Breakbulk pop up 640x340 (2).png

Event Pop Up

Events

Maritime

Supply chain

Breakbulk News

Port News

Transport, Trade and Regulation News

Marine terminals

International ports

Longshore labor

Breakbulk carriers

Ro/ro cargo

Energy projects

Heavy-haul transport

Project cargo

Trans-Atlantic

Forwarding

Trans-Pacific

Breakbulk ports

North American ports

Breakbulk Quarterly Intelligence

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The vessels will vary in size between 8,000 TEUs and 15,000 TEUs and are likely meant for deployment on the carrier’s longer-haul intra-Asia and mainline east-west services.</div>

The vessels will vary in size between 8,000 TEUs and 15,000 TEUs and are likely meant for deployment on the carrier’s longer-haul intra-Asia and mainline east-west services.

Feature image

<div>Taiwan’s Yang Ming Marine Transport will order up to 13 container ships as part of fleet optimization plans approved by the carrier’s directors Friday to replace aging vessels and expand the fleet of owned ships. The new ships will vary in size between 8,000 TEUs and 15,000 TEUs and are likely meant for deployment on longer-haul intra-Asia and mainline east-west services. The newbuilds are part of Yang Ming’s efforts to “optimize [our] service network and enhance fleet competitiveness,” the carrier said in a statement. The vessels will replace 5,500- and 6,500-TEU ships that are more than 20 years old, the...

Taiwan’s Yang Ming Marine Transport will order up to 13 container ships as part of fleet optimization plans approved by the carrier’s directors Friday to replace aging vessels and expand the fleet of owned ships. The new ships will vary in size between 8,000 TEUs and 15,000 TEUs and are likely meant for deployment on longer-haul intra-Asia and mainline east-west services. The newbuilds are part of Yang Ming’s efforts to “optimize [our] service network and enhance fleet competitiveness,” the carrier said in a statement. The vessels will replace 5,500- and 6,500-TEU ships that are more than 20 years old, the carrier said. Yang Ming currently operates six of that class that are 20 years and older, with a further five ships that will reach that milestone when the new vessels are likely delivered. Yang Ming said it will evaluate energy-saving technologies and study clean energy fuel options for likely use in the new ships before orders are placed with shipyards. The ships will allow the carrier to “provide customers worldwide with more environmentally friendly transportation solutions,” it said. The carrier gave no details of the cost or likely delivery dates of the new ships. But the fleet renewal plan comes as Yang Ming is expecting an increase both in the number of services and frequency of sailings once its Premier Alliance partnership is launched with Ocean Network Express (ONE) and HMM in February . Yang Ming said the number of services will increase by three to 28 with new loops from Asia to Europe, Mediterranean and Pacific Southwest, while the frequency will also increase on those trades. The carrier has also announced a raft of new services in the last few weeks. These include an India Ocean Express (ISE) service announced Friday connecting western India, Sri Lanka and Pakistan to North Europe. It will be operated in partnership with HMM and inaugurated on Feb. 5. Yang Ming said last week it would begin a China-Thailand Express (CTE) service with OOCL from early January to strengthen their competitiveness in the intra-Asia market. Contact Keith Wallis at keithwallis@hotmail.com.

Container lines

Container Shipping News

Yang Ming to order slate of new container ships in move to upgrade fleet

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">As if the Strait of Hormuz and Red Sea haven’t caused enough concern for commercial shipping, Lars Jensen warns of the potential for weather-related disruptions once again at the canal by year-end. </div>

As if the Strait of Hormuz and Red Sea haven’t caused enough concern for commercial shipping, Lars Jensen warns of the potential for weather-related disruptions once again at the canal by year-end.

