Shutterstock.)

17-Apr-2025

MUMBAI (ICIS)–India’s Deepak Chem Tech Ltd (DCTL) plans to set up a manufacturing complex to produce phenol, acetone and isopropyl alcohol (IPA) at a cost of Indian rupee (Rs) 35 billion ($407 million). The company will build a 300,000 tonne/year phenol unit, a 185,000 tonne/year acetone plant and a 100,000 tonne/year IPA line at Dahej in the western Gujarat state, its parent firm Deepak Nitrite Ltd (DNL) said in a statement to the Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE) on 9 April. It expects to fund the new project through a mix of debt and equity. DCTL is a wholly owned subsidiary of DNL. “The new capacity of phenol and acetone would be integrated to produce polycarbonate (PC) resins,” DNL said. In November 2024, DCTL announced plans to build a new 165,000 tonne/year PC plant in Dahej using technology from US-based engineering materials producer Trinseo. Trinseo sold its PC technology license, as well as all of its proprietary PC equipment at Stade, Germany to DCTL last year. DCTL expects to begin operations at all the new plants in the fiscal year ending March 2028. Once the plants are operational, DCTL “will be one of the most integrated producers of PC,” it said, adding that the complex will help Deepak to meet India's growing market demand for PC-based products. To make its Dahej complex fully integrated, DNL’s wholly owned subsidiary Deepak Phenolics Ltd (DPL) entered into a 15-year agreement with Petronet LNG for the procurement of 250,000 tonne/year of feedstock propylene and 11,000 tonnes/year of hydrogen in October 2024. DPL currently produces 330,000 tonnes/year of phenol, 200,000 tonnes/year of acetone and 80,000 tonnes/year of IPA at its production complex at Dahej. In March, Deepak Advanced Materials Limited (DAML), another wholly owned subsidiary of DNL, began operations at its PC compounds facility at Vadodara in the Gujarat state. This facility produces PC compounds for the electronic and mobility sectors. Separately, DCTL also plans to invest Rs2.20 billion to build a plant that will manufacture specialty fluorochemicals. DNL also plans to commission its greenfield 40,000 tonne/year methyl isobutyl ketone (MIBK) and 8000 tonne/year methyl isobutyl carbinol (MIBC) plants before September 2025. ($1 = Rs86.01)

