<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Demand for air cargo shipments in Asia fell slightly in October on the back of continued weakness in export-import activities in the major regional economies of China, India and Japan, according to the latest data from the Association of Asia Pacific Airlines.</div>

Demand for air cargo shipments in Asia fell slightly in October on the back of continued weakness in export-import activities in the major regional economies of China, India and Japan, according to the latest data from the Association of Asia Pacific Airlines.

<div>HONG KONG — Demand for <a>air cargo</a> shipments in <a>Asia</a> fell slightly in October on the back of continued weakness in export-import activities in the major regional economies of China, India and Japan, according to the latest data from the Association of Asia Pacific Airlines. Measured in freight tonne kilometer terms, air cargo demand among the region’s carriers edged 0.7 percent lower than during the same month last year. The average international freight load factor fell further, registering a 2.2 percentage point contraction to 64.2 percent for the month as offered freight capacity rose 2.7 percent.Andrew Herdman, AAPA director general,...

HONG KONG — Demand for air cargo shipments in Asia fell slightly in October on the back of continued weakness in export-import activities in the major regional economies of China, India and Japan, according to the latest data from the Association of Asia Pacific Airlines. Measured in freight tonne kilometer terms, air cargo demand among the region’s carriers edged 0.7 percent lower than during the same month last year. The average international freight load factor fell further, registering a 2.2 percentage point contraction to 64.2 percent for the month as offered freight capacity rose 2.7 percent.Andrew Herdman, AAPA director general, said from January through October, air cargo demand of 2.2 percent was held back by lackluster global trade conditions that continued to dampen Asian air cargo markets.“Air cargo markets are expected to remain soft, given weak global trade conditions,” he said.At the AAPA gathering in Bali earlier this month, Herdman said Asia’s airlines saw cargo growth last year that was long overdue and rising volumes led to a bright start at the beginning of this year, but he put much of that down to the U.S. West Coast port disruptions. “As we have gone through the year, the year-over-year monthly comparisons have tapered off to the point where cargo growth is 2.6 percent for the first nine months,” he said.Cargo airlines expect demand to improve as the higher value Christmas orders leave Asia and head for store shelves, especially in the U.S. Trans-Pacific trade has been a hallmark of the global cargo business this year, on both air and ocean.Contact Greg Knowler at greg.knowler@ihs.com and follow him on Twitter: @greg_knowler .

Air Cargo

Asia air cargo still waiting for peak season bump

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">TMV said the new funding will seed companies that want to apply new technologies to the maritime industry, shipbuilding, and related infrastructure. </div>

TMV said the new funding will seed companies that want to apply new technologies to the maritime industry, shipbuilding, and related infrastructure.

Feature image

<div class="phx-topic">A venture capital firm has launched a $200 million logistics and maritime fund anchored by warehousing giant Prologis and shipping industry certifier American Bureau of Shipping designed for early-stage funding of emerging technology, including artificial intelligence, robotics, and clean energy, aimed at the maritime industry. TMV said in a statement Tuesday its TMV Maritime and Logistics Fund raised the money from Prologis Ventures and ABS with the goal of “rebuilding the core infrastructure of maritime, shipbuilding, ports, and intermodal logistics.” TMV was founded in 2016 by Marina Hadjipateras, who had previously served as a business development executive for gas tanker carrier Dorian LPG, and Soraya Durabi, who also founded venture capital forum Transact Global. It currently has $230 million in investments spanning more than 50 companies in the maritime, technology and health industries. TMV said the new funding looks to capitalize on efforts by the US and other countries to revitalize their shipbuilding industries and develop better infrastructure for the maritime industry. TMV noted the US government investment in shipbuilding will go from $47.3 billion in fiscal 2026 to $65.8 billion in fiscal 2027. TMV will provide early-stage funding to companies involved in developing autonomous systems, robotics, artificial intelligence applications, dual-use technologies, and new energy systems for the maritime industry. While the fund targets the broader maritime industry, including defense and military shipping, it will also look at how to apply those technologies to container shipping and related logistics. TMV said it also has an advisory network that includes senior leaders from Maersk, terminal operator Fenix Marine Services, US intermodal depot operator ConGlobal, and freight forwarder Flexport. The TMV fund mirrors similar efforts that ocean carriers have made to bring new technologies to a hidebound industry. Since 2021, Maersk’s venture capital arm, Maersk Growth, has invested about $835 million in 38 companies, according to private company data from Capital IQ, a sister company of the Journal of Commerce within S&amp;P Global. CMA CGM Ventures has made seven investments totaling $1.8 billion, according to Cap IQ. Contact Michael Angell at <a href="mailto:michael.angell@spglobal.com">michael.angell@spglobal.com</a>.</div>

