<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">A drop in air freight charter rates has put the option of project cargoes moving by air back on the table.</div>

A drop in air freight charter rates has put the option of project cargoes moving by air back on the table.

Feature image

<div class="phx-topic">Air freight specialists are predicting buoyant times ahead for project cargo as shippers seek certainty amid geopolitical and trade upheaval. Shippers are increasingly balancing out the extra cost of using air freight against the penalties or costs of a project being delivered late if they opt for sea freight, experts say. Dan Morgan-Evans, group director for cargo at specialist air freight broker Air Charter Service (ACS), said he is seeing a pattern. “Some projects have a rush of air freight at the start, then use shipping, then there is a rush of air freight at the end,” he said. Project cargo freight forwarder Trans Global Projects (TGP) launched a dedicated air freight department in Bremen, Germany, on Jan. 5 to expand its capabilities for time-critical and complex cargo operating under its own International Air Transport Association (IATA) license. Swiss company Natco held an IATA license in Bremen before becoming part of TGP a decade ago, but since then TGP has been booking air freight from Bremen through other IATA licensed forwarders. “As a strategic investment, it makes sense to reactivate our IATA license,” Andreas Menzel, TGP’s managing director for Germany and Benelux, told the Journal of Commerce. “We do see some of our customers looking for quick solutions. With all the trade interruptions globally, including the Suez Canal and other impacts, air freight is becoming more and more critical to deliver time-sensitive cargo.” Bremen will serve as a hub for urgent shipments and engineered solutions, supported by Natco’s air freight and air charter expertise and TGP’s global resources, he added. <h3>Lower charter costs attract cargoes </h3>Uncertainty in the heavy-lift air cargo market is creating opportunities, said Morgan-Evans. “Last year there were all sorts of ups and downs and uncertainties in the market,” he said. “Our teams are buoyant about the idea of project cargo this year simply because air freight prices have dropped and the cost of an aircraft charter is much lower than in previous years. This should give us an opportunity.” He said that over the past five years, the cost of aircraft charters has been so high that project cargo air freight volumes were below pre-COVID levels. “With prices now down and choice and competitiveness in the market, pricing is more at a level that facilitates project cargo air freight movements,” Morgan-Evans said. Menzel added that uncertainty is a factor for TGP, too. “With all the global political and short-term changes, it is never easy to do a steady plan,” he said. “We have to adapt and adjust to specific impacts.” That said, TGP is focusing on some growing sectors in its planning, including power, oil and gas, mining and renewables. “For large projects like substations and power plants, the closer it gets to the ‘go live’ date, basically the more air freight is being requested, especially because in the finalization of projects, there may be missing or damaged material,” Menzel said. Morgan-Evans also pointed to major opportunities coming out of China and other Asia-Pacific countries. “We see a lot more movement from China into Africa, South America, Latin America and Europe, whether that’s construction work for big projects, oil and gas or mining – we can see projects coming up in all these sectors,” he said. While mid-January is early to offer any certainty on project cargo air freight prospects, Morgan-Evans said ACS was working on a number of international inquiries for project cargo. “I caveat everything with what Trump does, but we are pretty confident this will be a good year for project cargo for us,” he said. Contact Felicity Landon on <a href="mailto:felicity@felicitylandon.com">felicity@felicitylandon.com.</a></div>

Air freight specialists are predicting buoyant times ahead for project cargo as shippers seek certainty amid geopolitical and trade upheaval. Shippers are increasingly balancing out the extra cost of using air freight against the penalties or costs of a project being delivered late if they opt for sea freight, experts say. Dan Morgan-Evans, group director for cargo at specialist air freight broker Air Charter Service (ACS), said he is seeing a pattern. “Some projects have a rush of air freight at the start, then use shipping, then there is a rush of air freight at the end,” he said. Project cargo freight forwarder Trans Global Projects (TGP) launched a dedicated air freight department in Bremen, Germany, on Jan. 5 to expand its capabilities for time-critical and complex cargo operating under its own International Air Transport Association (IATA) license. Swiss company Natco held an IATA license in Bremen before becoming part of TGP a decade ago, but since then TGP has been booking air freight from Bremen through other IATA licensed forwarders. “As a strategic investment, it makes sense to reactivate our IATA license,” Andreas Menzel, TGP’s managing director for Germany and Benelux, told the Journal of Commerce. “We do see some of our customers looking for quick solutions. With all the trade interruptions globally, including the Suez Canal and other impacts, air freight is becoming more and more critical to deliver time-sensitive cargo.” Bremen will serve as a hub for urgent shipments and engineered solutions, supported by Natco’s air freight and air charter expertise and TGP’s global resources, he added. Lower charter costs attract cargoes Uncertainty in the heavy-lift air cargo market is creating opportunities, said Morgan-Evans. “Last year there were all sorts of ups and downs and uncertainties in the market,” he said. “Our teams are buoyant about the idea of project cargo this year simply because air freight prices have dropped and the cost of an aircraft charter is much lower than in previous years. This should give us an opportunity.” He said that over the past five years, the cost of aircraft charters has been so high that project cargo air freight volumes were below pre-COVID levels. “With prices now down and choice and competitiveness in the market, pricing is more at a level that facilitates project cargo air freight movements,” Morgan-Evans said. Menzel added that uncertainty is a factor for TGP, too. “With all the global political and short-term changes, it is never easy to do a steady plan,” he said. “We have to adapt and adjust to specific impacts.” That said, TGP is focusing on some growing sectors in its planning, including power, oil and gas, mining and renewables. “For large projects like substations and power plants, the closer it gets to the ‘go live’ date, basically the more air freight is being requested, especially because in the finalization of projects, there may be missing or damaged material,” Menzel said. Morgan-Evans also pointed to major opportunities coming out of China and other Asia-Pacific countries. “We see a lot more movement from China into Africa, South America, Latin America and Europe, whether that’s construction work for big projects, oil and gas or mining – we can see projects coming up in all these sectors,” he said. While mid-January is early to offer any certainty on project cargo air freight prospects, Morgan-Evans said ACS was working on a number of international inquiries for project cargo. “I caveat everything with what Trump does, but we are pretty confident this will be a good year for project cargo for us,” he said. Contact Felicity Landon on felicity@felicitylandon.com.

Air Cargo Forwarder News

Air Cargo Carriers News

Project cargo

Air Cargo

Fast-tracked project schedules boost heavy-lift air freight volumes

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The regulator’s decision was unanimous, but Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern can fix what is deficient in the application and resubmit it at a later date.</div>

The regulator’s decision was unanimous, but Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern can fix what is deficient in the application and resubmit it at a later date.

<div class="phx-topic">The US Surface Transportation Board dealt a blow Friday to Union Pacific Railroad’s $85 billion deal to acquire Norfolk Southern Railway, ruling the merger application UP filed last month is “incomplete.” The regulator’s decision was unanimous, but Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern can fix what is deficient in the application and resubmit it at a later date. UP must inform the STB before Feb. 17 whether it plans to refile an amended application, and can refile any time prior to June 22. Once resubmitted, the STB will initiate a similar 30-day review of the application’s completeness, which likely means it will not issue a final decision on the merger itself until at least the second half of 2027. "Given the deficiencies...the board finds the application is incomplete and, under the terms of the statute, must be rejected,” STB wrote in its ruling. “The board’s decision to reject the application should not be read as an indication of how the board might ultimately assess any revised application or future informational needs, should applicants decide to submit a revised application." In Friday’s 15-page decision, the STB highlighted three major deficiencies in the application, which was submitted by UP on Dec. 19. First, the regulators ruled that the traffic analysis underpinning the application is deficient because it uses market share totals from 2023 and fails to provide future market share projections. Second, the STB took issue with UP failing to disclose what’s called a “Schedule 5.8.” The document defines what counts as a “materially burdensome regulatory condition,” a regulatory outcome that could give UP the contractual right to walk away from the deal. UP had argued that the document didn’t need to be disclosed to the STB because it contains attorney-related work products. BNSF Railway, Canadian Pacific Kansas City, and Canadian National all filed objections to UP’s application based on the first two issues that were flagged by STB. The STB also found that the related Terminal Railroad Association of St. Louis control application was misclassified as a “minor” transaction instead of a “significant” transaction. STB applies different procedural and evidentiary requirements to major, significant, and minor transactions. By deeming something significant instead of minor, it means the board wants to examine the issues involved more closely. The STB also noted several minor, technical issues that should be addressed in a revised application. While the board did not specify what those issues were, a Journal of Commerce analysis of the application found spelling errors and cities labeled with the incorrect state. Contact Ari Ashe at <a href="mailto:ari.ashe@spglobal.com">ari.ashe@spglobal.com</a></div>

The US Surface Transportation Board dealt a blow Friday to Union Pacific Railroad’s $85 billion deal to acquire Norfolk Southern Railway, ruling the merger application UP filed last month is “incomplete.” The regulator’s decision was unanimous, but Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern can fix what is deficient in the application and resubmit it at a later date. UP must inform the STB before Feb. 17 whether it plans to refile an amended application, and can refile any time prior to June 22. Once resubmitted, the STB will initiate a similar 30-day review of the application’s completeness, which likely means it will not issue a final decision on the merger itself until at least the second half of 2027. "Given the deficiencies...the board finds the application is incomplete and, under the terms of the statute, must be rejected,” STB wrote in its ruling. “The board’s decision to reject the application should not be read as an indication of how the board might ultimately assess any revised application or future informational needs, should applicants decide to submit a revised application." In Friday’s 15-page decision, the STB highlighted three major deficiencies in the application, which was submitted by UP on Dec. 19. First, the regulators ruled that the traffic analysis underpinning the application is deficient because it uses market share totals from 2023 and fails to provide future market share projections. Second, the STB took issue with UP failing to disclose what’s called a “Schedule 5.8.” The document defines what counts as a “materially burdensome regulatory condition,” a regulatory outcome that could give UP the contractual right to walk away from the deal. UP had argued that the document didn’t need to be disclosed to the STB because it contains attorney-related work products. BNSF Railway, Canadian Pacific Kansas City, and Canadian National all filed objections to UP’s application based on the first two issues that were flagged by STB. The STB also found that the related Terminal Railroad Association of St. Louis control application was misclassified as a “minor” transaction instead of a “significant” transaction. STB applies different procedural and evidentiary requirements to major, significant, and minor transactions. By deeming something significant instead of minor, it means the board wants to examine the issues involved more closely. The STB also noted several minor, technical issues that should be addressed in a revised application. While the board did not specify what those issues were, a Journal of Commerce analysis of the application found spelling errors and cities labeled with the incorrect state. Contact Ari Ashe at ari.ashe@spglobal.com

Rail News

North-American rail

Surface

STB rejects UP-NS merger application as ‘incomplete’

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The state senate is considering a new bill that would block state funds from going toward port automation, with longshore workers adding their support.</div>

The state senate is considering a new bill that would block state funds from going toward port automation, with longshore workers adding their support.

<div class="phx-topic">Longshore workers in Washington State have thrown their support behind a bill that permanently blocks state money from funding port automation, arguing that technology already in place at the ports of Seattle and Tacoma has impacted waterfront jobs. Local members of the International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU) on Thursday testified before a state senate committee about a bill introduced earlier this month that would allow the use of state money to buy zero-emission cargo equipment but also ban the “purchase [of] fully automated marine container cargo handling equipment.”The bill is a follow-up to 2021 legislation that also blocked state funding for automated cargo handling equipment but was set to expire at the end of 2031. The new bill does not have a sunset clause, and the current expiration date “is starting to creep toward the present day,” state Sen. Jesse Salomon, the bill’s sponsor, said Thursday. “The point of this is to make sure that as we move forward into the future, humans still are valued for the work that they do, and we don’t fully automate,” Salomon said. The bill represents the latest effort by West Coast longshore workers to stem further encroachment of automation technology at ports. Last year, California ILWU members threw their support behind <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/stakeholders-differ-on-newsoms-move-to-kill-automation-ban-at-california-ports-6097378">an unsuccessful bill that would have prevented automated cargo handling from connecting to the state’s power grid</a>.<h3>Union questions state funds for marine terminals</h3>Dan McKisson, president of ILWU Washington Area District Council representing 5,000 dockworkers statewide, said in his testimony that while the union supports state funding of zero-emission equipment and infrastructure upgrades, marine terminals do not need state money because most of them “are multi-million international companies or controlled by private equity.” “This bill does not prohibit [terminals] from purchasing automated cargo handling equipment,” McKisson said. “International companies benefit from using taxpayer dollars for automated equipment. It does not benefit ports, workers, and the community.”Most of the technological upgrades at Seattle and Tacoma ports have focused on speeding up truck processing at terminal gates. As with nearly all US ports, Seattle and Tacoma have used optical character readers (OCRs) for scanning incoming containers for decades, along with using remote speaker boxes at gates in place of longshore clerks. Kesa Sten, the president of ILWU Local 52 that represents clerks and checkers, said such “computerized auto gates” have meant fewer such jobs and have led to inefficiencies, such as in-gating damaged containers. “Private companies wish to use automation to shift labor costs to others in the supply chain and to do the same work with fewer workers,” Sten said, adding that when she started on the job, every gate booth had a clerk. But now, “one person can do the job of five” checking in truckers.“That is fast, that is efficient, but it is also job erosion,” she said. “We welcome advances that enhance our job, not eliminate them.”Contact Michael Angell at <a href="mailto:michael.angell@spglobal.com">michael.angell@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