11-Apr-2025

NEW YORK (ICIS)–2 April 2025 – dubbed ‘Liberation Day’ by US President Trump – saw a sweeping and substantial salvo of reciprocal tariffs, with a baseline tariff set at 10% but for many countries, much higher customized levels. The higher reciprocal tariffs are scheduled to come into effect on 9 April, with the baseline 10% tariff imposed on 5 April. However, as of 8 April, there is emerging optimism on the potential for trade deals following comments from US President Trump that South Korea and China want to make a deal, and from administration officials that the US is in discussions with a number of countries. The reciprocal tariff levels – which include 34% on China, 20% on the EU, 46% on Vietnam, 32% on Taiwan, 26% on India, 25% on South Korea and 24% on Japan – were very much higher than anticipated. For China, 34% in reciprocal tariffs to come into effect on 9 April would be on top of the previous 20% tariffs the US implemented in February (10%) and March (10%), catapulting additional US tariffs on China this year to 54%. Products that fall under US sectoral tariffs, such as 25% on autos and auto parts, in effect since 5 April, will be exempt from the reciprocal tariffs. Products flagged for upcoming sectoral tariffs – pharmaceuticals, semiconductors, lumber and copper – will also be exempt from reciprocal tariffs. For Canada and Mexico, the US 25% tariff will remain in place, but only for non-USMCA (US-Mexico-Canada Agreement) compliant imports. DIRECT IMPACT ON US CHEMICAL MARKETSTariffs will undoubtedly raise costs for the US chemical industry and its customers, in the form of logistics, feedstocks and components such as additives and catalysts. For certain product chains where the US is self-sufficient, the direct impact should be somewhat limited. For example, Canada is the dominant exporter of chemicals and plastics to the US, but these are primarily in the olefins chain – polyethylene (PE), polypropylene (PP), propylene and ethylene glycol (EG) – where the US is more than self-sufficient and a big net exporter. These should also be USMCA compliant and thus exempt from tariffs. Even if there was a disruption, US producers in the US Gulf Coast could ship more volumes of ethylene and propylene derivatives domestically, replacing imports from Canada – although at higher logistics costs to some locations. The aromatics chain is more complicated. The US is a large net importer of benzene, toluene, xylenes and paraxylene (PX) – the bulk of which comes from South Korea, which is being hit with a 25% reciprocal tariff. The EU also exports aromatics to the US and will be subject to a 20% tariff. The US is a major importer of methylene diphenyl diisocyanate (MDI) with China and the EU as major suppliers. With 20% in additional tariffs imposed on all China exports in two stages – February (10%) and March (10%) – on top of the existing 25% tariff on China MDI, the US tariff on MDI from China is 45%. Adding the 34% reciprocal tariff brings this to a whopping 79% tariff level by 9 April. US EXPORTS IN CROSSHAIRS FOR RETALIATIONThe bigger risk to the US is for chemical and plastics exports. The US runs a chemical trade surplus of over $30 billion, according to the American Chemistry Council. Already China has announced a 34% tariff on all US imports to go into effect 10 April, while the EU prepares €18 billion in tariffs that would go into effect 15 April. The latter, which is in retaliation for US steel and aluminium tariffs, includes US PE and other polymers and chemicals. Even as the US is a much larger goods importer than exporter, particularly with China, it is the reverse for the US chemical industry, which will bear the brunt of the impact. “US goods exports to China in 2024 were $143.55 billion. The US imports far more – $462.64 billion – but this will have an impact on the US chemical industry as we compete against producers in the Middle East and elsewhere in Asia,” said Kevin Swift, ICIS senior economist for global chemicals. “This is the first large retaliatory challenge. Let’s hope it doesn’t devolve into a swirling beggar-thy-neighbor trade war,” he added. The new China 34% tariff on imports from the US could result in a $34 billion falloff in US exports of all goods to the nation – about a 24% decline, according to an analysis by Swift. Since 2018, the year that the first US-China trade war kicked off by the first Trump administration, US commodity chemical net exports have surged 88% to 2024, and are thus far more exposed to retaliatory tariffs than ever before. During this period, US exports of commodity chemicals and polymers to the world have increased 28% while imports declined 5%, according to the ICIS Supply and Demand Database. Top US chemical and polymers exports are linear low density PE (LLDPE), high density PE (HDPE), EG, polyvinyl chloride (PVC), caustic soda, methanol, low density PE (LDPE), vinyl chloride monomer (VCM), polypropylene (PP) and styrene. If China puts an additional 34% import tariff on US PE, the economics for exports do not work, even with the substantial US cost advantage. “With a 34% tariff on top of the current 6.5% tariff, US PE margins go negative at current production costs. US PE demand has been weak so far this year, particularly exports, down 8.1% year on year,” said Harrison Jacoby, director of PE at ICIS. “We see rebalancing of trade – less US PE into China, more to Europe. The industry already saw the start of this trend in 2024, with more US PE shifting from China to Europe. Now we need to see how Europe reacts on 13 April with its proposed retaliation targeting US PE, if they will increase their current 6.5% duty,” he added. In retaliation for US 25% tariffs on steel and aluminium imports that took effect on 12 March, the EU plans a new round of tariffs on around €18 billion of imports from the US, which includes high density PE (HDPE), linear low density PE (LLDPE) and low density PE (LDPE) along with a range of plastics and rubber products. This would be implemented in mid-April following a consultation period. The US is also a major exporter of PE to Europe. Total US PE exports to China and Europe were 32% of total US PE exports in 2024, according to the ICIS Supply and Demand Database. “The big picture is there are two low-cost PE regions that are the only net exporters – the US and Canada and the Middle East. These regions will continue to fill global production shortfalls, optimizing to mitigate the impact of tariffs,” said Jacoby. However, demand growth is likely to fall as a trade war will only further weaken demand for all goods and services, he added. Retaliatory tariffs on key US chemical exports could also have ripple effects throughout the chain. For example, retaliatory tariffs on US PE could lower cracker operating rates, in turn reducing crude C4 (CC4) feedstock coming out of those crackers for butadiene (BD) production. “I am concerned about impacts on our suppliers and customers. If there’s an impact on the ethylene industry which causes rate reductions because exports [of derivatives such as PE] get tougher, that would have an indirect effect on our supply of CC4s,” said Ed Dineen, CEO of BD producer TPC Group, in an interview with ICIS at the International Petrochemical Conference (IPC), hosted by the American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM). HIT TO KEY END MARKETSKey chemical end markets such as housing, automotive and durable goods will be burdened with higher costs with these reciprocal tariffs. Demand in these sectors has already been struggling for more than two years. “The economic law of demand holds that as prices of a good rise, demand for the good will fall,” said Kevin Swift, ICIS senior economist for global chemicals. US sectoral tariffs of 25% on steel and aluminium, in effect since March, will add nearly $1,500 to the cost of a light vehicle and result in lower sales for the automotive industry, he estimated. This would push down sales by about 525,000 units if the cost is fully pushed through, said Swift. In addition, 25% sectoral tariffs on autos and auto parts will put further upward pressure on pricing, in turn lowering demand further. The ultimate price impact, and not just for automotive, will also depend on consumer demand. It is likely the higher costs from tariffs will be shared by producers, suppliers and consumers. Housing costs are also poised to rise, with sectoral tariffs on steel and aluminum, and signaled tariffs on lumber and copper, along with reciprocal tariffs that will cover other imported goods such as vinyl floors, furniture, carpets and appliances. Consumer confidence is unlikely to improve anytime soon. The Conference Board’s consumer confidence reading in March for future expectations plunged 9.6 points, to 65.2, the lowest in 12 years. Inflation expectations for the next 12 months rose from 5.8% in February to 6.2% in March as consumers were concerned about high prices and the impact of tariffs. One silver lining is that other countries may lower their tariffs and trade barriers in response to US reciprocal tariffs, opening markets for US exports and in turn leading to the US lowering its reciprocal tariff levels. WALL STREET CUTS EARNINGS ESTIMATESIn the meantime, Wall Street is making sizeable cuts to US chemical company profit forecasts, with tariffs expected to squeeze margins in the form of higher costs as well as lower demand. “Uncertainty over tariffs has weakened US PE/PP trading volumes and we expect shifts in trade flows to create near-term negative supply chain/production impacts, which could be negative for Q1,” said UBS analyst Joshua Spector in a 7 April research note. “We are lowering estimates and price targets to better reflect a global [slowdown] that spills into 2026 and 2027,” said Jefferies analyst Laurence Alexander in a 7 April research note. “While we could easily be proven wrong by a couple of tweets (either escalating further or shifting from dramatic action to symbolism, bluff and rhetoric), we are adjusting our framework to reflect the current state of policy,” said Alexander. THE BIG PICTUREUltimately, US President Trump aims to engineer a “once in a hundred year pendulum shift” in the global economy and geopolitical order, said Rana Foroohar, global business columnist at the Financial Times, at the IPC hosted by the AFPM. “Tariffs are for real. Tariffs are here to stay…Trump sees the global economy as a giant gaming table, with the US consumer market as the biggest chip to put down. And he is going to use it in ways we haven’t seen in half a century, if not more,” said Foroohar. “This imbalance between Wall Street and Main Street – between the asset growth economy and the income-led economy – is really at the heart of what’s going on today…Cheaper is going away [and] place matters,” Foroohar added. Visit the ICIS Topic Page: US tariffs, policy – impact on chemicals and energy Infographics by Yashas Mudumbai Insight article by Joseph Chang and Yashas Mudumbai