A venture capital firm has launched a $200 million logistics and maritime fund anchored by warehousing giant Prologis and shipping industry certifier American Bureau of Shipping designed for early-stage funding of emerging technology, including artificial intelligence, robotics, and clean energy, aimed at the maritime industry. TMV said in a statement Tuesday its TMV Maritime and Logistics Fund raised the money from Prologis Ventures and ABS with the goal of “rebuilding the core infrastructure of maritime, shipbuilding, ports, and intermodal logistics.” TMV was founded in 2016 by Marina Hadjipateras, who had previously served as a business development executive for gas tanker carrier Dorian LPG, and Soraya Durabi, who also founded venture capital forum Transact Global. It currently has $230 million in investments spanning more than 50 companies in the maritime, technology and health industries. TMV said the new funding looks to capitalize on efforts by the US and other countries to revitalize their shipbuilding industries and develop better infrastructure for the maritime industry. TMV noted the US government investment in shipbuilding will go from $47.3 billion in fiscal 2026 to $65.8 billion in fiscal 2027. TMV will provide early-stage funding to companies involved in developing autonomous systems, robotics, artificial intelligence applications, dual-use technologies, and new energy systems for the maritime industry. While the fund targets the broader maritime industry, including defense and military shipping, it will also look at how to apply those technologies to container shipping and related logistics. TMV said it also has an advisory network that includes senior leaders from Maersk, terminal operator Fenix Marine Services, US intermodal depot operator ConGlobal, and freight forwarder Flexport. The TMV fund mirrors similar efforts that ocean carriers have made to bring new technologies to a hidebound industry. Since 2021, Maersk’s venture capital arm, Maersk Growth, has invested about $835 million in 38 companies, according to private company data from Capital IQ, a sister company of the Journal of Commerce within S&P Global. CMA CGM Ventures has made seven investments totaling $1.8 billion, according to Cap IQ. Contact Michael Angell at michael.angell@spglobal.com .

Maritime

Logistics Technology News

Container lines

Supply chain

Early-stage tech fund targets maritime industry with $200 million

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The move is likely to raise costs for forwarders and carriers as they devote more resources to ensure compliance with rate filing procedures, and it could hasten a wider shakeup in China’s logistics sector.</div>

The move is likely to raise costs for forwarders and carriers as they devote more resources to ensure compliance with rate filing procedures, and it could hasten a wider shakeup in China’s logistics sector.

<div class="phx-topic">Freight forwarders and ocean carriers are facing a widening crackdown by China's Transport Ministry and provincial authorities over the filing of ocean rate data, ostensibly as part of an effort to protect shippers from unclear pricing strategies, forwarders say. The move is likely to raise costs for forwarders and carriers as they devote more resources to ensure compliance with rate filing procedures. And it could hasten a wider shakeup in China's logistics sector, with increased consolidation and the demise of smaller, less compliant operators, the forwarders said. The crackdown by Chinese authorities comes after nine carriers and seven non-vessel operating common carriers (NVOCCs) received fines or warning letters after Transport Ministry officials found discrepancies in rate data filed for international shipments at three gateway ports late last year. “Since the government has emphasized enterprises must improve internal rate filing work systems and institutionalize accountability, with responsibility assigned to specific personnel, it may cost more for internal compliance costs, (and) force both large shipping lines and smaller forwarders to be more transparent," Cliff Xu, regional director of Greater China for the forwarder Rhenus Air &amp; Ocean, told the Journal of Commerce. “This would reduce the ability of non-compliant operators to undercut compliant competitors through opaque pricing strategies,” he added. “This may accelerate industry consolidation, with smaller and less compliant operators struggling to survive.” Inspections last year focused on Guangzhou, Ningbo, and Qingdao. “We anticipate further expansion nationwide,” Xu said. “The logical next steps would include other major trade gateways such as Shanghai, Shenzhen and Tianjin in future enforcement rounds. “The government has explicitly stated that it will increase the intensity of inspections on enterprises regarding the implementation of filed freight rates and that both the central ministry and its authorized provincial transportation authorities will carry out these enforcement actions,” Xu added. Ocean Network Express (ONE), Hapag-Lloyd, CMA CGM, Mediterranean Shipping Co., Evergreen Marine (Asia), and Wan Hai Lines (Singapore) were among the carriers that received "administrative punishment" following the inspections between August and November last year. ONE said it was penalized due to a “filing inaccuracy in mid-2025.” “ONE has since addressed the relevant findings through appropriate follow-up and corrective actions,” a spokesperson for the carrier told the Journal of Commerce, not providing further details. “Our current operations remain unaffected, and we remain committed to full regulatory compliance.” Hapag-Lloyd declined to comment. “Please understand that we cannot comment on ongoing proceedings as a general matter,” a spokesperson for the carrier said. The seven forwarders that received “administrative punishment,” which can also include license suspension, include Huilida International Freight Forwarding (Guangzhou), the Qingdao branch of Xuda International Freight Forwarding (Shanghai), and Ningbo Port Southeast Logistics Group, according to a Transport Ministry statement on May 12. <h3>‘Significant increase’ in scrutiny </h3>The Transport Ministry made it mandatory for carriers and forwarders to file rate data and information to the Shanghai Shipping Exchange, as the ministry’s agent, in 2013. But forwarder FIBS Logistics said freight rate filing enforcement “was considered a bit of a toothless paper tiger” until 2024 when Shanghai’s municipal transport commission carried out a two-week inspection blitz on freight rate filing procedures. Those checks included copies of bills of lading, freight lists, bank accounts, invoices, and “financial accounting vouchers,” according to the notice issued by the commission shortly before the inspection regime started. It was at that time that FIBS put a dedicated person in charge of the local filings for all China contracts, a spokesperson for the company told the Journal of Commerce. “We have never actually been audited, nor did we really hear much about other forwarders getting audited,” the spokesperson said. “I guess only forwarders who never or just rarely update the filing system will be audited.” Xu from Rhenus Logistics said the company has seen “a significant increase in enforcement and systematic scrutiny” since 2024. “The authorities have moved beyond simple filing mandates to vigorously enforce compliance with filed rates,” he said. “This represents a clear step-change in regulatory oversight. Contact Keith Wallis at <a href="mailto:keithwallis@hotmail.com">keithwallis@hotmail.com</a>. </div>