Longshore workers in Washington State have thrown their support behind a bill that permanently blocks state money from funding port automation, arguing that technology already in place at the ports of Seattle and Tacoma has impacted waterfront jobs. Local members of the International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU) on Thursday testified before a state senate committee about a bill introduced earlier this month that would allow the use of state money to buy zero-emission cargo equipment but also ban the “purchase [of] fully automated marine container cargo handling equipment.” The bill is a follow-up to 2021 legislation that also blocked state funding for automated cargo handling equipment but was set to expire at the end of 2031. The new bill does not have a sunset clause, and the current expiration date “is starting to creep toward the present day,” state Sen. Jesse Salomon, the bill’s sponsor, said Thursday. “The point of this is to make sure that as we move forward into the future, humans still are valued for the work that they do, and we don’t fully automate,” Salomon said. The bill represents the latest effort by West Coast longshore workers to stem further encroachment of automation technology at ports. Last year, California ILWU members threw their support behind an unsuccessful bill that would have prevented automated cargo handling from connecting to the state’s power grid . Union questions state funds for marine terminals Dan McKisson, president of ILWU Washington Area District Council representing 5,000 dockworkers statewide, said in his testimony that while the union supports state funding of zero-emission equipment and infrastructure upgrades, marine terminals do not need state money because most of them “are multi-million international companies or controlled by private equity.” “This bill does not prohibit [terminals] from purchasing automated cargo handling equipment,” McKisson said. “International companies benefit from using taxpayer dollars for automated equipment. It does not benefit ports, workers, and the community.” Most of the technological upgrades at Seattle and Tacoma ports have focused on speeding up truck processing at terminal gates. As with nearly all US ports, Seattle and Tacoma have used optical character readers (OCRs) for scanning incoming containers for decades, along with using remote speaker boxes at gates in place of longshore clerks. Kesa Sten, the president of ILWU Local 52 that represents clerks and checkers, said such “computerized auto gates” have meant fewer such jobs and have led to inefficiencies, such as in-gating damaged containers. “Private companies wish to use automation to shift labor costs to others in the supply chain and to do the same work with fewer workers,” Sten said, adding that when she started on the job, every gate booth had a clerk. But now, “one person can do the job of five” checking in truckers. “That is fast, that is efficient, but it is also job erosion,” she said. “We welcome advances that enhance our job, not eliminate them.” Contact Michael Angell at michael.angell@spglobal.com .

North American ports

Longshore labor

Marine terminals

Washington State weighs permanent ban on funding port automation

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The orders come amid continued strong growth in the global wind energy sector as turbines, blades and monopiles provide stable cargo for MPV and heavy-lift operators. </div>

The orders come amid continued strong growth in the global wind energy sector as turbines, blades and monopiles provide stable cargo for MPV and heavy-lift operators.

<div class="phx-topic">Multipurpose vessel (MPV) operators are continuing to add to their fleets, with owners in Germany and China placing orders for up to 12 ships totaling approximately $450 million.   The move comes amid continued strong growth in the global wind energy sector as turbines, blades and monopiles provide stable cargo for MPV and heavy-lift operators. Nordic Hamburg Group signed firm contracts this week for three 13,300-deadweight metric ton (dwt) heavy-lift multipurpose vessels, plus options for two similar vessels with Wuhu Shipyard, the east China shipbuilder said in a statement. The shipyard did not disclose financial details, but shipbrokers said the total order was worth about $150 million. The ships will be equipped with two 250-metric ton cranes to give a combined lifting capacity of 500 metric tons, “which can efficiently carry wind power equipment and other large equipment,” the statement said. The Ice-class vessels will have cargo hold totaling 936,000 cubic feet and will be over 20% more fuel efficient than older vessels, the shipyard added. The ships are likely to be delivered in 2027. Nordic Hamburg owns and manages a fleet of about 60 ships, including container ships and container and roll-on/roll-off (conro) ships, in addition to MPVs. Separately, Chinese shipowner Fujian Highton Development has ordered up to seven 62,000-dwt multipurpose and heavy-lift vessels from China’s Taizhou Kouan Shipbuilding. The deal, with a total value of about $300 million, comprises a firm contract for three ships to be delivered in 2029 and options for four similar ships. Fujian’s investment in the first three vessels will be capped at $130 million, the company said in a filing to the Shanghai stock exchange. Fujian, which operates about 80 MPVs and dry cargo ships, is planning to expand to 100 vessels by 2030. Contact Keith Wallis at <a href=" keithwallis@hotmail.com.">keithwallis@hotmail.com</a>.</div>

Multipurpose vessel (MPV) operators are continuing to add to their fleets, with owners in Germany and China placing orders for up to 12 ships totaling approximately $450 million.   The move comes amid continued strong growth in the global wind energy sector as turbines, blades and monopiles provide stable cargo for MPV and heavy-lift operators. Nordic Hamburg Group signed firm contracts this week for three 13,300-deadweight metric ton (dwt) heavy-lift multipurpose vessels, plus options for two similar vessels with Wuhu Shipyard, the east China shipbuilder said in a statement. The shipyard did not disclose financial details, but shipbrokers said the total order was worth about $150 million. The ships will be equipped with two 250-metric ton cranes to give a combined lifting capacity of 500 metric tons, “which can efficiently carry wind power equipment and other large equipment,” the statement said. The Ice-class vessels will have cargo hold totaling 936,000 cubic feet and will be over 20% more fuel efficient than older vessels, the shipyard added. The ships are likely to be delivered in 2027. Nordic Hamburg owns and manages a fleet of about 60 ships, including container ships and container and roll-on/roll-off (conro) ships, in addition to MPVs. Separately, Chinese shipowner Fujian Highton Development has ordered up to seven 62,000-dwt multipurpose and heavy-lift vessels from China’s Taizhou Kouan Shipbuilding. The deal, with a total value of about $300 million, comprises a firm contract for three ships to be delivered in 2029 and options for four similar ships. Fujian’s investment in the first three vessels will be capped at $130 million, the company said in a filing to the Shanghai stock exchange. Fujian, which operates about 80 MPVs and dry cargo ships, is planning to expand to 100 vessels by 2030. Contact Keith Wallis at keithwallis@hotmail.com .

Energy projects

Heavy-haul transport

Breakbulk News

Maritime

Carriers expand MPV fleets with $450 million in new vessel orders

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">But the US’ largest intermodal provider said during its fourth-quarter earnings call it is not forecasting a market inflection just yet, citing the “false starts” the industry has seen during the past 18 months.</div>

But the US’ largest intermodal provider said during its fourth-quarter earnings call it is not forecasting a market inflection just yet, citing the “false starts” the industry has seen during the past 18 months.

<div class="phx-topic">The US truckload market is “fragile” enough given the capacity now exiting that a disruption or demand catalyst could quickly send prices higher and mark the end of the freight recession, according to J. B. Hunt. But the US’ largest intermodal provider is not forecasting an inflection just yet, citing what it called the “false starts” the market has seen during the past 18 months. “[An] uptick in demand could create an environment that’s different than what we’ve seen in the last several years,” J.B. Hunt CEO Shelley Simpson said late Thursday during the company’s fourth-quarter earnings call. “Having said that, we’re not holding our breath ... We want to finish up at least January and February and see what happens there.” Spot market truckload rates paid by the shipper rose 19 cents month over month in December to $2.46 per mile on lanes greater than 250 miles, according to a Journal of Commerce analysis of data from DAT Freight and Analytics, Sunset Transportation, and digital platform Loadsmart. Shippers have told the Journal of Commerce, however, that the December spot market surge has not emerged as a topic in ongoing truckload contract negotiations. “Most customers view recent market tightening as temporary and seasonal rather than a structural shift,” Spencer Frazier, J.B. Hunt’s executive vice president of sales, said on the earnings call. “After several years of mixed signals and forecasting challenges, customers will only acknowledge a structural change after they feel a tighter market for a longer period of time, likely driven by some degree of both reduced capacity and stronger demand.” <h3>Intermodal markets still sluggish </h3>Intermodal demand, which often lags truckload, has yet to strengthen enough to shift pricing power back toward carriers. J.B. Hunt reported that its intermodal revenue was down 3% and volume down 2% year over year in the fourth quarter. Volume on the West Coast dropped 6%, while East Coast volume rose 5% in the fourth quarter. Intermodal operating income increased 16% year over year in the quarter, driven by lower costs and a strategy of walking away from low-margin freight. Over the past year, J.B. Hunt has emphasized yield and margin discipline even at the expense of weaker volume and revenue. To support that goal, the company has taken a tougher stance on pricing, a decision that has resulted in losing share to competitors in California. RailState, a rail visibility and analytics provider, reported that Union Pacific Railroad’s (UP’s) domestic intermodal volume out of Southern California increased more than 20% year over year in the fourth quarter, while BNSF Railway’s volume fell about 5%. The divergence suggests that UP partners such as Hub Group and Schneider National have captured business at J.B. Hunt’s expense in Southern California. BNSF is J.B. Hunt’s exclusive partner in the western US. Despite J.B. Hunt’s emphasis on margins, there is no indication that intermodal pricing dynamics have shifted materially from a year ago. During the 2025 bid cycle, intermodal providers were generally able to secure rate increases on outbound lanes from California, but struggled to do so elsewhere. “We’re a little bit hesitant to suggest that we think there’s some big pricing opportunity, but we’ll be quick to identify when we see the market shift...,” Darren Field, J.B. Hunt’s president of intermodal, said during the call. Field added that it’s too early to gauge 2026 contract pricing, noting that many of the intermodal bids in the fourth quarter were backhaul routes. Pricing on those lanes was flat to down last year as e-commerce giant Amazon continued to offer low rates to third-party shippers to fill capacity on return moves to Southern California. Field also made brief remarks about the UP-Norfolk Southern merger application filed Dec. 19 with the US Surface Transportation Board. “We continue to digest the application and had expected more intermodal-specific questions to be addressed in the merger application than there were [addressed],” he said. Analysts did not ask Field to elaborate. J.B. Hunt did not respond to a Journal of Commerce request for comment on which intermodal-related issues it expected to be addressed in the filing but were not. Contact Ari Ashe at <a href="mailto:ari.ashe@spglobal.com">ari.ashe@spglobal.com</a>.</div>

The US truckload market is “fragile” enough given the capacity now exiting that a disruption or demand catalyst could quickly send prices higher and mark the end of the freight recession, according to J. B. Hunt. But the US’ largest intermodal provider is not forecasting an inflection just yet, citing what it called the “false starts” the market has seen during the past 18 months. “[An] uptick in demand could create an environment that’s different than what we’ve seen in the last several years,” J.B. Hunt CEO Shelley Simpson said late Thursday during the company’s fourth-quarter earnings call. “Having said that, we’re not holding our breath ... We want to finish up at least January and February and see what happens there.” Spot market truckload rates paid by the shipper rose 19 cents month over month in December to $2.46 per mile on lanes greater than 250 miles, according to a Journal of Commerce analysis of data from DAT Freight and Analytics, Sunset Transportation, and digital platform Loadsmart. Shippers have told the Journal of Commerce, however, that the December spot market surge has not emerged as a topic in ongoing truckload contract negotiations. “Most customers view recent market tightening as temporary and seasonal rather than a structural shift,” Spencer Frazier, J.B. Hunt’s executive vice president of sales, said on the earnings call. “After several years of mixed signals and forecasting challenges, customers will only acknowledge a structural change after they feel a tighter market for a longer period of time, likely driven by some degree of both reduced capacity and stronger demand.” Intermodal markets still sluggish Intermodal demand, which often lags truckload, has yet to strengthen enough to shift pricing power back toward carriers. J.B. Hunt reported that its intermodal revenue was down 3% and volume down 2% year over year in the fourth quarter. Volume on the West Coast dropped 6%, while East Coast volume rose 5% in the fourth quarter. Intermodal operating income increased 16% year over year in the quarter, driven by lower costs and a strategy of walking away from low-margin freight. Over the past year, J.B. Hunt has emphasized yield and margin discipline even at the expense of weaker volume and revenue. To support that goal, the company has taken a tougher stance on pricing, a decision that has resulted in losing share to competitors in California. RailState, a rail visibility and analytics provider, reported that Union Pacific Railroad’s (UP’s) domestic intermodal volume out of Southern California increased more than 20% year over year in the fourth quarter, while BNSF Railway’s volume fell about 5%. The divergence suggests that UP partners such as Hub Group and Schneider National have captured business at J.B. Hunt’s expense in Southern California. BNSF is J.B. Hunt’s exclusive partner in the western US. Despite J.B. Hunt’s emphasis on margins, there is no indication that intermodal pricing dynamics have shifted materially from a year ago. During the 2025 bid cycle, intermodal providers were generally able to secure rate increases on outbound lanes from California, but struggled to do so elsewhere. “We’re a little bit hesitant to suggest that we think there’s some big pricing opportunity, but we’ll be quick to identify when we see the market shift...,” Darren Field, J.B. Hunt’s president of intermodal, said during the call. Field added that it’s too early to gauge 2026 contract pricing, noting that many of the intermodal bids in the fourth quarter were backhaul routes. Pricing on those lanes was flat to down last year as e-commerce giant Amazon continued to offer low rates to third-party shippers to fill capacity on return moves to Southern California. Field also made brief remarks about the UP-Norfolk Southern merger application filed Dec. 19 with the US Surface Transportation Board. “We continue to digest the application and had expected more intermodal-specific questions to be addressed in the merger application than there were [addressed],” he said. Analysts did not ask Field to elaborate. J.B. Hunt did not respond to a Journal of Commerce request for comment on which intermodal-related issues it expected to be addressed in the filing but were not. Contact Ari Ashe at ari.ashe@spglobal.com .