08-Apr-2025

LONDON (ICIS)–Regulatory changes and a growing focus on higher quality packaging-suitable grades – possibly at the expense of other grades – could bring about substantial change to the recycled low density polyethylene (R-LDPE) market in the next 12 to 24 months, making short-term forecasting increasingly challenging. Waste Shipment Framework will impact bale availability Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation (PPWR) brings mandatory targets to the sector Packaging-driven demand requires more innovation, investment REGULATION Regulation is having an impact across all recycled polymer markets, but for R-LDPE, one of the immediate areas of interest is the changes to the Waste Shipment Framework which looks to introduce an all-out ban on shipments of plastic waste to non-OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) countries from November 2026 until at least May 2029. Information on a European Commission website states: 'Exporting plastic waste, including clean, non-hazardous waste (which is destined for recycling) (B3011) will be subject to the “prior notification and consent procedure”. This requirement will apply from 21 May 2026.' The website then goes on to outline specific rules for non-OECD countries: 'Starting on 21 November 2026, there will be a complete ban on such exports until 21 May 2029. After this period, non-OECD countries interested in importing plastic waste are invited to notify the European Commission and demonstrate their capacity to manage such waste in an environmentally sound manner, in order to be included in the list of non-OECD countries to which plastic waste may be exported from the EU. The request to import EU plastic waste can only cover non-hazardous plastic waste (B3011).' Non-OECD countries wishing to continue to import non-hazardous waste after November 2026 had to submit requests to the Commission by 21 February 2025, with over 20 countries doing so including the likes of Indonesia, which regularly imports R-LDPE bales from Europe. Several of those countries included B3011 in their requests but sources canvassed in the R-LDPE market over March said they are preparing that exports of R-LDPE to non-OECD countries will be banned from November next year, leading to more waste to be processed in Europe. With growing concerns about recent bankruptcies and closures of both mechanical and chemical recyclers in Europe, some R-LDPE market participants have questioned if the region will have sufficient recycling capacity to handle any additional plastic waste which would usually have been exported after the ban comes into effect. Another question recyclers have is what will this do to the price of feedstock bales in the region. March saw increases in prices for both rigid thick film post-consumer natural bales and flexible 98/2 post-commercial natural bales due to more limited availability and growing demand from downstream pellets going into the packaging sector. If exports of waste are banned from next year, this could see more bales available in the European market, which would increase availability. The PPWR has also lead to concerns voiced previously from some R-LDPE recyclers over certain reuse targets and what that means for pallet wrap and collation film. The Commission has addressed concerns about this and other targets, with an assessment launched at the end of 2024 but it will be some time until any clarity on these targets is given, leaving the market guessing for now. SHIFTING PELLET MARKET Those bale price increases in March were driven by the growing demand for higher quality natural transparent pellets to serve the packaging sector. There is a growing demand for low melt flow index (MFI) pellets, typically between 0.3-0.8 and produced from thick film/shrink hood bales, and high-MFI pellets typically between 1.5-2.0 and produced from stretch film bales. High MFI pellets also contain more linear low density (LLDPE) material, which can increase the value of the pellets due to the improved technical qualities. Many sources are looking forward to the Plastics Recycling Show Europe (PRSE) at the start of April to get a better view of the developments in the pellet sector. One market source commented that the industry is seeing a period of ‘professionalization’ in terms of technology, investment and partnerships being formed to address what is hoped to be growing demand from the packaging sector, driven by the mandatory recycled content targets coming into effect in 2030 as laid out in the PPWR. But what that means for mixed coloured pellet demand and production is not clear. Market activity appears more limited compared to that of the packaging-grade related markets, also not helped by overall lower demand from the construction sector, which is one of the main end-use markets. Even recyclers that used to put some production capacity into the mixed coloured sectors have stopped doing so as they focus on natural grades. UNCERTAIN DEMAND OUTLOOK Those producers producing the natural transparent pellet grades have seen good demand during 2025 to date, in some cases above expectations, but there is also a question of how much further this demand will increase, especially if pellet prices rise due to higher feedstock costs. Less post-commercial and post-consumer waste as a result of the wider macroeconomic uncertainty in Europe means the good quality bales are increasingly hard to come by while demand from pellet could keep rising. But if bale prices rise too high, recyclers will find it hard to pass costs down the chain. The main reason is linked to the impact of the PPWR – or the lack of it currently. Even though the regulation has been signed into law, most R-LDPE participants do not expect to see real impact on demand until much closer to the 2030 deadline, possible 12-24 months before. So while demand for natural pellets is good right now, some recyclers fear that it would not take much for brands and fast moving consumer goods companies (FMCGs) to move away from R-LDPE back to virgin if recycled prices get too high. The ongoing discussion on tariffs on imports of virgin PE from the US to the EU is also a point of discussion in the R-LDPE market, mainly because of the level of uncertainty impacting the wider PE market. Of all the US PE imports into the EU, LDPE is the lowest as the EU has higher domestic production, but around 35% of EU PE demand was satisfied by imports from January to November 2024 according to new analysis of the ICIS Supply & Demand database. The direct impact on the R-LDPE market caused by any tariffs will be minimal at best, but it is the uncertainty that this could cause the overall PE market that R-LDPE recyclers and buyers will have to confront when they are trying to make their plans for the rest of the year and beyond. Coupled with the uncertainty around regulation and the move up the value chain that several players are starting to make, the R-LDPE market will need to remain agile enough to deal with whatever unforeseen circumstances it finds itself in over the coming months and years. Insight by Matt Tudball

28-Mar-2025

LONDON (ICIS)–Shell is looking to improve performance of its chemicals asset base by exploring strategic partnerships in the US and closures in Europe, the UK-based oil and gas major said on Tuesday. Presented at the firm’s capital markets day on Tuesday, Shell is looking to improve returns and cut capital spent on chemicals by 2030, through “high-grading” and closing select assets in Europe and potentially reducing its equity in US operations. The Wall Street Journal reported earlier this month that the company had tapped Morgan Stanley to conduct a strategic review of its chemicals portfolio, with potential sales of US and European assets on the table. The company did not comment on the reports in early March, but the focus on partnerships for its US chemicals assets points to the company retaining stakes in operations such as its Pennsylvania cracker and polyolefins complex. Shell has already rationalised part of its chemicals footprint in Asia with the sale of its Singapore refinery and petrochemicals assets to CAGPC, a partnership between Chandra Asri and Glencore Asian Holdings. The deal is expected to close in the first quarter of 2025. The firm has also announced some smaller closures in Europe over the last few years, including its orthoxylene and paraxylene assets in Wesseling, Germany, and its methyl ethyl ketone (MEK) production in Pernis, Netherlands. The Wesseling assets closed in 2023, with the Pernis measures expected in March-May this year. A spokesperson for the company declined to comment on what European assets are currently under review, or the timeline for the process. The capital market day strategy also includes a more substantial push on liquefied natural gas (LNG), targeting a 4-5% annual increase in sales through to 2030. The company is also looking to increase upstream production with annual oil and gas sales targeted to grow 1% to 2030, meaning that its 1.4 million barrel/day production levels over the next half-decade. “We want to become the world’s leading integrated gas and LNG business… while sustaining a material level of liquids production,” said CEO Wael Sawan. The producer is also looking ramp up cost-cutting, from $2 billion – 3 billion by the end of this year compared to 2022 levels, to $5 billion to $7 billion by the end of 2028. Thumbnail photo source: Shell