Freight forwarders and ocean carriers are facing a widening crackdown by China's Transport Ministry and provincial authorities over the filing of ocean rate data, ostensibly as part of an effort to protect shippers from unclear pricing strategies, forwarders say. The move is likely to raise costs for forwarders and carriers as they devote more resources to ensure compliance with rate filing procedures. And it could hasten a wider shakeup in China's logistics sector, with increased consolidation and the demise of smaller, less compliant operators, the forwarders said. The crackdown by Chinese authorities comes after nine carriers and seven non-vessel operating common carriers (NVOCCs) received fines or warning letters after Transport Ministry officials found discrepancies in rate data filed for international shipments at three gateway ports late last year. “Since the government has emphasized enterprises must improve internal rate filing work systems and institutionalize accountability, with responsibility assigned to specific personnel, it may cost more for internal compliance costs, (and) force both large shipping lines and smaller forwarders to be more transparent," Cliff Xu, regional director of Greater China for the forwarder Rhenus Air & Ocean, told the Journal of Commerce. “This would reduce the ability of non-compliant operators to undercut compliant competitors through opaque pricing strategies,” he added. “This may accelerate industry consolidation, with smaller and less compliant operators struggling to survive.” Inspections last year focused on Guangzhou, Ningbo, and Qingdao. “We anticipate further expansion nationwide,” Xu said. “The logical next steps would include other major trade gateways such as Shanghai, Shenzhen and Tianjin in future enforcement rounds. “The government has explicitly stated that it will increase the intensity of inspections on enterprises regarding the implementation of filed freight rates and that both the central ministry and its authorized provincial transportation authorities will carry out these enforcement actions,” Xu added. Ocean Network Express (ONE), Hapag-Lloyd, CMA CGM, Mediterranean Shipping Co., Evergreen Marine (Asia), and Wan Hai Lines (Singapore) were among the carriers that received "administrative punishment" following the inspections between August and November last year. ONE said it was penalized due to a “filing inaccuracy in mid-2025.” “ONE has since addressed the relevant findings through appropriate follow-up and corrective actions,” a spokesperson for the carrier told the Journal of Commerce, not providing further details. “Our current operations remain unaffected, and we remain committed to full regulatory compliance.” Hapag-Lloyd declined to comment. “Please understand that we cannot comment on ongoing proceedings as a general matter,” a spokesperson for the carrier said. The seven forwarders that received “administrative punishment,” which can also include license suspension, include Huilida International Freight Forwarding (Guangzhou), the Qingdao branch of Xuda International Freight Forwarding (Shanghai), and Ningbo Port Southeast Logistics Group, according to a Transport Ministry statement on May 12. ‘Significant increase’ in scrutiny The Transport Ministry made it mandatory for carriers and forwarders to file rate data and information to the Shanghai Shipping Exchange, as the ministry’s agent, in 2013. But forwarder FIBS Logistics said freight rate filing enforcement “was considered a bit of a toothless paper tiger” until 2024 when Shanghai’s municipal transport commission carried out a two-week inspection blitz on freight rate filing procedures. Those checks included copies of bills of lading, freight lists, bank accounts, invoices, and “financial accounting vouchers,” according to the notice issued by the commission shortly before the inspection regime started. It was at that time that FIBS put a dedicated person in charge of the local filings for all China contracts, a spokesperson for the company told the Journal of Commerce. “We have never actually been audited, nor did we really hear much about other forwarders getting audited,” the spokesperson said. “I guess only forwarders who never or just rarely update the filing system will be audited.” Xu from Rhenus Logistics said the company has seen “a significant increase in enforcement and systematic scrutiny” since 2024. “The authorities have moved beyond simple filing mandates to vigorously enforce compliance with filed rates,” he said. “This represents a clear step-change in regulatory oversight. Contact Keith Wallis at keithwallis@hotmail.com .