Trucking News

Truckload

Intermodal providers

Truckload at a tipping point; intermodal still lagging: J.B. Hunt

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">But rapid development of the record 8.4 gigawatts of new offshore capacity could lead to ship capacity constraints and logistical bottlenecks.</div>

But rapid development of the record 8.4 gigawatts of new offshore capacity could lead to ship capacity constraints and logistical bottlenecks.

<div class="phx-topic">Multipurpose and heavy-lift vessel operators are set for a surge of cargo linked to offshore wind farms around the coast of Britain after the UK government greenlit eight projects totaling $30 billion for completion by 2030. The projects, announced on Jan. 14, cover a record 8.4 GW of new offshore wind capacity split between six fixed and two floating sites around the coast of Britain following a government-backed auction of new locations. They will represent a 50% increase in offshore wind capacity from the 16 GW operating at the end of 2025. Still, vessel operators and analysts cautioned the development of so much offshore wind capacity in such a short period could cause supply chain bottlenecks due to limits on specialized vessel availability, port capacity, and the manufacturing capability of key equipment. “The volume of bottom-fixed projects implies a very high level of demand for heavy-lift and jack-up vessels, increasing the risk of installation bottlenecks if schedules converge,” Maëlig Gaborieau, senior offshore wind analyst at consultancy Spinergie, told the Journal of Commerce. Gaborieau said the supply of nacelles, which house the power generation equipment at the top of the turbine tower, is the most exposed part of the supply chain. “The scale program is such that UK projects alone will absorb a very significant share of European nacelle manufacturing capacity over a short period,” he said. “This makes nacelles the most critical component-level risk in terms of delivery timelines.” The supply of monopile foundations is also tight, although components are likely to be imported by non-European manufacturers including China, which would provide some additional flexibility, the analyst said. <h3>Ship capacity a concern </h3>Michael Mørland, project cargo director at multipurpose vessel (MPV) operator G2 Ocean, said there is currently limited capacity of MPVs and heavy-lift ships that can handle longer and heavier equipment, including blades and monopiles. “Blades, for example, typically span 344 to 377 feet, demanding ships with extended holds for tower sections and expansive, unobstructed weather decks to accommodate such lengths,” he told the Journal of Commerce. Some operators have seen this gap in the market and have ordered vessels that can more easily handle and install the latest generation of wind farm components. G2 Ocean will take delivery of 10 82,000-deadweight metric ton open hatch MPVs between now and 2029. Chipolbrok has 11 heavy-lift MPVs on order, including up to 10 60,800-dwt ships ordered last week, while DSME took delivery of the Norse Energi, on Jan. 15, its second new wind turbine installation vessel purpose built to install the next generation of large-scale offshore wind turbines. Mørland thought that this extra cargo volume could ease capacity constraints, but it would also lead to a firming in charter rates with the more capable ships attracting a premium. He said the eight UK projects are expected to involve the installation of approximately 500 to 600 turbines, “boosting the project cargo volumes bound for the North Sea.” “For G2 Ocean, this signals renewed momentum in the offshore wind segment — a welcome change after a period of slower growth,” Mørland said. <h3>Ports a possible chokepoint </h3>Mørland also highlighted port capacity as a potential bottleneck for the cargo needed for the UK projects. “The availability of lay-down areas and mobilization yards is a concern that has been widely raised in relation to this project,” he said. “The UK has limited space for these large offshore wind components. “Complicating matters, the UK’s departure from the EU means that utilizing facilities in neighboring countries for storage and staging is no longer as straightforward,” he added. “Deciding where the components will be manufactured, as well as securing sufficient staging, lay-down, and mobilization yard capacities, must be addressed fast to avoid delays to the projects.” But Spinergie’s Gaborieau said pressure on ports could be reduced by components being delivered and installed progressively, allowing more manageable lay-down capacity. Mørland thought the winners of the eight projects would already be talking to potential shipping and equipment company partners. RWE, the German energy company, won approval for five of the eight projects — Norfolk Vanguard East, Norfolk Vanguard West, and two Dogger Bank South projects in the British North Sea, plus the Awel y Môr project located in the Irish Sea — that total 6.9 GW of capacity. Investment firm KKR has teamed up with RWE to jointly develop, build and operate the two Norfolk Vanguard projects. Energy company SSE will develop the 1,380-MW Berwick Bank B project in northern England. Highland Wind, led by Copenhagen Offshore Partners, is developing the 9.5-MW Pentland floating offshore wind farm off the coast of northern Scotland. The second floating wind farm development is Blue Gem Wind’s 100-MW project off the coast of Wales. RWE and SSE declined to comment beyond their official statements. Other companies, including turbine suppliers Vestas and Siemens Gamesa, did not respond to requests for comment from the Journal of Commerce. Contact Keith Wallis at <a href="mailtokeithwallis@hotmail.com">keithwallis@hotmail.com</a>. </div>

Multipurpose and heavy-lift vessel operators are set for a surge of cargo linked to offshore wind farms around the coast of Britain after the UK government greenlit eight projects totaling $30 billion for completion by 2030. The projects, announced on Jan. 14, cover a record 8.4 GW of new offshore wind capacity split between six fixed and two floating sites around the coast of Britain following a government-backed auction of new locations. They will represent a 50% increase in offshore wind capacity from the 16 GW operating at the end of 2025. Still, vessel operators and analysts cautioned the development of so much offshore wind capacity in such a short period could cause supply chain bottlenecks due to limits on specialized vessel availability, port capacity, and the manufacturing capability of key equipment. “The volume of bottom-fixed projects implies a very high level of demand for heavy-lift and jack-up vessels, increasing the risk of installation bottlenecks if schedules converge,” Maëlig Gaborieau, senior offshore wind analyst at consultancy Spinergie, told the Journal of Commerce. Gaborieau said the supply of nacelles, which house the power generation equipment at the top of the turbine tower, is the most exposed part of the supply chain. “The scale program is such that UK projects alone will absorb a very significant share of European nacelle manufacturing capacity over a short period,” he said. “This makes nacelles the most critical component-level risk in terms of delivery timelines.” The supply of monopile foundations is also tight, although components are likely to be imported by non-European manufacturers including China, which would provide some additional flexibility, the analyst said. Ship capacity a concern Michael Mørland, project cargo director at multipurpose vessel (MPV) operator G2 Ocean, said there is currently limited capacity of MPVs and heavy-lift ships that can handle longer and heavier equipment, including blades and monopiles. “Blades, for example, typically span 344 to 377 feet, demanding ships with extended holds for tower sections and expansive, unobstructed weather decks to accommodate such lengths,” he told the Journal of Commerce. Some operators have seen this gap in the market and have ordered vessels that can more easily handle and install the latest generation of wind farm components. G2 Ocean will take delivery of 10 82,000-deadweight metric ton open hatch MPVs between now and 2029. Chipolbrok has 11 heavy-lift MPVs on order, including up to 10 60,800-dwt ships ordered last week, while DSME took delivery of the Norse Energi, on Jan. 15, its second new wind turbine installation vessel purpose built to install the next generation of large-scale offshore wind turbines. Mørland thought that this extra cargo volume could ease capacity constraints, but it would also lead to a firming in charter rates with the more capable ships attracting a premium. He said the eight UK projects are expected to involve the installation of approximately 500 to 600 turbines, “boosting the project cargo volumes bound for the North Sea.” “For G2 Ocean, this signals renewed momentum in the offshore wind segment — a welcome change after a period of slower growth,” Mørland said. Ports a possible chokepoint Mørland also highlighted port capacity as a potential bottleneck for the cargo needed for the UK projects. “The availability of lay-down areas and mobilization yards is a concern that has been widely raised in relation to this project,” he said. “The UK has limited space for these large offshore wind components. “Complicating matters, the UK’s departure from the EU means that utilizing facilities in neighboring countries for storage and staging is no longer as straightforward,” he added. “Deciding where the components will be manufactured, as well as securing sufficient staging, lay-down, and mobilization yard capacities, must be addressed fast to avoid delays to the projects.” But Spinergie’s Gaborieau said pressure on ports could be reduced by components being delivered and installed progressively, allowing more manageable lay-down capacity. Mørland thought the winners of the eight projects would already be talking to potential shipping and equipment company partners. RWE, the German energy company, won approval for five of the eight projects — Norfolk Vanguard East, Norfolk Vanguard West, and two Dogger Bank South projects in the British North Sea, plus the Awel y Môr project located in the Irish Sea — that total 6.9 GW of capacity. Investment firm KKR has teamed up with RWE to jointly develop, build and operate the two Norfolk Vanguard projects. Energy company SSE will develop the 1,380-MW Berwick Bank B project in northern England. Highland Wind, led by Copenhagen Offshore Partners, is developing the 9.5-MW Pentland floating offshore wind farm off the coast of northern Scotland. The second floating wind farm development is Blue Gem Wind’s 100-MW project off the coast of Wales. RWE and SSE declined to comment beyond their official statements. Other companies, including turbine suppliers Vestas and Siemens Gamesa, did not respond to requests for comment from the Journal of Commerce. Contact Keith Wallis at keithwallis@hotmail.com .

MPV, heavy-lift operators ready for UK offshore wind boom after project approvals

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">There are a lot of theories explaining the current freight recession, but there is no disputing that decreased demand, cutthroat competition, and plummeting rates have occurred simultaneously with inflationary cost components, writes Ted Prince.</div>

There are a lot of theories explaining the current freight recession, but there is no disputing that decreased demand, cutthroat competition, and plummeting rates have occurred simultaneously with inflationary cost components, writes Ted Prince.

<div class="phx-topic">In 1948, Gerald Hern, sports editor of the Boston Post, composed a brief poem describing the Boston Braves’ pitching en route to the 1948 National League pennant: First we’ll use Spahn then we’ll use Sain Then an off day, followed by rain Back will come Spahn, followed by Sain And followed, we hope, by two days of rain Warren Spahn and Johnny Sain were responsible for 39 of the Braves’ 91 victories that year. However, it was common to have a one-two punch at the top of a team’s pitching rotation. Intermodal has a similar duality: international and domestic — primarily dry 40- and 53-foot containers, respectively. While intermodal has a plethora of markets and equipment, the two segments have been carrying the industry for decades to constant new heights. They are also closely correlated in that a great deal of the domestic market is import cargo that was transloaded on the West Coast for movement inland. Hern’s work comes to mind when thinking about intermodal’s performance in 2025 and its prospects for 2026. Unlike the hoped-for two days of good rain, the industry has endured four years of painful rain since the halcyon volumes of 2021, the “good old days” of the COVID-19 pandemic. There are a lot of theories explaining the current freight “recession,” but there is no disputing that decreased demand, cutthroat competition, and plummeting rates have occurred simultaneously with inflationary cost components. As a result, intermodal has frequently found itself as a surface freight alternative that is slower and more expensive than trucking. And while there were some green shoots in 2024, the industry has been hoping for a second-half recovery — that has failed to materialize — in each of the past three years. The same seems true for 2026. <h3>Supply and demand drivers </h3>As we look forward, we need to consider supply and demand drivers. “Affordability” has taken the place of prominence in our political lexicon. As the costs of food and housing rise, discretionary income for other consumer products has shriveled and reduced demand. The same goes for increasing credit card, car, and student loan debt. Regardless of mortgage rates, there are long-term limitations on housing starts. This can further reduce consumer demand because so many purchases — e.g., furniture, home, electronics, etc. — are often associated with new homes. And although seven-year car loans have become more common, I don’t believe 50-year home mortgages will have the same penetration. With demand problematic, intermodal success will probably rely on supply changes. Many contend that the demand during the early days of COVID-19 created excess capacity that the truck market is still trying to absorb. However, it is unclear whether there was really an increase in overall capacity, or just realignment as many truckers decided to go out on their own. Regardless, there were a number of carriers that acquired capacity at historically high prices and must keep operating to just make their payments. The normal culling of unprofitable capacity was precluded by this inability to exit the market, ensuring a never-ending supply of zombie truckers. This capacity is getting older and more expensive to operate. Nevertheless, there is a feeling (or hope?) that 2026 will finally see marginal carriers leave the market and rate stability restored. <h3>Enhanced regulatory oversight </h3>The environmental green benefits of intermodal are not a priority for the current administration, so economic green will be paramount. Most likely that would come from increased regulatory oversight. Enhanced enforcement on non-domiciled commercial driver’s licenses is reducing driver supply. And there is still the unknown of hacked electronic logging devices allowing for illegal hours of service. What is unclear is whether these initiatives will impact truckload and drayage carriers equally, or whether one segment will suffer disproportionate opprobrium. If it is the former, intermodal will be advantaged; however, if it is the latter, maybe not. The former would be a rising tide that would raise all intermodal ships, whereas the latter could see the further ascendance of bimodal operations with integrated drayage overseen by robust safety regimens. In an attempt to increase demand, we can expect major players to assume prominent roles. Railroads and bimodals will seek to deploy equipment that has been stored for years. Ocean carriers will continue to consider their inland options. Finally, ports may become more involved as they explore inland options to attract more discretionary cargo. There are no historical comparisons for the last five years. It is unclear when the market will turn, but when it does, the recovery will follow Ernest Hemingway’s description: “Gradually, then suddenly.” We can then hope for the sun also to rise on intermodal. Ted Prince is founder and CEO of Tri-Cities Intermodal LLC. Contact him at <a href="mailto:ted@tricitiesintermodal.com">ted@tricitiesintermodal.com</a>.</div>