25-Mar-2025

SAN ANTONIO (ICIS)–Here is a summary of chemical market stories, heading into this year’s International Petrochemical Conference (IPC). Hosted by the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM), the IPC takes place on 23-25 March in San Antonio, Texas. AFPM ‘25: US tariffs, retaliation risk heightens uncertainty for chemicals, economies The threat of additional US tariffs, retaliatory tariffs from trading partners, and their potential impact is fostering a heightened level of uncertainty, dampening consumer, business and investor sentiment, along with clouding the 2025 outlook for chemicals and economies. AFPM '25: New US president brings chems regulatory relief, tariffs The new administration of US President Donald Trump is giving chemical companies a break on regulations and proposing tariffs on the nation's biggest trade partners and on the world. AFPM ’25: Shippers weigh tariffs, port charges on global supply chains Whether it is dealing with on-again, off-again tariffs, new charges at US ports for carriers with China-flagged vessels in their fleets, or booking passage through the Panama Canal, participants at this year's IPC have plenty to talk about. AFPM ’25: LatAm chemicals face uncertain outlook amid oversupply, trade policy woes Latin American petrochemicals face ongoing challenges from oversupplied markets and poor demand, with survival increasingly dependent on government protectionist measures. AFPM ’25: US propane supply long; ethane prices rising The US petrochemical industry is seeing a glut of upstream propane supply and rising prices for key feedstock ethane. AFPM ’25: Weak demand takes toll on US ethylene as supply concerns ease Persistently poor demand, underpinned by worries over global tariff policies and a sluggish US economy are putting downward pressure on US ethylene prices. AFPM ’25: US propylene demand weak despite recent supply disruptions Weak demand in the US propylene market has counterbalanced recent supply disruptions, pushing spot prices and sentiment lower. AFPM ’25: US BD supply lengthening; rubber demand optimistic US butadiene (BD) has been rather balanced in Q1 despite a couple of planned turnarounds and cracker outages limiting crude C4 deliveries, but supply is expected to lengthen, and demand is cautiously optimistic. AFPM ’25: US aromatics supply ample amid low demand Domestic supply of aromatics is ample and demand is relatively poor. AFPM ’25: US methanol exports, bunker fuel demand to grow, but domestic demand sentiment low US methanol participants’ outlook on the key downstream construction and automotive sectors has dimmed, but optimism continues for export growth and bunker fuel demand. AFPM ’25: Tariffs, weak demand weigh on US base oils Uncertain US trade policy paired with already weak finished lubricant demand weighs on base oil market sentiment. AFPM ’25: Trade policies dampening outlook for Americas PE The US polyethylene (PE) industry started 2025 with some early successes amid the backdrop of lower year-on-year GDP growth. Now, with the impact of volatile tariff policy on top of the aforementioned lower GDP forecast, the outlook for PE has fallen. AFPM '25: Tariffs to shape the trajectory of caustic soda in US and beyond The North American caustic soda market is facing continued headwinds coming via potential tariffs, a challenged PVC market and planned and unplanned outages. US President Donald Trump has threatened to implement tariffs on Mexico, Canada and the EU as well as on products that are directly tied to caustic soda but has delayed enactment on multiple occasions. These delays have bred uncertainty in the near-term outlook, impacting markets in the US and beyond. AFPM '25: US PVC to face headwinds from tariffs, economy The US polyvinyl chloride (PVC) market is facing continued headwinds as tariff-related uncertainties persist. The domestic PVC market is expected to grow between 1-3% in 2025 but continues to face challenges in housing and construction. Meanwhile, export markets continue to wrestle with the threat of protectionist policies and tariffs at home and abroad. AFPM ’25: US spot EG supply balanced-to-tight on heavy turnaround season; EO balanced Supply in the US ethylene glycols (EG) market is balanced-to-tight as the market is undergoing a heavy turnaround season. The US ethylene oxide (EO) market is balanced as demand from derivatives including surfactants is flat. AFPM ’25: US PET prices facing upward price pressure on tariffs, China’s antimony exports ban, peak seasonUS polyethylene terephthalate (PET) prices continue to face volatility as the market assesses the impacts of potential tariffs on imports from Canada and Mexico. AFPM ’25: US PP volatility persists amid weak demand The US polypropylene (PP) market is facing weak demand, raw material volatility and tariff uncertainty. AFPM ’25: US ACN rationalization inevitable amid declining demand Production of acrylonitrile (ACN) in the US is being reduced or shuttered as already weak demand continues to fall and as downstream plants are shutting down. Changes to the supply/demand balance, trade flows and tariff uncertainties are weighing on market participants. AFPM ’25: US nylon trade flows shifting amid global capacity changes, tariff uncertainties US nylon imports and exports are changing as capacity becomes regionalized and geographically realigned. The subsequent changes to trade flows, price increase initiatives and tariff uncertainties are weighing on market participants. AFPM ’25: US ABS, PC face headwinds from closure and oversupply The US acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS) and polycarbonate (PC) markets are lackluster and oversupplied. Demand remains soft kicking off the year, and the closure of INEOS’s Addyston, Ohio, ABS facility and tariff uncertainties continue to pressure ABS and PC markets. AFPM ’25: US styrene market facing oversupply amid weak demand, trade