Forwarding

Asia-Europe

China widens regulatory crackdown on filing of ocean transport rate data

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The South Korean electronics conglomerate said it should not be held liable for more than $1 million in charges resulting from container delays that Wan Hai-contracted truckers experienced between 2020 and 2022.</div>

The South Korean electronics conglomerate said it should not be held liable for more than $1 million in charges resulting from container delays that Wan Hai-contracted truckers experienced between 2020 and 2022.

<div class="phx-topic">Samsung Electronics has filed a complaint with US shipping regulators over more than $1 million in fees Wan Hai charged the conglomerate on delayed container pickups under the ocean carrier’s control, marking Samsung’s latest salvo against ocean carriers over pandemic-era delays and resulting financial penalties. Samsung’s complaint, reported Monday by the Federal Maritime Commission (FMC), alleged that Taiwan’s Wan Hai Lines violated US shipping law by charging demurrage and detention (D&amp;D) on hundreds of containers between 2020 and 2022 where Wan Hai was responsible for the inland move under carrier haulage, or so-called “store door” terms. “In store door shipments, costs and charges relating to delays in the timely removal of containers from terminals (generally known as “demurrage” charges) should be borne by Wan Hai, not a consignee,” Samsung’s complaint said. In addition to $1.2 million in direct charges, Samsung said it also bore other costs related to the transportation of its containers. It is asking the FMC to determine what restitution will be appropriate. Samsung, <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/journal-of-commerce-top-100-us-importers-and-exporters-in-2025-6210438">the 15th-largest US importer by volume</a>, has filed five other FMC complaints against ocean carriers, including <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/fmc-complaint-from-samsung-is-latest-salvo-against-cosco-for-dd-billing-5199869">Cosco Shipping</a>, Orient Overseas Container Line, <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/samsung-fmc-complaint-alleges-thousands-of-inaccurate-fees-assessed-by-hmm-5244232">HMM</a>, Zim Shipping and SM Line, over container late fees charged during the pandemic. So far, only the complaint against Zim <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/fmc-judge-awards-samsung-37-million-from-zim-in-billing-dispute-5990789">resulted in damages being awarded to Samsung</a>, with the other cases expected to be decided later in 2026 and 2027. Similar to its other complaints, Samsung alleged that Wan Hai began “repeatedly failing” to deliver Samsung’s containers from marine terminals in a timely manner in 2021 “due to chassis shortages and heavy terminal congestion.” Despite those matters being outside of Samsung’s control, the company alleged Wan Hai would charge Samsung demurrage on over 550 delayed container retrievals and detention on over 150 container returns. Samsung also claimed it faced over 800 other instances of associated charges due to the delays. Samsung’s complaint said Wan Hai’s late charges contradict the FMC’s “<a href="https://www.joc.com/article/stakeholders-say-us-cargo-flow-would-be-undermined-by-proposed-fmc-billing-rule-5245716">incentive principle</a>,” which justifies such charges for prompting the timely removal of containers from terminals. Samsung said the container moves were totally under the control of Wan Hai and that the carrier continued to accept Samsung’s containers even though it could not promptly move them to Samsung warehouses. “Wan Hai’s foregoing practices and procedures related to the assessment of demurrage and detention charges are unjust and unreasonable as applied because they did not serve their intended primary purpose to incentivize freight fluidity,” the complaint said. Wan Hai did not respond to a request for comment. <h3>‘Beat you up on rates’ </h3>The president of a New Jersey-based motor carrier told the Journal of Commerce his general experience with carrier haulage moves through ocean carriers has been fraught. While his company, which has over just over 40 trucks, will occasionally handle store door moves if the shipper asks for a specific motor carrier, contracting haulage directly from an ocean carrier usually means very short notice of when a container will reach a port, usually four or five days in advance. That leaves motor carriers less time to allocate drivers and chassis. The source’s direct shipper customers, though, will provide ongoing forecasts of how many containers to expect and when, so planning goes more smoothly. While ocean carriers will generally provide a no-cost chassis to a shipper for a store door move, motor carriers are still typically forced to use a chassis pool rather than their own chassis. “The ocean carriers can promise you a lot of business because they have the customer relationship, but they can beat you up on rates,” the source said.  Contact Michael Angell at <a href="mailto:michael.angell@spglobal.com">michael.angell@spglobal.com</a>.</div>