In 1948, Gerald Hern, sports editor of the Boston Post, composed a brief poem describing the Boston Braves’ pitching en route to the 1948 National League pennant: First we’ll use Spahn then we’ll use Sain Then an off day, followed by rain Back will come Spahn, followed by Sain And followed, we hope, by two days of rain Warren Spahn and Johnny Sain were responsible for 39 of the Braves’ 91 victories that year. However, it was common to have a one-two punch at the top of a team’s pitching rotation. Intermodal has a similar duality: international and domestic — primarily dry 40- and 53-foot containers, respectively. While intermodal has a plethora of markets and equipment, the two segments have been carrying the industry for decades to constant new heights. They are also closely correlated in that a great deal of the domestic market is import cargo that was transloaded on the West Coast for movement inland. Hern’s work comes to mind when thinking about intermodal’s performance in 2025 and its prospects for 2026. Unlike the hoped-for two days of good rain, the industry has endured four years of painful rain since the halcyon volumes of 2021, the “good old days” of the COVID-19 pandemic. There are a lot of theories explaining the current freight “recession,” but there is no disputing that decreased demand, cutthroat competition, and plummeting rates have occurred simultaneously with inflationary cost components. As a result, intermodal has frequently found itself as a surface freight alternative that is slower and more expensive than trucking. And while there were some green shoots in 2024, the industry has been hoping for a second-half recovery — that has failed to materialize — in each of the past three years. The same seems true for 2026. Supply and demand drivers As we look forward, we need to consider supply and demand drivers. “Affordability” has taken the place of prominence in our political lexicon. As the costs of food and housing rise, discretionary income for other consumer products has shriveled and reduced demand. The same goes for increasing credit card, car, and student loan debt. Regardless of mortgage rates, there are long-term limitations on housing starts. This can further reduce consumer demand because so many purchases — e.g., furniture, home, electronics, etc. — are often associated with new homes. And although seven-year car loans have become more common, I don’t believe 50-year home mortgages will have the same penetration. With demand problematic, intermodal success will probably rely on supply changes. Many contend that the demand during the early days of COVID-19 created excess capacity that the truck market is still trying to absorb. However, it is unclear whether there was really an increase in overall capacity, or just realignment as many truckers decided to go out on their own. Regardless, there were a number of carriers that acquired capacity at historically high prices and must keep operating to just make their payments. The normal culling of unprofitable capacity was precluded by this inability to exit the market, ensuring a never-ending supply of zombie truckers. This capacity is getting older and more expensive to operate. Nevertheless, there is a feeling (or hope?) that 2026 will finally see marginal carriers leave the market and rate stability restored. Enhanced regulatory oversight The environmental green benefits of intermodal are not a priority for the current administration, so economic green will be paramount. Most likely that would come from increased regulatory oversight. Enhanced enforcement on non-domiciled commercial driver’s licenses is reducing driver supply. And there is still the unknown of hacked electronic logging devices allowing for illegal hours of service. What is unclear is whether these initiatives will impact truckload and drayage carriers equally, or whether one segment will suffer disproportionate opprobrium. If it is the former, intermodal will be advantaged; however, if it is the latter, maybe not. The former would be a rising tide that would raise all intermodal ships, whereas the latter could see the further ascendance of bimodal operations with integrated drayage overseen by robust safety regimens. In an attempt to increase demand, we can expect major players to assume prominent roles. Railroads and bimodals will seek to deploy equipment that has been stored for years. Ocean carriers will continue to consider their inland options. Finally, ports may become more involved as they explore inland options to attract more discretionary cargo. There are no historical comparisons for the last five years. It is unclear when the market will turn, but when it does, the recovery will follow Ernest Hemingway’s description: “Gradually, then suddenly.” We can then hope for the sun also to rise on intermodal. Ted Prince is founder and CEO of Tri-Cities Intermodal LLC. Contact him at ted@tricitiesintermodal.com .

Supply chain

Pace of freight market recovery a matter of ‘gradually, then suddenly’

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">As AI becomes embedded across global trade workflows, the companies that stand apart will be the ones that treat identity, consent and authorization as core infrastructure.</div>

As AI becomes embedded across global trade workflows, the companies that stand apart will be the ones that treat identity, consent and authorization as core infrastructure.

<div class="phx-topic">Global trade runs on trust, long before it runs on technology. Every day, cargo, data and cash move across borders through a complex network of shippers, forwarders, airlines, ground handlers, customs authorities, banks and regulators. While technology supports these flows, accountability for them still concentrates in one place: the forwarder. Forwarders sit at the intersection of commercial commitment and regulatory responsibility. They carry the risk when descriptions are wrong, classifications are incomplete, tariffs are misapplied or known shipper requirements are not met. Whether it is EU tariff enforcement, customs declarations, security filings or payment settlement, errors propagate outward but consequences flow back. Despite decades of digitization efforts, much of global trade still operates on email, spreadsheets, PDFs and human judgment. That reality is not accidental. It reflects the need to verify who is acting, on whose authority and with what accountability. Artificial intelligence is now changing this environment in subtle but important ways. When automation blurs authorization I was recently pitched on a marketing service that promised to improve outbound engagement using AI. The model was straightforward: automated emails sent on behalf of a company, written in its voice, referencing its brand and measured through open and click rates. The reported results were better than industry benchmarks. By traditional marketing standards, it looked successful. The concern was not performance, but authorization. When asked who had granted permission to use the company’s identity to communicate externally, the answer was implicit rather than explicit. The system was optimized for activity, not accountability. This approach is not new. Variations of it have existed for decades. What has changed is scale. Large language models make it easy to generate convincing, personalized communication that appears legitimate, authorized and informed, even when it is not. To the recipient, such outreach is indistinguishable from spam. But to the represented company, it quietly introduces reputational and security risk. Why this matters more in air cargo In air freight and global trade, identity is not cosmetic; it is operational. Forwarders do not simply coordinate movement; they certify information. They stand behind documentation. They are relied upon by regulators, airlines and customers to ensure that what is declared matches what moves. As AI-generated communication becomes more prevalent, the industry faces a growing gap between who appears to be speaking and who is accountable if something goes wrong. This gap is especially dangerous in an environment where compliance requirements are tightening. From tariff enforcement to known shipper programs to data accuracy mandates, regulators are not reducing expectations; they are increasing them. Yet many commercial practices, particularly around outreach and representation, are evolving without similar discipline. Reframing security in global trade Much of the AI discussion in logistics focuses on data security. That focus is necessary but incomplete. Equally important is identity security: Who is authorized to represent a company, under what conditions, with what auditability, and how does the counterparty know? Other industries have addressed similar risks through Know Your Customer (KYC) and Know Your Business (KYB) standards. Logistics already applies analogous rigor to cargo movement. The same rigor should apply to how companies represent themselves digitally. The lesson here is not that forwarders need more tools to know what moved, where it went or when it arrived. Most already have that visibility. What they need is confidence that the information entering the system is authorized, intentional and accountable. As AI becomes embedded across global trade workflows, the companies that stand apart will not be the loudest or the most automated. They will be the ones that treat identity, consent and authorization as core infrastructure. Efficiency gained at the expense of trust is not progress. In global trade, it is deferred risk, and that risk more often than not lands squarely on the forwarder. Chris Condon is CEO of Aircon and can be reached at <a href="mailto:ccondon@aircon.ai">ccondon@aircon.ai.</a></div>

Global trade runs on trust, long before it runs on technology. Every day, cargo, data and cash move across borders through a complex network of shippers, forwarders, airlines, ground handlers, customs authorities, banks and regulators. While technology supports these flows, accountability for them still concentrates in one place: the forwarder. Forwarders sit at the intersection of commercial commitment and regulatory responsibility. They carry the risk when descriptions are wrong, classifications are incomplete, tariffs are misapplied or known shipper requirements are not met. Whether it is EU tariff enforcement, customs declarations, security filings or payment settlement, errors propagate outward but consequences flow back. Despite decades of digitization efforts, much of global trade still operates on email, spreadsheets, PDFs and human judgment. That reality is not accidental. It reflects the need to verify who is acting, on whose authority and with what accountability. Artificial intelligence is now changing this environment in subtle but important ways. When automation blurs authorization I was recently pitched on a marketing service that promised to improve outbound engagement using AI. The model was straightforward: automated emails sent on behalf of a company, written in its voice, referencing its brand and measured through open and click rates. The reported results were better than industry benchmarks. By traditional marketing standards, it looked successful. The concern was not performance, but authorization. When asked who had granted permission to use the company’s identity to communicate externally, the answer was implicit rather than explicit. The system was optimized for activity, not accountability. This approach is not new. Variations of it have existed for decades. What has changed is scale. Large language models make it easy to generate convincing, personalized communication that appears legitimate, authorized and informed, even when it is not. To the recipient, such outreach is indistinguishable from spam. But to the represented company, it quietly introduces reputational and security risk. Why this matters more in air cargo In air freight and global trade, identity is not cosmetic; it is operational. Forwarders do not simply coordinate movement; they certify information. They stand behind documentation. They are relied upon by regulators, airlines and customers to ensure that what is declared matches what moves. As AI-generated communication becomes more prevalent, the industry faces a growing gap between who appears to be speaking and who is accountable if something goes wrong. This gap is especially dangerous in an environment where compliance requirements are tightening. From tariff enforcement to known shipper programs to data accuracy mandates, regulators are not reducing expectations; they are increasing them. Yet many commercial practices, particularly around outreach and representation, are evolving without similar discipline. Reframing security in global trade Much of the AI discussion in logistics focuses on data security. That focus is necessary but incomplete. Equally important is identity security: Who is authorized to represent a company, under what conditions, with what auditability, and how does the counterparty know? Other industries have addressed similar risks through Know Your Customer (KYC) and Know Your Business (KYB) standards. Logistics already applies analogous rigor to cargo movement. The same rigor should apply to how companies represent themselves digitally. The lesson here is not that forwarders need more tools to know what moved, where it went or when it arrived. Most already have that visibility. What they need is confidence that the information entering the system is authorized, intentional and accountable. As AI becomes embedded across global trade workflows, the companies that stand apart will not be the loudest or the most automated. They will be the ones that treat identity, consent and authorization as core infrastructure. Efficiency gained at the expense of trust is not progress. In global trade, it is deferred risk, and that risk more often than not lands squarely on the forwarder. Chris Condon is CEO of Aircon and can be reached at ccondon@aircon.ai.

Forwarding

In an AI-driven trade system, identity matters as much as capacity

West

East

Gulf

PIERS containerized US import and export volumes is the transportation industry’s largest US waterborne trade data set, covering all US ports. Every day, the PIERS team processes an average of about 60,000 bills of lading filed with US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and integrates this transactional trade data with standardized company details. PIERS contains US trade data going back to 2003. [PIERS](https://www.spglobal.com/marketintelligence/en/mi/products/piers.html)

Asia to US West, East and Gulf Coast YTD container volume market share (PIERS)

PIERS TEU market share US coastal imports from Asia (YTD) Gateway

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Operating conditions could also turn expected losses in 2026 into profits despite little clarity over the timing of a widespread return to Red Sea transits, according to the consultancy.</div>

Operating conditions could also turn expected losses in 2026 into profits despite little clarity over the timing of a widespread return to Red Sea transits, according to the consultancy.