uncertainty The US styrene market is transitioning from a period of supply tightness to one of potential oversupply, driven by weak derivative demand and the recent restart of Styrolution’s Bayport, Texas, unit. This return to full operation, coupled with subdued demand, suggests ample supply in the short term. AFPM ’25: US PS faces slow start to 2025 amid weak demand Domestic polystyrene (PS) demand started the year off weaker than expected, with limited restocking and slower markets. AFPM ’25: US phenol/acetone face challenging outlook heading into Q2 US phenol and acetone are grappling with a lot of moving pieces. AFPM ’25: US MMA facing new supply amid volatile demand heading into Q2 US methyl methacrylate (MMA) is facing evolving supply-and-demand dynamics. Roehm's new plant in Bay City, Texas, is in the final stage of start-up, but is not in operation yet. There is anticipation of sample product being available in Q2 for qualification purposes. AFPM ’25: US epoxy resins in flux amid duties, tariffs heading into Q2 US epoxy resins is grappling with changes in duties and trade policies. AFPM ’25: Acetic acid, VAM eyes impact of tariffs on demand, outages on supply The US acetic acid and vinyl acetate monomer (VAM) markets are waiting to see what impact shifting trade and tariff policy will have on domestic and export demand, while disruptions are beginning to tighten VAM supply. AFPM '25: US etac, butac, glycol ethers markets focus on upcoming paints, coatings demand US ethyl acetate (etac), butyl acetate (butac) and glycol ethers market participants are waiting to see if the upcoming paints and coatings season will reinvigorate demand that has been in a long-term slump. AFPM ’25: Low demand for US oxos, acrylates, plasticizers countering feedstock cost spikes US propylene derivatives oxo alcohols, acrylic acid, acrylate esters and plasticizers have been partly insulated from upstream costs spikes by low demand, focusing outlooks on volatile supply and uncertain demand. AFPM ’25: N Am expectations for H2 TiO2 demand rebound paused amid tariff implementations After initial expectations of stronger demand for titanium dioxide (TiO2) in the latter half of 2025, the North American market is now in flux following escalating tariff talks. AFPM ’25: US IPA, MEK markets look to supplies, upstream costs US isopropanol (IPA) market has an eye on costs as upstream propylene supplies are volatile, while the US methyl ethyl ketone (MEK) market is evaluating the impact of global capacity reductions. AFPM ’25: US melamine prices continue to face upward pressure on duties, tight supply US melamine is experiencing upward pricing pressure, thanks in large part to antidumping and countervailing duty sanctions and tight domestic supply. AFPM '25: US polyurethane industry braces for cascade effect of tariffs US polyurethane prices for toluene diisocyanate (TDI), methylene diphenyl diisocyanate (MDI) and a variety of polyether and polyester polyols continue to see increase pressure as the market assesses the impacts of potential tariffs on imports from Canada and Mexico. AFPM ’25: US BDO market eyes costs, demand outlook uncertain US 1,4 butanediol (BDO) production costs have been mounting, and margins have been crunched. Supply is ample and demand has been lackluster. AFPM ’25: US propylene glycol demand begins softening after prior feedstock-driven uptick After a cold winter with strong demand for seasonal propylene glycol (PG) end-uses in antifreeze and de-icers in many parts of the US, demand is starting to cool. AFPM ’25: US MA sentiment cautious ahead of potentially volatile Q2 US maleic anhydride (MA) is facing a volatile economic backdrop. Spot feedstock normal butane has fallen below $1/gal in March due to the end of peak blending season and strong production. AFPM ’25: US PA, OX face trade uncertainty, production constraints US phthalic anhydride (PA) and orthoxylene (OX) demand remains relatively weak. Prices have been remaining flat and are expected to settle lower this month after losing mixed xylene (MX) price support and underlying crude oil price declines. AFPM '25: Tight feedstock availability to keep US fatty acids, alcohols firm despite demand woes Tight supplies and high prices for oleochemical feedstocks are expected to keep US oleochemicals prices relatively firm, as continued macroeconomic headwinds, including escalating trade tensions between the US and other countries, only further weigh on consumer sentiment and discourage players from taking long-term positions. AFPM '25: Historic drop in biodiesel production to keep US glycerine relatively firm A drop in US biodiesel production to levels not seen since Q1 2017 is likely to keep the floor on US glycerine prices relatively firm through at least H1 as imports of both crude and refined material fail to fully offset the short-term shortfalls in domestic supply. PRC ’25: US R-PET demand to fall short of 2025 expectations, but still see slow growth As the landmark year, 2025, swiftly passes, many within the US recycled polyethylene terephthalate (R-PET) industry doubt the demand and market growth promised by voluntary brand goals and regulatory post-consumer recycled (PCR) content minimums will come to fruition. PRC ’25: US pyrolysis recycling players churning through regulatory, economic uncertainty As both regulatory and economic landscapes continue to change, production and commercialization progress among pyrolysis based plastic recyclers continues to be mixed. Pyrolysis, a thermal depolymerization/conversion technology which targets polyolefin-heavy mixed plastic waste, or tires, is expected to become the dominant form of chemical recycling over the next decade. Visit the US tariffs, policy – impact on chemicals and energy topic page Visit the Macroeconomics: Impact on chemicals topic page Visit the Logistics: Impact on chemicals and energy topic page Visit the Recycled Plastics topic page