Samsung Electronics has filed a complaint with US shipping regulators over more than $1 million in fees Wan Hai charged the conglomerate on delayed container pickups under the ocean carrier’s control, marking Samsung’s latest salvo against ocean carriers over pandemic-era delays and resulting financial penalties. Samsung’s complaint, reported Monday by the Federal Maritime Commission (FMC), alleged that Taiwan’s Wan Hai Lines violated US shipping law by charging demurrage and detention (D&D) on hundreds of containers between 2020 and 2022 where Wan Hai was responsible for the inland move under carrier haulage, or so-called “store door” terms. “In store door shipments, costs and charges relating to delays in the timely removal of containers from terminals (generally known as “demurrage” charges) should be borne by Wan Hai, not a consignee,” Samsung’s complaint said. In addition to $1.2 million in direct charges, Samsung said it also bore other costs related to the transportation of its containers. It is asking the FMC to determine what restitution will be appropriate. Samsung, the 15th-largest US importer by volume , has filed five other FMC complaints against ocean carriers, including Cosco Shipping , Orient Overseas Container Line, HMM , Zim Shipping and SM Line, over container late fees charged during the pandemic. So far, only the complaint against Zim resulted in damages being awarded to Samsung , with the other cases expected to be decided later in 2026 and 2027. Similar to its other complaints, Samsung alleged that Wan Hai began “repeatedly failing” to deliver Samsung’s containers from marine terminals in a timely manner in 2021 “due to chassis shortages and heavy terminal congestion.” Despite those matters being outside of Samsung’s control, the company alleged Wan Hai would charge Samsung demurrage on over 550 delayed container retrievals and detention on over 150 container returns. Samsung also claimed it faced over 800 other instances of associated charges due to the delays. Samsung’s complaint said Wan Hai’s late charges contradict the FMC’s “ incentive principle ,” which justifies such charges for prompting the timely removal of containers from terminals. Samsung said the container moves were totally under the control of Wan Hai and that the carrier continued to accept Samsung’s containers even though it could not promptly move them to Samsung warehouses. “Wan Hai’s foregoing practices and procedures related to the assessment of demurrage and detention charges are unjust and unreasonable as applied because they did not serve their intended primary purpose to incentivize freight fluidity,” the complaint said. Wan Hai did not respond to a request for comment. ‘Beat you up on rates’ The president of a New Jersey-based motor carrier told the Journal of Commerce his general experience with carrier haulage moves through ocean carriers has been fraught. While his company, which has over just over 40 trucks, will occasionally handle store door moves if the shipper asks for a specific motor carrier, contracting haulage directly from an ocean carrier usually means very short notice of when a container will reach a port, usually four or five days in advance. That leaves motor carriers less time to allocate drivers and chassis. The source’s direct shipper customers, though, will provide ongoing forecasts of how many containers to expect and when, so planning goes more smoothly. While ocean carriers will generally provide a no-cost chassis to a shipper for a store door move, motor carriers are still typically forced to use a chassis pool rather than their own chassis. “The ocean carriers can promise you a lot of business because they have the customer relationship, but they can beat you up on rates,” the source said.  Contact Michael Angell at michael.angell@spglobal.com .

Marine terminals

Samsung levels D&D complaint against Wan Hai with FMC

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Costs rose sharply following the start of the war, and although emergency fuel surcharges were quickly levied on spot shipments, cargo under contract was locked into quarterly BAFs.</div>

Costs rose sharply following the start of the war, and although emergency fuel surcharges were quickly levied on spot shipments, cargo under contract was locked into quarterly BAFs.

<div class="phx-topic">Fuel prices that rocketed higher since the war with Iran began on Feb. 28 have so far added $5.5 billion to the bunker costs of container lines, according to Sea-Intelligence Maritime Analysis. Ocean carriers have rolled out emergency fuel surcharges in an urgent bid to recover that increase in operating costs, <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/war-adding-40-50-million-per-week-to-hapag-lloyds-costs-ceo-6193532">estimated at up to $50 million a week by Hapag-Lloyd</a>. “It is clear that if the (Strait of) Hormuz crisis persists, and hence fuel prices remain elevated, the industry would become clearly loss-making, unless the added fuel costs translate into higher freight rates,” Alan Murphy, CEO of Sea-Intelligence, wrote in his weekly Sunday Spotlight newsletter. “Spot rates have indeed been on the rise these past couple of weeks, especially on the Asia-Europe trade, implying that the process of passing on the added fuel costs is under way,” Murphy added. Bunker costs rose sharply following the start of the war, and although emergency fuel surcharges were quickly levied on spot shipments, cargo under contract was locked into quarterly bunker adjustment factors (BAFs). <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/demand-rising-on-asia-europe-ocean-trade-as-july-bunker-hike-looms-6225813">Those costs will be passed on to shippers in the third quarter</a> beginning July 1. Murphy put the scale of the additional fuel costs for the three-month period through May in context, noting that the first-quarter financial results for 2026 implied combined industry-wide revenue of $61 billion and earnings before interest and taxes (EBIT) of $2.7 billion. <h3>Peace prospects spark oil price drop</h3>While oil prices have fallen to a two-week low amid hopes that Washington and Tehran were close to a peace deal, the fragility of the current ceasefire was illustrated Monday by renewed US strikes and return fire from Iranian positions. Very low-sulfur fuel oil (VLSFO) was trading at $782 per metric ton (mt) Monday, down 11% since a mid-May high, according to Ship &amp; Bunker. High-sulfur fuel oil (HSFO) is trading at a substantial discount to VLSFO at $628/mt, down 13% since mid-May. To arrive at a daily added fuel cost per-container for the industry from the Middle East war, Sea-Intelligence used an estimated fuel use of 70 million tons per year, with 47.2 million TEUs shipped in the first three months of 2026, according to Container Trades Statistics (CTS). “The CTS data period is not quite the same as the fuel premium period,” Murphy acknowledged. “However, as a ballpark estimate, this implies an added fuel cost on average of $117/TEU.” Whether a vessel was equipped with an exhaust scrubber or not would also influence the cost per container. “Vessels equipped with a scrubber can use the lower-priced (HSFO), whereas vessels without a scrubber need to purchase the more expensive VLSFO,” Murphy said. Contact Greg Knowler at <a href="mailto:greg.knowler@spglobal.com">greg.knowler@spglobal.com</a>.</div>