<div class="phx-topic">Ocean carriers are expected to report better-than-expected full-year 2025 results over the next few weeks due to higher profit margins through the third quarter and slowing fleet growth, according to maritime consultancy Drewry. Although rates softened and volume slowed on the major east-west trade lanes through the fourth quarter, Drewry is also revising its prior loss-making forecast for 2026. The consultancy now expects the industry to turn a profit despite little clarity over the timing of a widespread return to Red Sea transits that would release 8% of global capacity back into an already oversupplied market. Simon Heaney, senior manager for container research at Drewry, said the container shipping sector’s earnings before interest and taxes (EBIT) margins fell to 12.3% in the third quarter of 2025, well below the 34.5% margin recorded in third-quarter 2024 but still a significant rate-supported improvement on the 7.9% margin in the 2025 second quarter. “This was an unexpected change of direction as we had anticipated that margins would shrink further in 3Q 2025,” Heaney told the Journal of Commerce Tuesday.  The “better-than-expected results” has prompted Drewry to upgrade the financial year 2025 profit forecast from $20 billion to $32 billion and raise the outlook for 2026 from a $10 billion loss to a $1 billion profit, he noted. HSBC Global Investment Research highlighted the narrowing supply-demand gap in a market update that pointed to data showing container fleet growth slowing to 4% in 2026 from 7% in 2025, with demand growth this year slowing to 2.5% compared to 4% in 2025. The report said, “... we think the gap is manageable before worsening in 2027 when [vessel] deliveries surge to all-time highs.” “Demand is holding up despite US container imports declining in the past few months and the National Retail Federation expecting weakness until April, albeit milder than previous forecasts,” HSBC noted.  On the Asia-Europe trade, the latest data from Container Trades Statistics (CTS) shows a 15.5% year-over-year increase in volume in November, which HSBC said indicated <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/asia-europe-ocean-carriers-add-capacity-as-trade-enters-peak-shipping-period-6145059">a pre-Lunar New Year peak season rush</a>. Still no clarity over return to Red Sea A return of container shipping to the Red Sea hangs over the 2026 outlook, with the timing of such a return likely to have a material influence on carrier earnings. Analysts remain divided over when a widescale return will happen. Carriers have mostly avoided the Red Sea and Suez Canal since late 2023 when Houthi militants operating in Yemen began their attacks on commercial shipping to protest Israel’s move into Gaza. “We see no immediate resolution to the Red Sea disruptions, which alongside ongoing port congestion in Europe should keep capacity tight and prevent freight rates from capitulating,” HSBC said. J.P. Morgan had a more positive view, noting that a 20% increase in Suez transits in December compared to the previous month has created growing interest around shipping’s return to the far-quicker route. “We expect this to happen post-Lunar New Year on Feb. 17, and we see limited disruption risk of congestion in Europe materially impacting short-term rates should the timing coincide with the seasonal trough,” the investment bank noted. Peter Sand, chief analyst for rate benchmarking platform Xeneta, said it was “highly unlikely” carriers would present extensive guidance on a Red Sea return in their 2026 outlooks. He expected carriers to maintain Cape of Good Hope transits around southern Africa while planning for a gradual shift to the Suez route. Another Maersk vessel transits Suez Following the successful transit of the Maersk Sebarok through the Suez and Red Sea in December, the carrier sent the Maersk Denver through the waterway this week; both vessels are part of the MECL service linking India to the US East Coast. However, in a customer advisory Tuesday, Maersk was quick to reiterate its position that the safety of crew, vessels and cargo remained “of utmost importance,” noting the necessary safety measures were applied during the transit of the Maersk Denver.  “Customers with cargo on this vessel are being informed directly,” the carrier said. “Assuming that security thresholds continue to be met, we will continue our stepwise approach towards gradually resuming navigation along the east-west corridor via the Suez Canal and the Red Sea. There are no additional sailings to announce at this time.”  While the ceasefire between Israel and Hamas that was agreed to in October is holding, rapidly unfolding geopolitical events in the region are again raising red flags, according to Jack Kennedy, head of Middle East and North Africa country risk at S&amp;P Global Market Intelligence. “If Israel gets involved in [new] strikes on Iran, there is a higher likelihood that the Houthi will resume some kind of direct attacks on Israel from Yemen, and that might extend to US shipping with acknowledgment that this increases risk from targeting issues,” Kennedy said. "If the regime in Tehran perceives a genuine existential risk, they will probably try to escalate across the region to create an intervention reassessment from the US,” he added.  S&amp;P Global is the parent company of the Journal of Commerce. Contact Greg Knowler at <a href="mailto:greg.knowler@spglobal.com">greg.knowler@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

Ocean carriers are expected to report better-than-expected full-year 2025 results over the next few weeks due to higher profit margins through the third quarter and slowing fleet growth, according to maritime consultancy Drewry.  Although rates softened and volume slowed on the major east-west trade lanes through the fourth quarter, Drewry is also revising its prior loss-making forecast for 2026. The consultancy now expects the industry to turn a profit despite little clarity over the timing of a widespread return to Red Sea transits that would release 8% of global capacity back into an already oversupplied market.  Simon Heaney, senior manager for container research at Drewry, said the container shipping sector’s earnings before interest and taxes (EBIT) margins fell to 12.3% in the third quarter of 2025, well below the 34.5% margin recorded in third-quarter 2024 but still a significant rate-supported improvement on the 7.9% margin in the 2025 second quarter.  “This was an unexpected change of direction as we had anticipated that margins would shrink further in 3Q 2025,” Heaney told the Journal of Commerce Tuesday.   The “better-than-expected results” has prompted Drewry to upgrade the financial year 2025 profit forecast from $20 billion to $32 billion and raise the outlook for 2026 from a $10 billion loss to a $1 billion profit, he noted.  HSBC Global Investment Research highlighted the narrowing supply-demand gap in a market update that pointed to data showing container fleet growth slowing to 4% in 2026 from 7% in 2025, with demand growth this year slowing to 2.5% compared to 4% in 2025.  The report said, “... we think the gap is manageable before worsening in 2027 when [vessel] deliveries surge to all-time highs.”  “Demand is holding up despite US container imports declining in the past few months and the National Retail Federation expecting weakness until April, albeit milder than previous forecasts,” HSBC noted.   On the Asia-Europe trade, the latest data from Container Trades Statistics (CTS) shows a 15.5% year-over-year increase in volume in November, which HSBC said indicated  a pre-Lunar New Year peak season rush .  Still no clarity over return to Red Sea  A return of container shipping to the Red Sea hangs over the 2026 outlook, with the timing of such a return likely to have a material influence on carrier earnings. Analysts remain divided over when a widescale return will happen. Carriers have mostly avoided the Red Sea and Suez Canal since late 2023 when Houthi militants operating in Yemen began their attacks on commercial shipping to protest Israel’s move into Gaza.  “We see no immediate resolution to the Red Sea disruptions, which alongside ongoing port congestion in Europe should keep capacity tight and prevent freight rates from capitulating,” HSBC said.  J.P. Morgan had a more positive view, noting that a 20% increase in Suez transits in December compared to the previous month has created growing interest around shipping’s return to the far-quicker route.  “We expect this to happen post-Lunar New Year on Feb. 17, and we see limited disruption risk of congestion in Europe materially impacting short-term rates should the timing coincide with the seasonal trough,” the investment bank noted.  Peter Sand, chief analyst for rate benchmarking platform Xeneta, said it was “highly unlikely” carriers would present extensive guidance on a Red Sea return in their 2026 outlooks. He expected carriers to maintain Cape of Good Hope transits around southern Africa while planning for a gradual shift to the Suez route.  Another Maersk vessel transits Suez  Following the successful transit of the Maersk Sebarok through the Suez and Red Sea in December, the carrier sent the Maersk Denver through the waterway this week; both vessels are part of the MECL service linking India to the US East Coast.  However, in a customer advisory Tuesday, Maersk was quick to reiterate its position that the safety of crew, vessels and cargo remained “of utmost importance,” noting the necessary safety measures were applied during the transit of the Maersk Denver.   “Customers with cargo on this vessel are being informed directly,” the carrier said. “Assuming that security thresholds continue to be met, we will continue our stepwise approach towards gradually resuming navigation along the east-west corridor via the Suez Canal and the Red Sea. There are no additional sailings to announce at this time.”   While the ceasefire between Israel and Hamas that was agreed to in October is holding, rapidly unfolding geopolitical events in the region are again raising red flags, according to Jack Kennedy, head of Middle East and North Africa country risk at S&P Global Market Intelligence.  “If Israel gets involved in [new] strikes on Iran, there is a higher likelihood that the Houthi will resume some kind of direct attacks on Israel from Yemen, and that might extend to US shipping with acknowledgment that this increases risk from targeting issues,” Kennedy said.  "If the regime in Tehran perceives a genuine existential risk, they will probably try to escalate across the region to create an intervention reassessment from the US,” he added.   S&P Global is the parent company of the Journal of Commerce.  Contact Greg Knowler at  greg.knowler@spglobal.com . 

Container lines

Asia-Europe

‘Unexpected’ margin boost in Q3 2025 to lift ocean carriers’ full-year results – Drewry 

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">STG said the filing will reset its balance sheet and reduce debt obligations, but drayage, domestic intermodal, transloading and warehousing operations will not be affected.</div>

STG said the filing will reset its balance sheet and reduce debt obligations, but drayage, domestic intermodal, transloading and warehousing operations will not be affected.

<div class="phx-topic">STG Logistics, the US’s fourth-largest asset-based intermodal marketing company, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in New Jersey Monday, entering a court-supervised restructuring that the company said will reduce its debt while keeping freight moving without disruption. STG will reduce funded debt by approximately $952 million, a deleveraging of about 91%, while securing commitments for up to $150 million of new capital, according to the agreement included in the bankruptcy filing. STG, which maintains a large drayage presence in the Port of New York and New Jersey, among other East Coast ports, expects to emerge from Chapter 11 in about five months. The new financing will be structured as debtor-in-possession financing, a form of court-approved bankruptcy that provides cash while STG continues day-to-day operations. The restructuring will change after STG exits bankruptcy. The financing is known as a debt-for-equity swap, under which the participating lender group will trade its debt claims for ownership of the business upon exiting bankruptcy. The new ownership group will be private equity firms Antares Capital, Fortress Investment Group and Invesco, which were part of a controversial 2024 financing transaction that triggered litigation by STG’s minority lenders. Ohio-based STG owns approximately 15,000 domestic containers, behind J.B. Hunt Transport Services, Hub Group and Schneider National. STG also operates a joint service with CSX Transportation called RailPlus, a door-to-door domestic intermodal product covering nearly 350 lanes across the US. STG owns 32 warehouses across North America and offers transloading operations for international shippers. The company runs agency-based ocean drayage operations in US ports and inland rail ramps. STG said the filing will reset its balance sheet and reduce debt obligations, but drayage, domestic intermodal, transloading and warehousing operations will not be affected. Employees and drivers will continue to be paid, as will key vendors, including rail partners such as CSX and Union Pacific Railroad. STG’s bankruptcy was anticipated as the company faces multiple lawsuits and lacks the financial resiliency of larger intermodal competitors to navigate a freight recession approaching its fourth year. S&amp;P Global, the parent company of the Journal of Commerce, lowered STG’s credit rating in July to CCC, warning that free cash flow would end 2025 at $110 million in the red and that STG could run out of money early this year. A CCC rating is considered speculative-grade credit with a high risk of default. STG hired Kirkland &amp; Ellis and PJT Partners, firms known for bankruptcy filings, credit analysts at Octus reported last month. <h3>Lawsuits affected </h3>STG’s bankruptcy will impact two legal disputes involving the company. New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin sued STG Logistics in December 2023 for worker misclassification, seeking back wages and penalties for more than 300 drivers. The lawsuit centers on the rules governing who qualifies as an employee versus an independent contractor. Like California’s AB5, New Jersey applies an “ABC test” that presumes employee status unless a company can satisfy three “prongs,” a high bar in drayage and trucking models. Those prongs are that the worker is free from the control of the hiring entity, that the work is performed outside the usual course of company business and that the worker is engaged in an independently established trade or occupation. The New Jersey case would be frozen and transferred to the bankruptcy court. The bankruptcy filing comes a week after a New York state judge allowed another lawsuit by minority lenders Axos Financial and Siemens Financial Services to move forward, according to The Wall Street Journal. Axos and Siemens were lenders in STG’s 2022 financing to acquire the intermodal division of XPO Logistics. In October 2024, STG announced a $300 million financing package, but Axos and Siemens later sued, alleging the deal also functioned as a liability-management transaction that shifted collateral and other protections toward new lenders, leaving them with weaker claims in bankruptcy. The October 2024 transaction included Antares, Fortress and Invesco, according to the Journal. The New York judge described the Axos and Siemens allegations as “lender bullying,” the Journal reported. Axos and Siemens were not parties to the agreement filed with the court. The filing triggers an automatic stay to the New York case, pausing litigation against the debtor as the restructuring proceeds. Contact Ari Ashe at <a href="mailto:ari.ashe@spglobal.com">ari.ashe@spglobal.com</a>.</div>