22-Mar-2025

HOUSTON (ICIS)–As both regulatory and economic landscapes continue to change, production and commercialization progress among pyrolysis based plastic recyclers continues to be mixed heading into this year’s Plastics Recycling Conference (PRC). Pyrolysis, a thermal depolymerization/conversion technology which targets polyolefin-heavy mixed plastic waste, or tires, is expected to become the dominant form of chemical recycling over the next decade. This comes at a time when sought after food grade, natural colored mechanically recycled polyethylene (R-PE) and recycled polypropylene (R-PP) resins continue to be in tight supply and chemically recycled resin could help to close the gap. However, all types of recycled resin face rising premiums compared to softening virgin markets. REGULATION: FEDERAL AND STATEChemical recycling technologies, such as pyrolysis, have previously been under scrutiny at the federal level through Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulation. The latest 2023 stance, officials asked for more time to review the full life cycle and environmental impact of chemical recycling facilities before deregulating permit processes. Counter to this stance and while not explicitly stated, it is assumed the Trump administration would likely be supportive of chemical recycling, due to the underlying petrochemical industry involvement and pro-business fundamentals. At a state level, 25 states have passed bills classifying chemical recycling technologies as recycling technologies rather than waste management processes. This potentially opens the door for pyrolysis facilities in those states to qualify for state grants and tax incentives that are available to manufacturing operations as well as supports the case for recycled resin from chemical recycling processes to count towards post-consumer recycled (PCR) content minimums. However, there is a catch: among the states that have accepted chemical recycling, there are a few states that explicitly exclude certain processes. For example, states such as Kentucky and Kansas are among those that exclude processes that turn plastic to fuel. One example of this can be seen in the State of Kentucky’s HB 45, which notes, "Advanced recycling does not include energy recovery or the conversion of post-use polymers into fuel." Similar language can be found in the State of Kansas’ SB 114, "Advanced recycling does not include incineration of plastics or waste-to-energy processes, and products sold as fuel are not recycled products." In these specific situations, pyrolysis may still not be counted as a form of recycling. Similarly, there are several states which have passed or proposed passing laws which prohibit processes such as pyrolysis to count as recycling. PYROLYSIS HURDLES FROM PCR/EPR MANDATESStates with plastic recycled content requirements have mixed views on acceptance of recycled content from chemical recycling, including pyrolysis. Currently, five states – California, Maine, Connecticut, Washington and New Jersey – have passed PCR laws, through of which are currently active. However, none of these states are among the 25 mentioned above that have formally accepted chemical recycling into legislation. This fact means that it is often unclear if outputs from chemical recycling are ineligible to count toward PCR requirements, undermining the industry’s potential impact and growth. In some cases, clarity is brought informally through "Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)" documents, such as in New Jersey. A notable exception exists in Washington, where its PCR law explicitly states: “Both mechanical and chemical recycling methods are acceptable.” This language demonstrates a more inclusive approach, contrasting with states like California and Maine, which remain cautious about embracing chemical recycling. This mirrors uncertainty in extended producer responsibility (EPR) policies which are currently implemented on a state-by-state basis. At present, five states have passed plastic packaging related EPR – Oregon, Colorado, California, Minnesota and Maine. However, the relationship between EPR and chemical recycling remains complex. A key issue lies in how EPR laws define acceptable “end markets” for collected plastics. Oregon’s definition of responsible end markets appears tailored to traditional mechanical recycling, inadvertently excluding many chemical recycling technologies. This exclusion stems from the varied outputs of chemical recycling, which can range from plastics to fuels or chemical precursors, complicating their classification as traditional recycling. Pyrolysis is one of the recycling processes that produce multiple outputs, meaning that it will likely suffer from this definition. INVESTMENT, PROGRESS MIRRORS FRAGMENTATIONAs a result of these legislative hurdles, as well as financial burdens, lack of commercial success in the face of premiums, and public pushback on the environmental consequences of these processes, there have been project cancellations for chemical recycling in 2024. Two notable pyrolysis cancellations are Regenyx and Encina. Announced this week, another US pyrolysis player, Brightmark, has filed for chapter 11 bankruptcy, thus placing their existing Ashley, Indiana plant in jeopardy, though with the hope that both existing and planned facilities will be able to continue operations in the future. Per the bankruptcy filing, the Ashley facility, with an installed capacity of 100,000 tonnes, had been operating at less than 5% capacity. Progress on the Thomaston, Georgia facility announced last year is on going. Brightmark had previously cancelled plans for a separate Georgia facility. Moreover, several facilities continue to see operational challenges and are also heard to be producing a minimal amount of material. Despite these setbacks, pyrolysis is projected to have the most growth based on announced plants. According to data gather from the ICIS Chemical Recycling Supply Tracker – which tracks these facility announcements – the chemical recycling capacity could potentially grow 10 times by 2030, with a majority of that growth expected to come from pyrolysis. Reasons for this include synergies with mechanical recycling by targeting different feedstock and the ability to handle a wider range of feedstock, reducing the degree of sorting needed. Notable expected facilities include ExxonMobil's expansion plans, Braven Environmental's recently announced plans, and LyondellBasell's future plans for the Houston refinery. The chemical recycling industry is nascent as well as controversial. As such, there is a considerable amount of both optimism and challenges. Despite all of the challenges on the horizon, the chemical recycling industry and pyrolysis continue to push forward. Hosted by Resource Recycling Inc, the PRC takes place on 24-26 March in National Harbor, Maryland. ICIS will be presenting "Shaping the Future of Recycled Plastics: Trends and Forecasts" on Monday, March 24th at 11:15AM in room Potomac D. As well as attending our session, we would love to connect with you at the show- please stop by our booth, #308. Visit the US tariffs, policy – impact on chemicals and energy topic page Visit the Macroeconomics: Impact on chemicals topic page Visit the Logistics: Impact on chemicals and energy topic page Focus article by Joshua Dill Additional reporting by Emily Friedman