Fuel prices that rocketed higher since the war with Iran began on Feb. 28 have so far added $5.5 billion to the bunker costs of container lines, according to Sea-Intelligence Maritime Analysis. Ocean carriers have rolled out emergency fuel surcharges in an urgent bid to recover that increase in operating costs, estimated at up to $50 million a week by Hapag-Lloyd . “It is clear that if the (Strait of) Hormuz crisis persists, and hence fuel prices remain elevated, the industry would become clearly loss-making, unless the added fuel costs translate into higher freight rates,” Alan Murphy, CEO of Sea-Intelligence, wrote in his weekly Sunday Spotlight newsletter. “Spot rates have indeed been on the rise these past couple of weeks, especially on the Asia-Europe trade, implying that the process of passing on the added fuel costs is under way,” Murphy added. Bunker costs rose sharply following the start of the war, and although emergency fuel surcharges were quickly levied on spot shipments, cargo under contract was locked into quarterly bunker adjustment factors (BAFs). Those costs will be passed on to shippers in the third quarter beginning July 1. Murphy put the scale of the additional fuel costs for the three-month period through May in context, noting that the first-quarter financial results for 2026 implied combined industry-wide revenue of $61 billion and earnings before interest and taxes (EBIT) of $2.7 billion. Peace prospects spark oil price drop While oil prices have fallen to a two-week low amid hopes that Washington and Tehran were close to a peace deal, the fragility of the current ceasefire was illustrated Monday by renewed US strikes and return fire from Iranian positions. Very low-sulfur fuel oil (VLSFO) was trading at $782 per metric ton (mt) Monday, down 11% since a mid-May high, according to Ship & Bunker. High-sulfur fuel oil (HSFO) is trading at a substantial discount to VLSFO at $628/mt, down 13% since mid-May. To arrive at a daily added fuel cost per-container for the industry from the Middle East war, Sea-Intelligence used an estimated fuel use of 70 million tons per year, with 47.2 million TEUs shipped in the first three months of 2026, according to Container Trades Statistics (CTS). “The CTS data period is not quite the same as the fuel premium period,” Murphy acknowledged. “However, as a ballpark estimate, this implies an added fuel cost on average of $117/TEU.” Whether a vessel was equipped with an exhaust scrubber or not would also influence the cost per container. “Vessels equipped with a scrubber can use the lower-priced (HSFO), whereas vessels without a scrubber need to purchase the more expensive VLSFO,” Murphy said. Contact Greg Knowler at greg.knowler@spglobal.com .

Container Shipping News

Middle East war adds $5.5 billion to ocean carriers' bunker costs: Sea-Intelligence

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Ag exporters have always faced logistical challenges because their crops are grown in the interior US and shipped through ports located hundreds of miles away; those challenges seem to be growing, the AgTC conference heard this week. </div>

Ag exporters have always faced logistical challenges because their crops are grown in the interior US and shipped through ports located hundreds of miles away; those challenges seem to be growing, the AgTC conference heard this week.