STG Logistics, the US’s fourth-largest asset-based intermodal marketing company, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in New Jersey Monday, entering a court-supervised restructuring that the company said will reduce its debt while keeping freight moving without disruption. STG will reduce funded debt by approximately $952 million, a deleveraging of about 91%, while securing commitments for up to $150 million of new capital, according to the agreement included in the bankruptcy filing. STG, which maintains a large drayage presence in the Port of New York and New Jersey, among other East Coast ports, expects to emerge from Chapter 11 in about five months. The new financing will be structured as debtor-in-possession financing, a form of court-approved bankruptcy that provides cash while STG continues day-to-day operations. The restructuring will change after STG exits bankruptcy. The financing is known as a debt-for-equity swap, under which the participating lender group will trade its debt claims for ownership of the business upon exiting bankruptcy. The new ownership group will be private equity firms Antares Capital, Fortress Investment Group and Invesco, which were part of a controversial 2024 financing transaction that triggered litigation by STG’s minority lenders. Ohio-based STG owns approximately 15,000 domestic containers, behind J.B. Hunt Transport Services, Hub Group and Schneider National. STG also operates a joint service with CSX Transportation called RailPlus, a door-to-door domestic intermodal product covering nearly 350 lanes across the US. STG owns 32 warehouses across North America and offers transloading operations for international shippers. The company runs agency-based ocean drayage operations in US ports and inland rail ramps. STG said the filing will reset its balance sheet and reduce debt obligations, but drayage, domestic intermodal, transloading and warehousing operations will not be affected. Employees and drivers will continue to be paid, as will key vendors, including rail partners such as CSX and Union Pacific Railroad. STG’s bankruptcy was anticipated as the company faces multiple lawsuits and lacks the financial resiliency of larger intermodal competitors to navigate a freight recession approaching its fourth year. S&P Global, the parent company of the Journal of Commerce, lowered STG’s credit rating in July to CCC, warning that free cash flow would end 2025 at $110 million in the red and that STG could run out of money early this year. A CCC rating is considered speculative-grade credit with a high risk of default. STG hired Kirkland & Ellis and PJT Partners, firms known for bankruptcy filings, credit analysts at Octus reported last month. Lawsuits affected STG’s bankruptcy will impact two legal disputes involving the company. New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin sued STG Logistics in December 2023 for worker misclassification, seeking back wages and penalties for more than 300 drivers. The lawsuit centers on the rules governing who qualifies as an employee versus an independent contractor. Like California’s AB5, New Jersey applies an “ABC test” that presumes employee status unless a company can satisfy three “prongs,” a high bar in drayage and trucking models. Those prongs are that the worker is free from the control of the hiring entity, that the work is performed outside the usual course of company business and that the worker is engaged in an independently established trade or occupation. The New Jersey case would be frozen and transferred to the bankruptcy court. The bankruptcy filing comes a week after a New York state judge allowed another lawsuit by minority lenders Axos Financial and Siemens Financial Services to move forward, according to The Wall Street Journal. Axos and Siemens were lenders in STG’s 2022 financing to acquire the intermodal division of XPO Logistics. In October 2024, STG announced a $300 million financing package, but Axos and Siemens later sued, alleging the deal also functioned as a liability-management transaction that shifted collateral and other protections toward new lenders, leaving them with weaker claims in bankruptcy. The October 2024 transaction included Antares, Fortress and Invesco, according to the Journal. The New York judge described the Axos and Siemens allegations as “lender bullying,” the Journal reported. Axos and Siemens were not parties to the agreement filed with the court. The filing triggers an automatic stay to the New York case, pausing litigation against the debtor as the restructuring proceeds. Contact Ari Ashe at ari.ashe@spglobal.com .

STG files Ch. 11 bankruptcy, but intermodal operations remain intact

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Most major carriers have set net-zero goals and are investing heavily in dual-fuel vessels that support their emissions-cutting strategies despite a lack of global regulatory support.</div>

Most major carriers have set net-zero goals and are investing heavily in dual-fuel vessels that support their emissions-cutting strategies despite a lack of global regulatory support.

<div class="phx-topic">Dual-fuel vessels capable of running on liquefied natural gas (LNG) continue to dominate the container shipping order book despite ongoing uncertainty around global emissions-cutting regulations.  While the overall newbuilding market across all shipping segments fell to 2,403 orders, down from 4,405 in 2024, new orders in container shipping rose from 447 in 2024 to 547 in 2025, accounting for 49% of all gross tonnage and 68% of alternative-fuel new orders, according to classification society DNV. “The resilience of the alternative fuels order book in 2025 is mainly driven by cargo owners who have set their own emissions reduction goals despite [the] market slowdown and regulatory uncertainty,” Jason Stefanatos, global decarbonization director at DNV, said in a market update Monday. "We see [ocean carriers] prioritizing investments where there is a strong alignment between fuel infrastructure, regulatory certainty and commercial viability, particularly in container shipping, where LNG and methanol are supported by established supply chains and customer demand,” he added. The chance for shipping to become the first global industry to implement emissions-reducing regulations was lost in October when <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/imo-punts-on-pivotal-net-zero-shipping-regulation-6099141">US-led opposition derailed the International Maritime Organization (IMO) net-zero framework</a> at a pivotal Marine Environmental Protection Committee (MEPC) meeting in London. The net-zero framework was postponed for at least a year and possibly longer if the US continues to lobby against it. At issue is the price differential between conventional bunker fuels and greener fuels. A global price on emissions is key to narrowing the price gap, spurring demand and giving green fuel producers an incentive to invest in production. The MEPC will meet again this coming October, and although the delay may hurt the broader case for investment in the development of alternative fuels and related infrastructure, container carriers and shipowners remain firmly focused on LNG as the top green fuel of choice in newbuild vessel orders. Net-zero targets set by carriers Most of the major carriers in container shipping have set net-zero goals and are investing heavily in dual-fuel vessels that support their emissions-cutting strategies despite the regulatory uncertainty.  Data from Sea-web, a sister company of the Journal of Commerce within S&amp;P Global, shows that just over 4 million TEUs of capacity for LNG dual-fuel ships was on order in 2025, compared to 2 million TEUs of methanol-capable vessels. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="e8be4ac1-33cb-4758-93c4-1d0f92f52e7d"></dynamic-object></div>LNG as an interim alternative fuel solves multiple problems for container lines. It can reduce absolute carbon emissions by up to 20%, according to the American Bureau of Shipping, so progress toward decarbonization can be demonstrated to customers and the public. LNG is also more widely available than methanol, the supply of which is constrained and prices stubbornly high and will likely remain so due to IMO inaction on its zero-emissions framework. Maersk, for example, cited a lack of adequate supply when it <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/maersks-lng-order-hedges-bet-on-green-fuel-technology-ceo-5703200">pivoted from methanol to LNG in late 2024</a> for its next round of 50-60 vessels. DNV said in its market update that investment in fuel infrastructure was continuing at pace, with 22 LNG bunker vessels added to the orderbook alongside new bunkering vessels capable of supplying methanol and biofuel. These developments signal growing confidence in LNG supply chains and emerging multifuel capabilities, reducing operational risk and supporting the economics of alternative fuel adoption. With the IMO delay in adopting global decarbonization measures throwing interim greenhouse gas emissions targets into doubt, improving the fuel efficiency of vessels has attained even greater importance, particularly in Europe. The EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) carbon tax and maritime fuel intensity regulations will come into full effect this year, and cutting vessel emissions will directly impact a carrier’s operating costs. Contact Greg Knowler at <a href="mailto:greg.knowler@spglobal.com">greg.knowler@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

Dual-fuel vessels capable of running on liquefied natural gas (LNG) continue to dominate the container shipping order book despite ongoing uncertainty around global emissions-cutting regulations.   While the overall newbuilding market across all shipping segments fell to 2,403 orders, down from 4,405 in 2024, new orders in container shipping rose from 447 in 2024 to 547 in 2025, accounting for 49% of all gross tonnage and 68% of alternative-fuel new orders, according to classification society DNV.  “The resilience of the alternative fuels order book in 2025 is mainly driven by cargo owners who have set their own emissions reduction goals despite [the] market slowdown and regulatory uncertainty,” Jason Stefanatos, global decarbonization director at DNV, said in a market update Monday.  "We see [ocean carriers] prioritizing investments where there is a strong alignment between fuel infrastructure, regulatory certainty and commercial viability, particularly in container shipping, where LNG and methanol are supported by established supply chains and customer demand,” he added.  The chance for shipping to become the first global industry to implement emissions-reducing regulations was lost in October when  US-led opposition derailed the International Maritime Organization (IMO) net-zero framework  at a pivotal Marine Environmental Protection Committee (MEPC) meeting in London. The net-zero framework was postponed for at least a year and possibly longer if the US continues to lobby against it.  At issue is the price differential between conventional bunker fuels and greener fuels. A global price on emissions is key to narrowing the price gap, spurring demand and giving green fuel producers an incentive to invest in production.  The MEPC will meet again this coming October, and although the delay may hurt the broader case for investment in the development of alternative fuels and related infrastructure, container carriers and shipowners remain firmly focused on LNG as the top green fuel of choice in newbuild vessel orders.  Net-zero targets set by carriers  Most of the major carriers in container shipping have set net-zero goals and are investing heavily in dual-fuel vessels that support their emissions-cutting strategies despite the regulatory uncertainty.   Data from Sea-web, a sister company of the Journal of Commerce within S&P Global, shows that just over 4 million TEUs of capacity for LNG dual-fuel ships was on order in 2025, compared to 2 million TEUs of methanol-capable vessels.  LNG as an interim alternative fuel solves multiple problems for container lines. It can reduce absolute carbon emissions by up to 20%, according to the American Bureau of Shipping, so progress toward decarbonization can be demonstrated to customers and the public. LNG is also more widely available than methanol, the supply of which is constrained and prices stubbornly high and will likely remain so due to IMO inaction on its zero-emissions framework. Maersk, for example, cited a lack of adequate supply when it  pivoted from methanol to LNG in late 2024  for its next round of 50-60 vessels.  DNV said in its market update that investment in fuel infrastructure was continuing at pace, with 22 LNG bunker vessels added to the orderbook alongside new bunkering vessels capable of supplying methanol and biofuel. These developments signal growing confidence in LNG supply chains and emerging multifuel capabilities, reducing operational risk and supporting the economics of alternative fuel adoption.  With the IMO delay in adopting global decarbonization measures throwing interim greenhouse gas emissions targets into doubt, improving the fuel efficiency of vessels has attained even greater importance, particularly in Europe. The EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) carbon tax and maritime fuel intensity regulations will come into full effect this year, and cutting vessel emissions will directly impact a carrier’s operating costs.  Contact Greg Knowler at  greg.knowler@spglobal.com . 

Transport, Trade and Regulation News

Container Shipping News

Solid growth evident in LNG order book despite regulatory uncertainty 

Use code GTW595 at checkout and save $900 on first year of an annual Gold subscription!

Upgrade Subscription - Gold Trials

Become a Gold Subscriber and Save!

Arm your team with the most trusted information portal for the international container shipping industry.

Group Subscriptions - Wide Box

Get into a group subscription today

Use code NYW26 at checkout to save 25% on a Silver or Silver Plus annual subscription! 

Subscribe Now - FT to S/SP - Wide Box

NEW YEAR SALE

Use code NYW595 and upgrade to Gold for just $595! Valid for first year of subscription.

Upgrade Subscription - S/SP to Gold - Wide Box

Subscribe today using code NYW26 at checkout and save 25% on a Silver or Silver Plus annual subscription!

Subscribe Now - Anonymous to S/SP - Wide Box

Use code NYW995 at checkout to save $500 on first year of a Gold subscription!

Subscribe Now - FT to Gold - Wide Box

Get into a Gold subscription today and save $500 by using code NYW995 at checkout!

Subscribe Now - Anonymous to Gold - Wide Box

NEW YEAR SALE: Use code NYW26 to save 25% on first year of a Silver or Silver Plus annual subscription!


Subscribe Now - FT to S/SP - Offer Box

Subscribe and Save

NEW YEAR SALE: Subscribe today using code NYW26 at checkout and save 25% on a Silver or Silver Plus annual subscription!

Subscribe Now - Anonymous to S/SP - Offer Box

SUBSCRIBE TODAY

UPGRADE TO GOLD AND SAVE: Use code GTW595 at checkout and save $900 on first year of a Gold subscription!

Upgrade Subscription

NEW YEAR SALE: Get into a Gold subscription today and save $500 by using code NYW995 at checkout!

Subscribe Now - Anonymous to Gold - Offer Box

NEW YEAR SALE: Use code NYW595 and upgrade to Gold for just $595! Valid on first year of subscription.

Upgrade Subscription - S/SP to Gold - Offer Box

NEW YEAR SALE: Use code NYW995 at checkout to save $500 on a Gold subscription!

Subscribe Now - FT to Gold - Offer Box

SUBSCRIBE AND SAVE

Monthly publication providing an editorial deep dive into global supply chain news

Journal of Commerce Magazine - Rectangle Box

Journal of Commerce Magazine

A premium access index of savings using domestic intermodal vs. OTR 

ISI Report - Rectangle Box

Intermodal Savings Index

An in-depth analysis of transport trends in the multipurpose and heavy-lift fleet segment

Breakbulk Report - Rectangle Box

Breakbulk Quarterly

An extensive dashboard of charts organized by trade lane, mode, and topic

Gateway - Rectangle Box

Gateway

Customers scoring their intermodal partners to identify the best service providers

Intermodal Service Scorecard - Rectangle Box

Intermodal Service Scorecard

A premium access outlook critical to shippers and transportation providers

QI Report - Rectangle Box

Quarterly Intelligence

The premier conference for the global container shipping and supply chain community

TPM Conference - Rectangle Box

Attend TPM26

The only editorially independent conference for the breakbulk & project cargo industry

Breakbulk Conference - Rectangle Box

Attend Breakbulk26

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Intermodal marketing companies have long been at a disadvantage because rail-owned containers lacked the real-time tracking and tracing capabilities that are standard among private fleets.</div>

Intermodal marketing companies have long been at a disadvantage because rail-owned containers lacked the real-time tracking and tracing capabilities that are standard among private fleets.