20-Mar-2025

HOUSTON (ICIS)–As the landmark year, 2025, swiftly passes, many within the US recycled polyethylene terephthalate (R-PET) industry doubt the demand and market growth promised by voluntary brand goals and regulatory post-consumer recycled (PCR) content minimums will come to fruition. Despite this reality, the market has and will continue to see slow progress, with forecast growth even in the face of trade and macroeconomic uncertainties heading into this year’s Plastics Recycling Conference (PRC). MARKET SNAPSHOTOver the course of 2024, average US R-PET market prices saw increases across the board ranging from 2 cents/lb to over 6 cents/lb. More muted growth is expected throughout 2025. At present, East Coast bale, flake and pellet prices remain steady, on sufficient supply and unchanged demand trends despite March typically being a period of transition for the market. On the West Coast, bale prices remain under pressure from Mexican export interest, though domestic players are muted. Flake and pellet prices have shifted in line with bales, but remain under pressure from competitive recycled and virgin imports. Demand expectations across the US for the full spring season are mixed. Historically, demand from thermoformers who cater towards agricultural markets increases in the spring and summer alongside growing season. At the same time, demand from the beverage industry also tends to increase in the spring in preparation for summer bottled beverage consumption. Though, this year, ramp-up timing and intensity remains uncertain due to the impacts of tariffs and inflation on consumer spending. On the fiber side, demand is expected to remain weak and is typically not as seasonally driven. BRAND DEMAND AND SUPPLY LANDSCAPEWhen assessing PCR demand, there are two factors of influence: firstly, the overall product demand as referenced above, but then secondly, the transition from virgin packaging materials to recycled content. Hinging on the same macroeconomic uncertainty, late last year and early this year several brands have publicly stated it is likely they will miss their 2025 sustainability goals. Under this mentality, PCR sellers have noted that many brand and converter customers have downsized PCR growth plans throughout this year as a cost-savings mechanism. This comes as the most recent fast-moving consumer goods (FMCG) data suggests slowing progress, or even in the case of the 2023 Canadian Plastics Pact annual report, negative progress. According to the latest Ellen MacArthur Foundation Global Commitment report, nearly 1.6 million tonnes of additional recycled plastic would be needed for signatories to meet their 2025 targets, as compared to 2023 PCR volumes. On top of the overarching trend, much of the market presently remains in wait-and-see mode due to the whiplash effect of proposed US tariffs, though few players are heard to be operating strongly with consistent year-round demand. The fragmentation of the market persists, as was highlighted during off-peak season last year, and underscores the evolving landscape of polyethylene terephthalate (PET) recycling infrastructure. While some large players who have become entrenched as a premier provider of R-PET see strong order books, other standalone players continue to struggle. Adding to the mixed messaging, several players expect expanded capacity in 2025 such as Republic Services, D6 and Circularix, while another player, Evergreen, has announced a partial facility closure. Future investments in R-PET, whether domestic or international, have largely been paralyzed by the risk that market sentiment and trade policies could shift with each administration, and investments take several years to come to fruition. POLICYWhile not a primary driver of US international trade, plastic scrap and recycled plastic do have strong exposure to international markets, particularly Canada and Mexico as waste is regional and typically market economics hinge on location proximity. To be clear, the proposed 25% tariff on imported goods from Canada and Mexico does include recycled plastic and plastic scrap. When looking at bale and flake supply, tariffs could push US recyclers who are close to Mexico and Canada away from international supply, and towards domestic volumes, thus further straining the limited collection system. The US imported 133 million lbs of PET scrap in 2024, with Canada leading the globe as the US's strongest PET scrap trade partner, followed by Thailand, Ecuador and Japan. Moreover, several US converters and brands have partnered with Canadian and Mexican recyclers over the last several years and now may seek supply relationships with domestic recyclers to avoid additional tariff-related costs. This could be seen as a positive force for the domestic recycling market, though players expect little further support from the current administration, as sustainability and environmental progress has not been identified as a key priority. No federal policies are expected. Despite the ongoing negotiations of the Global Plastics Treaty, based on President Trump's second withdrawal from the Paris Climate Accord, it is unlikely the US will support another global sustainability effort. Instead, state-level legislation is expected to continue carrying PCR momentum, with several proposed extended producer responsibility (EPR) bills as well as some PCR mandates active within various state legislatures. Moreover, as existing policies continue to take shape, such as defining the regulations of California’s Senate Bill 54, or the implementation of Oregon’s EPR program starting this July, the industry hopes that regulation provides a stronger foundation for recycled plastic market growth over voluntary goals which shift with economic sentiment. Hosted by Resource Recycling Inc, the PRC takes place on 24-26 March in National Harbor, Maryland. ICIS will be presenting "Shaping the Future of Recycled Plastics: Trends and Forecasts" on Monday, 24 March at 11:15 local time in room Potomac D. As well as attending our session, we would love to connect with you at the show – please stop by our booth, #308. Visit the Recycled Plastics topic page Visit the US tariffs, policy – impact on chemicals and energy topic page Visit the Macroeconomics: Impact on chemicals topic page Visit the Logistics: Impact on chemicals and energy topic page Focus article by Emily Friedman

18-Mar-2025

HOUSTON (ICIS)–The US polyvinyl chloride (PVC) market is facing continued headwinds as tariff-related uncertainties persist heading into this year's International Petrochemical Conference (IPC). The domestic PVC market is expected to grow between 1-3% in 2025 but continues to face challenges in housing and construction. Meanwhile, export markets continue to wrestle with the threat of protectionist policies and tariffs at home and abroad. The domestic PVC market has been healthy to start the year but has been saddled with excess supply following capacity additions in late Q4. The new capacity, coupled with strong run rates, resulted in high levels of inventory to start the year. This added supply comes in contrast to a US housing market plagued by high prices and high borrowing costs. The pressure of these variables, coupled with exceptionally cold weather, was evident in January housing statistics, where housing starts slumped 9.8% to a 1.366-million-unit pace led by a steep 13.5% decline in the multifamily segment. Despite this, production and sales remained firm in February. Production was expected to decline in March due to turnarounds by two US producers. There was some positive economic news with 30-year mortgage rates easing in March and falling to their lowest levels of 2025 at 6.63% in early March before inching to 6.65% in mid-March. Still, current levels were well above levels considered necessary to spur demand, generally considered to be around 5.0-5.5%. Additionally, inflation appeared to stabilize in February, coming in at 2.8%, lower than the forecast 2.9% and below January levels of 3%. Despite these developments, consumer confidence remains weak. The US PVC export market will also face its share of challenges coming primarily via protectionist policies. Potential 25% tariffs on Mexico and Canada could present challenges as the US exports significant volumes of PVC to each country and then brings back the converted goods for use in medical, building and construction, auto and industrial applications. Reciprocal tariffs could increase the cost of these imports and dent US PVC demand. Additionally, US PVC exports face existing and potential tariff threats from a number of other trading partners including India, Canada, Mexico, Brazil and the EU. Given the challenges in the domestic market and current growth levels, US producers will need to export more than one-third of their production to maintain operating rates in the mid-80s% range, a tall task considering adequate supply and the proliferation of tariffs and antidumping duties (ADDs). To the south, the Latin America PVC market also faces significant challenges, with demand trends differing across key regional markets. A combination of economic pressures and the potential of US tariffs is reshaping the landscape, influencing both supply and demand dynamics. In Brazil, PVC demand remains weak, largely due to persistently high interest rates and ongoing economic uncertainty. These factors have led to buyer hesitancy, reducing the country's dependence on US PVC imports. The outlook for Brazil’s construction sector in 2025 presents a mixed scenario that could influence PVC market dynamics in different ways. The Brazilian Chamber of the Construction Industry (CBIC) projects a 2.3% growth in the sector’s GDP. At the same time, Sinduscon-SP and Fundacao Getulio Vargas (FGV) have a slightly more optimistic forecast, expecting a 3.0% expansion. This growth is primarily driven by ongoing projects and newly contracted developments set to begin in the coming months, particularly in infrastructure and real estate. However, broader macroeconomic factors may temper this momentum. The expectation of slower economic growth, higher inflation exceeding the target ceiling and rising interest rates could cool investment and business activity. If these conditions lead to tighter credit and reduced consumer confidence, demand for new real estate developments could soften, impacting the need for PVC-based materials used in construction applications like pipes, fittings and profiles. Colombia is also experiencing economic difficulties, though the exact demand trends remain unclear. The overall sentiment is cautious, with expectations for stable-to-weak demand in the near term. Meanwhile, Argentina faces persistent investment shortfalls in critical sectors, which continue to hinder PVC demand. This adds to the difficulties for US exporters separately aiming to maintain market share in the country. Mexico, as a key importer of US PVC, brings in around 350,000 tonnes annually. However, the introduction of new tariffs is expected to raise costs for downstream segments that export goods to the US, which reduces the competitiveness of US exports and demand could soften. Pricing dynamics are also likely to shift, if the additional tariff scenario among Mexico, Canada and the US changes in April, as the US Gulf PVC producers could face lower operational rates if demand from their primary export destinations declines. This could lead to production cutbacks, raising per-unit production costs. For the Americas as a whole, uncertainty remains a prevalent theme. 2025 looks to be a challenging year and the effect of proposed tariffs from the Trump administration and retaliatory tariffs on PVC demand is unclear, with economic and inflationary factors adding further uncertainty to the 2025 outlook. Policy and economic health will continue to drive demand in 2025 and producers will need to manage production and inventories closely, control costs and target alternative outlets for exports to mitigate the risks that lie ahead. Hosted by the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM), the IPC takes place on 23-25 March in San Antonio, Texas. Visit the US tariffs, policy – impact on chemicals and energy topic page Visit the Macroeconomics: Impact on chemicals topic page Visit the Logistics: Impact on chemicals and energy topic page Focus article by Kevin Allen and Daniel Lopes Thumbnail source: Shutterstock