<div class="phx-topic">US agricultural shippers are facing increasing and costly challenges in getting their goods to global markets as the war in the Middle East and schedule changes by ocean carriers upset the cadence of their operations. “Container availability, schedule changes, rail delays from the interior of the country; these things can combine and create sort of a monster for us,” Christopher Jennum, global manager of export logistics and marketing at the Dairy Farmers of America, told the annual Agriculture Transportation Coalition (AgTC) conference this week in Tacoma. Ag exporters have always faced logistical challenges because their crops are grown in the interior US and shipped through ports located hundreds of miles away. This makes it difficult for exporters to secure empty containers, plan their rail moves to the ports, and meet marine terminal requirements for the on-time delivery of their boxes. Shippers must commit to delivery of their containers weeks ahead of time. “They’re committing to an export window that hasn’t formed,” said Vijay Harrell, CEO of logistics provider Tradelanes. Additionally, ag exporters are operating in a transportation environment designed decades ago and not equipped to handle modern day disruptions such as the pandemic and now the war in the Middle East. “I think the system that has carried us this far is starting to show some wear and tear,” Ken O’Brien, CEO of Gemini Shippers Association, told AgTC. “The disruption we face has somehow fundamentally changed our industry.” That wear and tear has affected the reliability of service, while communication between carriers and their customers has been compromised and the ability to accurately forecast supply and demand has been degraded, he said. “Both (carriers and customers) have to do a better job as to how we forecast demand,” O’Brien said. The fact that ag exports originate across a vast heartland and are shipped through a number of gateways makes it difficult for ocean carriers to consistently provide the equipment and services their customers demand and need, said Patrick “PJ” McGrath, senior vice president for commercial at Hapag-Lloyd in North America. If all imports and exports went through either Los Angeles-Long Beach or New York-New Jersey, serving shippers in the interior would be easy and much less costly for the ocean carriers. They’re not, but there is a strategy, McGrath said. “So how do I look at each individual piece? It boils down to communication (between the parties),” he said. <h3>Communication among parties is crucial </h3>Carriers must do a better job of communicating disruptions in vessel scheduling and services, as well as the fuel surcharges they are implementing due to the war in the Middle East, said Irina Brown, cotton export specialist at Dunavant Global Logistics Group. “The biggest problem is managing communication during disruptions, but it is super hard when you have trouble receiving responses from carriers, especially during the past year,” Brown told AgTC. “We get responses from carriers that make no sense.” Rapidly rising fuel costs and accompanying surcharges, which vary from carrier to carrier, have become a huge cost burden for shippers, said Cynthia Tathwell, supply chain logistics specialist at Columbia Grain. “I’ve seen unjustified rises in rates and billing practices outside of published tariffs,” Tathwell said. “It’s a pattern across the industry.” She added that she has challenged these charges, which has its own set of problems, noting that disputes “equal time and money for both sides.” <h3>FMC ‘has teeth’ </h3>Ag exporters also face ongoing problems with transportation providers in the levying of detention fees for the late return of equipment to the marine terminal or railyard and demurrage charges for containers remaining at a marine terminal or railyard after free storage time has expired. Laura DiBella, chairman of the Federal Maritime Commission (FMC), told the ag shippers the agency is aware of these practices and will move to stop any unfair implementation of detention and demurrage fees. “You are going to see plenty more on that,” DiBella told AgTc. “We’re definitely taking a more aggressive stance.” Whether it’s addressing unfair detention and demurrage fees or fuel surcharge issues, the FMC has various investigatory and enforcement powers it will use to move against unfair practices, she said. “The FMC has teeth,” DiBella said. “It has very big teeth.” Contact Bill Mongelluzzo at <a href="mailto:bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com">bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