<div class="phx-topic">A multiyear effort to install GPS devices on approximately 75,000 rail-owned intermodal containers shared among several North American Class I railroads has been completed, according to Union Pacific Railroad (UP), closing a visibility gap that gave private container owners a strategic advantage in negotiations with shippers. UP owns and operates the container fleet, which also runs on the networks of Canadian National Railway, CSX Transportation, Norfolk Southern Railway and Mexico’s Ferromex. “This is another meaningful step as we deliver the best customer experience possible,” Kenny Rocker, UP’s executive vice president of sales, said in a statement on Monday. “By combining GPS-enabled containers with real-time data and smarter visibility tools, we’re providing the transparency and reliability our customers depend on.” The rail-owned containers are a critical resource for non-asset intermodal marketing companies (IMC), which compete directly for shipper freight with private container owners such as Hub Group, J.B. Hunt Transport Services and Schneider National. IMCs have long been at a disadvantage because rail-owned containers lacked the real-time tracking and tracing capabilities that are standard among private fleets. By contrast, real-time visibility is now common across the US truckload sector. Closing that gap has taken on added importance as UP’s projections for truckload-to-rail conversions are a pillar of its <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/up-in-merger-filing-vows-to-convert-millions-of-loads-to-intermodal-annually-6138380">case before the US Surface Transportation Board</a> as it seeks approval of its proposed acquisition of Norfolk Southern. Real-time location tracking of the rail-owned boxes will be available through the Blume Global platform and will support e-mail notifications, geofencing and application programming interface (API) connectivity. The move also introduces potential risk, however, as much of the freight moving in rail-owned containers already relies on Blume Global software; the logistics technology provider was the target of a cyberattack in 2022. Contact Ari Ashe at <a href="mailto:ari.ashe@spglobal.com">ari.ashe@spglobal.com</a>.</div>

A multiyear effort to install GPS devices on approximately 75,000 rail-owned intermodal containers shared among several North American Class I railroads has been completed, according to Union Pacific Railroad (UP), closing a visibility gap that gave private container owners a strategic advantage in negotiations with shippers. UP owns and operates the container fleet, which also runs on the networks of Canadian National Railway, CSX Transportation, Norfolk Southern Railway and Mexico’s Ferromex. “This is another meaningful step as we deliver the best customer experience possible,” Kenny Rocker, UP’s executive vice president of sales, said in a statement on Monday. “By combining GPS-enabled containers with real-time data and smarter visibility tools, we’re providing the transparency and reliability our customers depend on.” The rail-owned containers are a critical resource for non-asset intermodal marketing companies (IMC), which compete directly for shipper freight with private container owners such as Hub Group, J.B. Hunt Transport Services and Schneider National. IMCs have long been at a disadvantage because rail-owned containers lacked the real-time tracking and tracing capabilities that are standard among private fleets. By contrast, real-time visibility is now common across the US truckload sector. Closing that gap has taken on added importance as UP’s projections for truckload-to-rail conversions are a pillar of its case before the US Surface Transportation Board as it seeks approval of its proposed acquisition of Norfolk Southern. Real-time location tracking of the rail-owned boxes will be available through the Blume Global platform and will support e-mail notifications, geofencing and application programming interface (API) connectivity. The move also introduces potential risk, however, as much of the freight moving in rail-owned containers already relies on Blume Global software; the logistics technology provider was the target of a cyberattack in 2022. Contact Ari Ashe at ari.ashe@spglobal.com .

North American rail container fleet fully outfitted with GPS devices

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The move follows the successful trial transits of the Maersk Sebarok in December and the Maersk Denver, which sailed through the waterway this week.</div>

The move follows the successful trial transits of the Maersk Sebarok in December and the Maersk Denver, which sailed through the waterway this week.

<div class="phx-topic">Maersk has finalized operational plans to reinstate regular sailings on its India-US East Coast “MECL” network to the traditional — and significantly shorter — Red Sea/Suez Canal route following two uneventful trial passages over the past month, multiple sources told the Journal of Commerce. The normal schedule will take effect with a late January or early February vessel departure out of India. “The MECL is going to go via the Suez on a permanent basis soon,” said a Maersk Middle East executive who did not want to be identified. Officially, the carrier declined to confirm details of the India/Suez plans when contacted by the Journal of Commerce. “We cannot comment on specific vessels’ schedules and potential deviations,” Maersk said. Following the successful transit of the Maersk Sebarok through the Suez and Red Sea in December, the carrier sent the Maersk Denver through the waterway this week; both vessels are part of the MECL service linking India to the US East Coast (USEC) and are not part of the Gemini Cooperation alliance between Maersk and Hapag-Lloyd.<div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="ae1df54b-4003-46b5-a8c3-e0d35707e941"></dynamic-object></div>Major carriers have mostly avoided the Red Sea and Suez Canal since late 2023 when Houthi militants operating in Yemen began their attacks on commercial shipping to protest Israel’s move into Gaza. The weekly MECL features three ports of call out of West India — Mundra, Pipavav and Nhava Sheva. But the Danish liner has declared omissions to Mundra and Pipavav on two upcoming MECL voyages, the Maersk Hartford in Week 3 and the Maersk Chicago in Week 5. Grape cargo bookings for Europe Although Maersk <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/unexpected-margin-boost-in-q3-2025-to-lift-ocean-carriers-full-year-results-drewry-6151976">in a Jan. 12 customer advisory reiterated a “stepwise approach”</a> toward resuming Red Sea/Suez transits, there are other market signals on its firm Suez transit plans. Freight forwarder executives in Mumbai who spoke with the Journal of Commerce said the carrier has begun accepting grape cargo bookings from West India to Europe via the Suez that it is estimated will give shippers a six-day transit gain on average relative to the longer Cape of Good Hope passage, which is significant for perishables trades. Maersk will also move Indian grape containers on MECL vessels at Nhava Sheva for transshipment out of Salalah, Oman, to Rotterdam, sources said. But Maersk in a response to a Journal of Commerce query, said it had not started loading Europe cargo from India on the MECL. “We will explore it when the official [routing] changes happen,” the carrier said. The specialized reefer-centric Indian grape export trade has been a high-stakes bet for Maersk, even though it suffered marginal market share setbacks in the last season due to increased competition from Hapag-Lloyd. The Suez offering seems to be a strategic effort to regain lost volumes. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="56199e2b-5df4-468f-a149-b18ae7c32e51"></dynamic-object></div>Meanwhile, all major India-USEC carriers have reported strong cargo lifts in the current week, with most vessels overbooked due to tighter capacity stemming from smaller vessel deployments and blank sailings. CMA CGM’s first Suez-based “Indamex” westbound voyage, the CMA CGM Verdi that has an estimated departure of Jan. 17 from Nhava Sheva, has also closed bookings ahead of its declared gate cutoff, according to forwarder sources. Exports from India to the US East Coast have been on a steady decline since the middle of last year amid the tariff spat between Washington and New Delhi. Volumes into the USEC were 67,490 TEUs in November, down from 93,160 TEUs in August, according to data from PIERS, a sister product of the Journal of Commerce within S&amp;P Global. Spot rates on the trade, meanwhile, were pegged at $1,300 per FEU as of Jan. 13 by Platts, a sister company of the Journal of Commerce. That is down from $1,400 per FEU a month ago. Contact Bency Mathew at <a href="mailto:bencyvmathew@gmail.com">bencyvmathew@gmail.com.</a></div>

Maersk has finalized operational plans to reinstate regular sailings on its India-US East Coast “MECL” network to the traditional — and significantly shorter — Red Sea/Suez Canal route following two uneventful trial passages over the past month, multiple sources told the Journal of Commerce. The normal schedule will take effect with a late January or early February vessel departure out of India. “The MECL is going to go via the Suez on a permanent basis soon,” said a Maersk Middle East executive who did not want to be identified. Officially, the carrier declined to confirm details of the India/Suez plans when contacted by the Journal of Commerce. “We cannot comment on specific vessels’ schedules and potential deviations,” Maersk said. Following the successful transit of the Maersk Sebarok through the Suez and Red Sea in December, the carrier sent the Maersk Denver through the waterway this week; both vessels are part of the MECL service linking India to the US East Coast (USEC) and are not part of the Gemini Cooperation alliance between Maersk and Hapag-Lloyd. Major carriers have mostly avoided the Red Sea and Suez Canal since late 2023 when Houthi militants operating in Yemen began their attacks on commercial shipping to protest Israel’s move into Gaza. The weekly MECL features three ports of call out of West India — Mundra, Pipavav and Nhava Sheva. But the Danish liner has declared omissions to Mundra and Pipavav on two upcoming MECL voyages, the Maersk Hartford in Week 3 and the Maersk Chicago in Week 5. Grape cargo bookings for Europe Although Maersk in a Jan. 12 customer advisory reiterated a “stepwise approach” toward resuming Red Sea/Suez transits, there are other market signals on its firm Suez transit plans. Freight forwarder executives in Mumbai who spoke with the Journal of Commerce said the carrier has begun accepting grape cargo bookings from West India to Europe via the Suez that it is estimated will give shippers a six-day transit gain on average relative to the longer Cape of Good Hope passage, which is significant for perishables trades. Maersk will also move Indian grape containers on MECL vessels at Nhava Sheva for transshipment out of Salalah, Oman, to Rotterdam, sources said. But Maersk in a response to a Journal of Commerce query, said it had not started loading Europe cargo from India on the MECL. “We will explore it when the official [routing] changes happen,” the carrier said. The specialized reefer-centric Indian grape export trade has been a high-stakes bet for Maersk, even though it suffered marginal market share setbacks in the last season due to increased competition from Hapag-Lloyd. The Suez offering seems to be a strategic effort to regain lost volumes. Meanwhile, all major India-USEC carriers have reported strong cargo lifts in the current week, with most vessels overbooked due to tighter capacity stemming from smaller vessel deployments and blank sailings. CMA CGM’s first Suez-based “Indamex” westbound voyage, the CMA CGM Verdi that has an estimated departure of Jan. 17 from Nhava Sheva, has also closed bookings ahead of its declared gate cutoff, according to forwarder sources. Exports from India to the US East Coast have been on a steady decline since the middle of last year amid the tariff spat between Washington and New Delhi. Volumes into the USEC were 67,490 TEUs in November, down from 93,160 TEUs in August, according to data from PIERS, a sister product of the Journal of Commerce within S&P Global. Spot rates on the trade, meanwhile, were pegged at $1,300 per FEU as of Jan. 13 by Platts, a sister company of the Journal of Commerce. That is down from $1,400 per FEU a month ago. Contact Bency Mathew at bencyvmathew@gmail.com.

Port News

International ports

Maersk set to resume regular Suez transits on India-USEC ‘MECL’ loop – sources

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Noel Hacegaba made the announcement about the possible 1.8 million-TEU terminal during his first State of the Port presentation since taking over as CEO on Jan. 1 following the retirement of Mario Cordero.</div>

Noel Hacegaba made the announcement about the possible 1.8 million-TEU terminal during his first State of the Port presentation since taking over as CEO on Jan. 1 following the retirement of Mario Cordero.