18-Mar-2025

Taiwan’s incumbent announces higher March prices CPC continues to grapple with LNG costs Island ramps up receiving LNG capacity SINGAPORE (ICIS)–Taiwan’s main power company announced a hike in its posted prices for natural gas in March, citing globally higher LNG prices, according to an official notice . This comes as it faces pressure to buy more LNG supplies from the US and manage a sharp energy transition from nuclear and coal power generation fuels. Electricity prices will rise by 3%, while industrial users will face a 10% increase, as CPC Corp grapples with mounting financial pressure. The price adjustments come amid a sustained surge in global LNG costs that has pushed up prices of imported LNG cargoes into the island. According to data collected by ICIS, spot cargoes into Taiwan have ticked up in the recent months, at higher prices. CPC has held onto a policy to absorb the increase costs for residential users, a practice set to continue in March, despite a government-approved pricing formula that typically passes on these costs to consumers. However, with the company’s debt ratio reaching 93%, absorbing such losses is becoming unsustainable, according to the notice. Soaring LNG prices, driven by a cold snap and heightened European demand as well as EU stockpiling regulations have led to stiff competition for LNG. All of which has stretched Taiwan’s energy budget in the past months. The state-owned company has mostly absorbed losses to shield residential users from price hikes, holding rates for users steady through January and February citing ongoing Lunar New Year festivities alongside its price-stabilization policy. While industrial prices last rose in December, residential rates have remained unchanged for months and were even cut last May. At the same time, Taiwan has also looked to shore up its trade ties with the US after President Donald Trump took office and began issuing a slew of import tariffs and calling for more onshoring of manufacturing from trade partners with a surplus, such as Taiwan. In response, Taiwan has said it could invest in the proposed Alaska LNG project and buy more US LNG cargoes. As well, Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC) has also pledged to invest in high-end chip manufacturing in the US. Taiwan also relies on de facto US military support as it faces a push for reunification with the Chinese mainland that could be enforced by a blockade of post and incoming LNG shipments. Taiwan has some offtake from the US including deals with TotalEnergies for Cameron LNG, and supplies from US producer Cheniere. LNG TO BECOME DOMINANT ENERGY SOURCE Even as the island grapples with high costs of bringing in LNG cargoes, it remains committed to its LNG push, expanding infrastructure at a rapid clip . Taiwanese incumbents, both the state-owned CPC Corp and Taiwan Power Co (Taipower) are investing in large-scale LNG storage tanks, regasification units, and gas-fired power plants. For instance, under expansion plans, Taipower will add 2.7mtpa by 2026 and another 3mtpa by 2029, taking its total receiving capacity to close to 11mpta. Meanwhile, Yung An terminal will be boosted by 2mtpa. Still, energy security remains a key concern as Taiwan leans heavily on imported liquefied natural gas to meet rising demand. “Taiwan has no piped gas and minimal domestic production, so LNG accounts for nearly 100% of the country’s gas supply,” said ICIS analyst Yuanda Wang. This leaves the island vulnerable to price swings alongside geopolitical uncertainty. Compounding the challenge is a nuclear-free policy shuttering two nuclear reactors . Taiwan will become fully nuclear-free in May 2025 as the 950MW Maanshan Unit 2 shuts down, leaving an 8.8TWh power shortfall , according to forecasts by ICIS. Last year, Jane Liao, a vice president at CPC, told a conference that the utility expects to see more LNG purchases into 2025 on the back of the retirement Taiwan’s nuclear plants. “We need to continue the purchasing,” Liao added. Premier Cho had also in July reaffirmed the commitment to reduce reliance on coal. As the island phases out these sources, it will inevitably turn to LNG to fill in the gap in its energy mix. ICIS modeling forecasts Taiwan’s power demand will rise by 12.5% in the first quarter of 2025, with LNG imports expected to hit 21.1 million tonnes in 2025. As energy prices rise and Taiwan doubles down on its LNG ambitions, businesses and consumers brace for higher costs. The island now faces a delicate balancing act: maintaining price stability while deepening its long-term reliance on LNG. (ICIS analyst Yuanda Wang contributed to this story)

18-Mar-2025