US agricultural shippers are facing increasing and costly challenges in getting their goods to global markets as the war in the Middle East and schedule changes by ocean carriers upset the cadence of their operations. “Container availability, schedule changes, rail delays from the interior of the country; these things can combine and create sort of a monster for us,” Christopher Jennum, global manager of export logistics and marketing at the Dairy Farmers of America, told the annual Agriculture Transportation Coalition (AgTC) conference this week in Tacoma. Ag exporters have always faced logistical challenges because their crops are grown in the interior US and shipped through ports located hundreds of miles away. This makes it difficult for exporters to secure empty containers, plan their rail moves to the ports, and meet marine terminal requirements for the on-time delivery of their boxes. Shippers must commit to delivery of their containers weeks ahead of time. “They’re committing to an export window that hasn’t formed,” said Vijay Harrell, CEO of logistics provider Tradelanes. Additionally, ag exporters are operating in a transportation environment designed decades ago and not equipped to handle modern day disruptions such as the pandemic and now the war in the Middle East. “I think the system that has carried us this far is starting to show some wear and tear,” Ken O’Brien, CEO of Gemini Shippers Association, told AgTC. “The disruption we face has somehow fundamentally changed our industry.” That wear and tear has affected the reliability of service, while communication between carriers and their customers has been compromised and the ability to accurately forecast supply and demand has been degraded, he said. “Both (carriers and customers) have to do a better job as to how we forecast demand,” O’Brien said. The fact that ag exports originate across a vast heartland and are shipped through a number of gateways makes it difficult for ocean carriers to consistently provide the equipment and services their customers demand and need, said Patrick “PJ” McGrath, senior vice president for commercial at Hapag-Lloyd in North America. If all imports and exports went through either Los Angeles-Long Beach or New York-New Jersey, serving shippers in the interior would be easy and much less costly for the ocean carriers. They’re not, but there is a strategy, McGrath said. “So how do I look at each individual piece? It boils down to communication (between the parties),” he said. Communication among parties is crucial Carriers must do a better job of communicating disruptions in vessel scheduling and services, as well as the fuel surcharges they are implementing due to the war in the Middle East, said Irina Brown, cotton export specialist at Dunavant Global Logistics Group. “The biggest problem is managing communication during disruptions, but it is super hard when you have trouble receiving responses from carriers, especially during the past year,” Brown told AgTC. “We get responses from carriers that make no sense.” Rapidly rising fuel costs and accompanying surcharges, which vary from carrier to carrier, have become a huge cost burden for shippers, said Cynthia Tathwell, supply chain logistics specialist at Columbia Grain. “I’ve seen unjustified rises in rates and billing practices outside of published tariffs,” Tathwell said. “It’s a pattern across the industry.” She added that she has challenged these charges, which has its own set of problems, noting that disputes “equal time and money for both sides.” FMC ‘has teeth’ Ag exporters also face ongoing problems with transportation providers in the levying of detention fees for the late return of equipment to the marine terminal or railyard and demurrage charges for containers remaining at a marine terminal or railyard after free storage time has expired. Laura DiBella, chairman of the Federal Maritime Commission (FMC), told the ag shippers the agency is aware of these practices and will move to stop any unfair implementation of detention and demurrage fees. “You are going to see plenty more on that,” DiBella told AgTc. “We’re definitely taking a more aggressive stance.” Whether it’s addressing unfair detention and demurrage fees or fuel surcharge issues, the FMC has various investigatory and enforcement powers it will use to move against unfair practices, she said. “The FMC has teeth,” DiBella said. “It has very big teeth.” Contact Bill Mongelluzzo at  bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com .

US ag shippers navigate creaky supply chain not built for modern disruption

Use code GTT26W 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 FTW25 at checkout to save 25% on a Silver or Silver Plus annual subscription! 

Subscribe Now - FT to S/SP - Wide Box

SUBSCRIBE AND SAVE

Use code GW595 and upgrade to Gold for just $595! Valid for first year of subscription.

Upgrade Subscription - S/SP to Gold - Wide Box

SAVE $900 ON A GOLD SUBSCRIPTION

Choose a subscription plan that works best for you!

Subscribe Now - Anonymous to S/SP - Wide Box

Subscribe Today

Access Journal of Commerce content for 30 days

Free Trial - Wide Box

START A FREE TRIAL TODAY

Use code GW995 at checkout to save $500 on first year of a Gold subscription!

Subscribe Now - FT to Gold - Wide Box

Subscribe Now - Anonymous to Gold - Wide Box

SUBSCRIBE TODAY

Subscribe and Save: Use code FTW25 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

GET INTO A GROUP SUBSCRIPTION: Arm your team with unlimited Journal of Commerce content

Group Subscriptions - Offer Box

Group Subscriptions

SUBSCRIBE TODAY: Choose a subscription plan that works best for you!

Subscribe Now - Anonymous to S/SP - Offer Box

UPGRADE TO GOLD AND SAVE: Use code GTT26W at checkout and save $900 on first year of a Gold subscription!

Upgrade Subscription

Subscribe Now - Anonymous to Gold - Offer Box

SAVE $900 ON A GOLD SUBSCRIPTION: Use code GW595 and upgrade to Gold for just $595! Valid on first year of subscription.

Upgrade Subscription - S/SP to Gold - Offer Box

SUBSCRIBE AND SAVE: Use code GW995 and save $500 on the first year of a Gold subscription!

Subscribe Now - FT to Gold - Offer Box

A must-attend conference for shippers & logistics providers moving goods inland

Inland Conference - Rectangle Box

Attend Inland26

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 Journal of Commerce’s air cargo news covers the movement of air cargo, including air cargo shipping, air cargo carriers, air freight forwarders, air freight, air shipments, cargo airports and cargo news. It also tracks air cargo trends, air freight news, shifting of cargo between air and ocean, airports and airfreight delays and congestion.

Journal of Commerce offers extensive air freight forwarder news and analysis of air cargo forwarding, including topics such as strategies, capacity, services.

Air Cargo Forwarder News | Journal of Commerce

Air Cargo Forwarder News

Stay informed with air cargo carriers news. Journal of Commerce covers updates on air cargo carriers, air craft carrier capacity, rates routings and technology.

Air Cargo Carriers News | Journal of Commerce

Air Cargo Carriers News

Get the latest air cargo news and analysis with JOC. From carriers to trends, get insights into air freight news, air cargo shipping, and more.

Latest News

More News & Analysis

Early-stage tech fund targets maritime industry with $200 million

China widens regulatory crackdown on filing of ocean transport rate data

Samsung levels D&D complaint against Wan Hai with FMC