<div class="phx-topic">The Port of Long Beach is exploring the possibility of developing what its new CEO said Thursday would be the “first conventional, zero-emissions container terminal in the world.” Noel Hacegaba made the announcement during his first State of the Port presentation since taking over as CEO on Jan. 1 following the retirement of Mario Cordero. Hacegaba said Long Beach has inked an exclusive agreement with Brookfield Infrastructure Group for the potential development of a 1.8 million-TEU terminal designed for express vessels of up to 9,000-TEU capacity. The facility, being called the Metro Express Terminal, would be built on Long Beach’s Pier S and use zero-emission, human-operated equipment, container peel-off operations, 24/7 gate access, free-flow cargo stacks and zero-emission trucks, he said. If it comes to fruition, Brookfield would partner with Nautilus International on the project, further details of which were not disclosed in Hacegaba’s presentation. That presentation made clear that the Port of Long Beach will leverage marine terminal expansion, massive investment in intermodal rail connectivity and the creation of a supply chain information highway to handle a projected doubling of container volume by 2050. That comes after the port handled a record 9.9 million laden and empty TEUs in 2025, according to data from the port. “According to our latest cargo forecast, 2050 is the year our container volumes will reach 20 million TEUs,” Hacegaba said. Long Beach forecasts it will handle about 9 million TEUs this year, which although down from 2025, will still rank among its top five years, he said. Long Beach faces an immediate challenge in adjusting to diminishing imports from China due to the Trump administration’s tariffs, and fewer exports to China because of that country’s counter tariffs. “Six years ago, about 70% of all our cargo — imports and exports — was tied to China,” Hacegaba said. “Today that’s down to 60%.” While the tariffs have fostered a shifting of US trade to Vietnam and other countries in Southeast Asia, it has also highlighted the importance of adding “speed, precision and reliability” to the Long Beach supply chain as it competes for cargo with other US ports, he said. <h3>Emphasis on on-dock rail connectivity </h3>Long Beach is investing $1.8 billion in its <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/inland-rail-connectivity-key-to-port-of-long-beach-growth-new-ceo-6133971">on-dock rail support facility at Pier B</a>, which is scheduled for completion in 2032. By assembling longer intermodal trains on dock rather than at near-dock sites that require a move by truck, the transfer of containers from vessel to train, which now takes slightly less than four days, will be reduced to 24 hours, Hacegaba said. “Our terminals are driving the movement of rail to inland points,” he said. “TTI (Total Terminals International) is already moving more than 50% of its containers by rail.” The <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/up-ns-deal-could-benefit-some-shippers-while-others-face-longer-transits-6143225">proposed merger of Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern</a>, which would create the nation’s first transcontinental railroad, holds the potential for faster, more efficient intermodal service to rail hubs in the eastern half of the country. Also, the announcement in November by BNSF Railway and CSX that they will <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/intermodal-cooperation-on-rails-has-declined-amid-cost-pressures-6152067">expand their intermodal partnership for service connecting Long Beach with rail terminals in the Ohio Valley and the Northeast</a> will cut transit times by as much as two days, Hacegaba said. Five of Long Beach’s six container terminals last year handled more than 1 million TEUs, with two of those facilities handling more than 2 million TEUs. International Transportation Service and Macquarie Asset Management in July broke ground on a project that will fill in a 19-acre slip at Pier G that will enhance operational efficiency and build a single, continuous wharf measuring 3,400 feet that will accommodate the berthing of two super-post Panamax ships at the same time, Hacegaba said. <h3>Data sharing within the supply chain </h3>Hacegaba also announced that development is beginning on Long Beach’s CargoNav digital platform that will navigate the supply chain one container at a time, from arrival on the dock to shipment to its final destination. Further information will be released in the coming months. Emphasizing the importance of data sharing among carriers, terminal operators, truckers, railroads and shippers, Long Beach several years ago unveiled its supply chain information highway through its community portal. “The goal was simple, end-to-end visibility via coast-to-coast connectivity,” Hacegaba said. Long Beach in the coming weeks will also launch a universal trucking appointment system that members of the Harbor Trucking Association asked for several years ago, he said. Projects that improve operational efficiency will be another priority, Hacegaba said, particularly those that continue to reduce harmful emissions from vessels, cargo-handling equipment, tugboats, trucks, and trains. “As we continue our quest to zero emissions, we remain laser-focused on our core mission — moving more cargo more quickly, safely, efficiently, and sustainably,” he said Contact Bill Mongelluzzo at <a href="mailto:bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com">bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com</a></div>

The Port of Long Beach is exploring the possibility of developing what its new CEO said Thursday would be the “first conventional, zero-emissions container terminal in the world.” Noel Hacegaba made the announcement during his first State of the Port presentation since taking over as CEO on Jan. 1 following the retirement of Mario Cordero. Hacegaba said Long Beach has inked an exclusive agreement with Brookfield Infrastructure Group for the potential development of a 1.8 million-TEU terminal designed for express vessels of up to 9,000-TEU capacity. The facility, being called the Metro Express Terminal, would be built on Long Beach’s Pier S and use zero-emission, human-operated equipment, container peel-off operations, 24/7 gate access, free-flow cargo stacks and zero-emission trucks, he said. If it comes to fruition, Brookfield would partner with Nautilus International on the project, further details of which were not disclosed in Hacegaba’s presentation. That presentation made clear that the Port of Long Beach will leverage marine terminal expansion, massive investment in intermodal rail connectivity and the creation of a supply chain information highway to handle a projected doubling of container volume by 2050. That comes after the port handled a record 9.9 million laden and empty TEUs in 2025, according to data from the port. “According to our latest cargo forecast, 2050 is the year our container volumes will reach 20 million TEUs,” Hacegaba said. Long Beach forecasts it will handle about 9 million TEUs this year, which although down from 2025, will still rank among its top five years, he said. Long Beach faces an immediate challenge in adjusting to diminishing imports from China due to the Trump administration’s tariffs, and fewer exports to China because of that country’s counter tariffs. “Six years ago, about 70% of all our cargo — imports and exports — was tied to China,” Hacegaba said. “Today that’s down to 60%.” While the tariffs have fostered a shifting of US trade to Vietnam and other countries in Southeast Asia, it has also highlighted the importance of adding “speed, precision and reliability” to the Long Beach supply chain as it competes for cargo with other US ports, he said. Emphasis on on-dock rail connectivity Long Beach is investing $1.8 billion in its on-dock rail support facility at Pier B , which is scheduled for completion in 2032. By assembling longer intermodal trains on dock rather than at near-dock sites that require a move by truck, the transfer of containers from vessel to train, which now takes slightly less than four days, will be reduced to 24 hours, Hacegaba said. “Our terminals are driving the movement of rail to inland points,” he said. “TTI (Total Terminals International) is already moving more than 50% of its containers by rail.” The proposed merger of Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern , which would create the nation’s first transcontinental railroad, holds the potential for faster, more efficient intermodal service to rail hubs in the eastern half of the country. Also, the announcement in November by BNSF Railway and CSX that they will expand their intermodal partnership for service connecting Long Beach with rail terminals in the Ohio Valley and the Northeast will cut transit times by as much as two days, Hacegaba said. Five of Long Beach’s six container terminals last year handled more than 1 million TEUs, with two of those facilities handling more than 2 million TEUs. International Transportation Service and Macquarie Asset Management in July broke ground on a project that will fill in a 19-acre slip at Pier G that will enhance operational efficiency and build a single, continuous wharf measuring 3,400 feet that will accommodate the berthing of two super-post Panamax ships at the same time, Hacegaba said. Data sharing within the supply chain Hacegaba also announced that development is beginning on Long Beach’s CargoNav digital platform that will navigate the supply chain one container at a time, from arrival on the dock to shipment to its final destination. Further information will be released in the coming months. Emphasizing the importance of data sharing among carriers, terminal operators, truckers, railroads and shippers, Long Beach several years ago unveiled its supply chain information highway through its community portal. “The goal was simple, end-to-end visibility via coast-to-coast connectivity,” Hacegaba said. Long Beach in the coming weeks will also launch a universal trucking appointment system that members of the Harbor Trucking Association asked for several years ago, he said. Projects that improve operational efficiency will be another priority, Hacegaba said, particularly those that continue to reduce harmful emissions from vessels, cargo-handling equipment, tugboats, trucks, and trains. “As we continue our quest to zero emissions, we remain laser-focused on our core mission — moving more cargo more quickly, safely, efficiently, and sustainably,” he said Contact Bill Mongelluzzo at bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com

Trans-Pacific

Long Beach considering development of ‘conventional, zero-emissions' terminal: CEO

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The weekly loop, known as the ME11 for Maersk and the IMX for partner Hapag-Lloyd, would join Maersk’s MECL service and CMA CGM’s Indamex among major carriers in resuming transits through the Red Sea and Suez.</div>

The weekly loop, known as the ME11 for Maersk and the IMX for partner Hapag-Lloyd, would join Maersk’s MECL service and CMA CGM’s Indamex among major carriers in resuming transits through the Red Sea and Suez.

<div class="phx-topic">A Gemini Cooperation service on the India-Middle East-Mediterranean trade is poised to return to the shorter Red Sea/Suez Canal route “shortly,” a source at Gemini partner Maersk told the Journal of Commerce. The weekly loop — known as the ME11 for Maersk and the IMX for partner Hapag-Lloyd — calls Jebel Ali (Dubai), Mundra and Nhava Sheva (India), Salalah (Oman), Port Tangier (Morocco), Valencia (Spain) and Port Said (Egypt). “Schedule readjustments are being worked out with Hapag-Lloyd to resume Red Sea transits,” said a Maersk executive with knowledge of the matter who did not want to be identified. “The service will shortly switch over.” Officially, the Danish carrier declined to provide any details of upcoming Gemini schedule changes when contacted by the Journal of Commerce. “Currently, we cannot comment on any future sailings,” Maersk said in an email response. The Gemini loop would <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/maersk-set-to-resume-regular-suez-transits-on-india-usec-mecl-loop-sources-6152441">join Maersk’s MECL service</a> and CMA CGM’s Indamex among major carriers in resuming transits through the Red Sea and Suez Canal. Major liners have mostly avoided the route since late 2023 when Houthi militants operating in Yemen began their attacks on commercial shipping to protest Israel’s move into Gaza, forcing lengthy diversions around southern Africa. <h3>Gemini has three India services </h3>The ME11/IMX schedule development should be viewed in the context of Gemini's operational fleet structure. For the India/Mediterranean trade coverage, Maersk has the flexibility to implement Red Sea/Suez transits because it is the sole tonnage provider, with space allotted to its partner, unlike the West India-North Europe string, which has a Hapag-Lloyd capacity sway. Overall, the Gemini framework has three services out of India: two serving northwestern markets via the ports of Nhava Sheva and Mundra and one linking the southeastern region via Ennore, near Chennai. Capacity utilization out of Ennore is facing pressure due to the general slowdown in Indian exports, with Gemini scaling down space allocations for 2026, forwarder sources in Chennai said. The India-Mediterranean trade is now a crowded field for mainline carriers, driven by the entry of several regional carriers, including Turkish participants, and non-vessel-operating common carriers trying to cash in on the Red Sea disruption with direct services. CMA CGM is <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/cma-cgm-reworks-india-med-loop-rotation-to-streamline-red-sea-operations-6142192">already operating its “Medex” service on the trade lane via the Red Sea/Suez route</a>, with the shift implemented in June 2025. Forwarder sources have put current average booking rates from Nhava Sheva to Port Said at between $1,400 and $1,500 per FEU, down about $200 over the past month despite sporadic sailing cuts on mainline services. Contact Bency Mathew at <a href="mailto:bencyvmathew@gmail.com">bencyvmathew@gmail.com.</a></div>

A Gemini Cooperation service on the India-Middle East-Mediterranean trade is poised to return to the shorter Red Sea/Suez Canal route “shortly,” a source at Gemini partner Maersk told the Journal of Commerce. The weekly loop — known as the ME11 for Maersk and the IMX for partner Hapag-Lloyd — calls Jebel Ali (Dubai), Mundra and Nhava Sheva (India), Salalah (Oman), Port Tangier (Morocco), Valencia (Spain) and Port Said (Egypt). “Schedule readjustments are being worked out with Hapag-Lloyd to resume Red Sea transits,” said a Maersk executive with knowledge of the matter who did not want to be identified. “The service will shortly switch over.” Officially, the Danish carrier declined to provide any details of upcoming Gemini schedule changes when contacted by the Journal of Commerce. “Currently, we cannot comment on any future sailings,” Maersk said in an email response. The Gemini loop would join Maersk’s MECL service and CMA CGM’s Indamex among major carriers in resuming transits through the Red Sea and Suez Canal. Major liners have mostly avoided the route since late 2023 when Houthi militants operating in Yemen began their attacks on commercial shipping to protest Israel’s move into Gaza, forcing lengthy diversions around southern Africa. Gemini has three India services The ME11/IMX schedule development should be viewed in the context of Gemini's operational fleet structure. For the India/Mediterranean trade coverage, Maersk has the flexibility to implement Red Sea/Suez transits because it is the sole tonnage provider, with space allotted to its partner, unlike the West India-North Europe string, which has a Hapag-Lloyd capacity sway. Overall, the Gemini framework has three services out of India: two serving northwestern markets via the ports of Nhava Sheva and Mundra and one linking the southeastern region via Ennore, near Chennai. Capacity utilization out of Ennore is facing pressure due to the general slowdown in Indian exports, with Gemini scaling down space allocations for 2026, forwarder sources in Chennai said. The India-Mediterranean trade is now a crowded field for mainline carriers, driven by the entry of several regional carriers, including Turkish participants, and non-vessel-operating common carriers trying to cash in on the Red Sea disruption with direct services. CMA CGM is already operating its “Medex” service on the trade lane via the Red Sea/Suez route , with the shift implemented in June 2025. Forwarder sources have put current average booking rates from Nhava Sheva to Port Said at between $1,400 and $1,500 per FEU, down about $200 over the past month despite sporadic sailing cuts on mainline services. Contact Bency Mathew at bencyvmathew@gmail.com.

Fast-tracked project schedules boost heavy-lift air freight volumes

Featured Gateway Chart

Essential Reads

‘Unexpected’ margin boost in Q3 2025 to lift ocean carriers’ full-year results – Drewry

STG files Ch. 11 bankruptcy, but intermodal operations remain intact

Solid growth evident in LNG order book despite regulatory uncertainty

Recent Commentary

Pace of freight market recovery a matter of ‘gradually, then suddenly’

In an AI-driven trade system, identity matters as much as capacity

Top 5 Most Read Stories