<div class="phx-topic">The entire shipping industry, and most certainly shippers needing to get cargo moved, is yearning for some semblance of stability and predictability to return. If this is the message you are seeking, you should not read further. While all eyes are on the Strait of Hormuz as well as the Red Sea crisis and their inevitable domino effects, it is prudent to look deeper into another potential issue: the Panama Canal. No, not from the geopolitical perspective where Panama is presently squeezed between US and Chinese interests. That is an uncertainty unto itself. <div class="wrapper-narrow float-right-element"><img src="/images/phoenix/6202588_0.1.jpg"></img></div>The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) issues a monthly outlook for the El Niño/La Niña weather phenomenon. These are shifting weather patterns occurring in the Pacific, and among the many effects driven by the weather pattern is an impact on rainfall in Panama. When we have the El Niño pattern, this can lead to reduced rainfall in Panama, which in turn impacts the water level in Lake Gatun in central Panama. This is the water basin used to operate the locks in the Panama Canal. If the water level drops too far, it leads to restrictions on vessels being able to transit the Panama Canal. The water level in Lake Gatun generally varies between 85 and 88 feet. The latest El Niño was in 2023–24, and it was categorized as “strong.” This led to Lake Gatun water levels dropping to 79.2 feet, which was the third-lowest recorded since 1965, when measurements began. As many might remember from two years ago, this resulted in significant capacity restrictions on shipping through the Panama Canal. We saw a “weak” El Niño in 2018–20. (Note that “weak,” “strong,” etc. are the official designations placed on each El Niño by NOAA depending on intensity). Here we also saw Lake Gatun drop below 80 feet, although for a considerably shorter period than in 2023–24. The one before that was a “very strong” El Niño in 2015–16 that had water levels drop almost to 78 feet, the lowest level ever recorded. There were five “weak” or “moderate” El Niño periods from 1999 to 2015, all with limited impact on the canal water level. Prior to that, 1997–98 was a “very strong” El Niño, leading to water levels dropping to 78.5 feet, the second-lowest ever recorded. The historical data is quite clear. A “strong” or “very strong” El Niño tends to result in a significant decline in Lake Gatun water levels. A weaker El Niño might at times do that, but usually not. <h3>Shippers should begin planning </h3>On Thursday, the outlook from NOAA noted a 61% chance of El Niño emerging this May–July and persisting at least until the end of 2026. NOAA also predicted a 51% chance by year-end that it will be either “strong” or “very strong,” with equal risk between the two. This means that based on the current weather models, there is essentially a 50/50 risk that by the end of the year we will have an El Niño pattern of a magnitude that historically has a high likelihood of significantly reducing the water levels in Lake Gatun. And with this comes the risk of renewed, albeit temporary, capacity restrictions through the canal. Weather and climate forecasts are, by nature, probabilistic, and no one can give a certain prediction. Instead, shippers depending on cargo flows through the Panama Canal might at this time contemplate whether this 50/50 risk should be ignored, be used as a reason for planning contingency measures or be used to look at possible changes to the current supply chain setup. Lars Jensen is CEO and partner at Vespucci Maritime. Contact him at <a href="mailto:lars.jensen@vespucci-maritime.com">lars.jensen@vespucci-maritime.com</a>. </div>

The entire shipping industry, and most certainly shippers needing to get cargo moved, is yearning for some semblance of stability and predictability to return. If this is the message you are seeking, you should not read further. While all eyes are on the Strait of Hormuz as well as the Red Sea crisis and their inevitable domino effects, it is prudent to look deeper into another potential issue: the Panama Canal. No, not from the geopolitical perspective where Panama is presently squeezed between US and Chinese interests. That is an uncertainty unto itself. The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) issues a monthly outlook for the El Niño/La Niña weather phenomenon. These are shifting weather patterns occurring in the Pacific, and among the many effects driven by the weather pattern is an impact on rainfall in Panama. When we have the El Niño pattern, this can lead to reduced rainfall in Panama, which in turn impacts the water level in Lake Gatun in central Panama. This is the water basin used to operate the locks in the Panama Canal. If the water level drops too far, it leads to restrictions on vessels being able to transit the Panama Canal. The water level in Lake Gatun generally varies between 85 and 88 feet. The latest El Niño was in 2023–24, and it was categorized as “strong.” This led to Lake Gatun water levels dropping to 79.2 feet, which was the third-lowest recorded since 1965, when measurements began. As many might remember from two years ago, this resulted in significant capacity restrictions on shipping through the Panama Canal. We saw a “weak” El Niño in 2018–20. (Note that “weak,” “strong,” etc. are the official designations placed on each El Niño by NOAA depending on intensity). Here we also saw Lake Gatun drop below 80 feet, although for a considerably shorter period than in 2023–24. The one before that was a “very strong” El Niño in 2015–16 that had water levels drop almost to 78 feet, the lowest level ever recorded. There were five “weak” or “moderate” El Niño periods from 1999 to 2015, all with limited impact on the canal water level. Prior to that, 1997–98 was a “very strong” El Niño, leading to water levels dropping to 78.5 feet, the second-lowest ever recorded. The historical data is quite clear. A “strong” or “very strong” El Niño tends to result in a significant decline in Lake Gatun water levels. A weaker El Niño might at times do that, but usually not. Shippers should begin planning On Thursday, the outlook from NOAA noted a 61% chance of El Niño emerging this May–July and persisting at least until the end of 2026. NOAA also predicted a 51% chance by year-end that it will be either “strong” or “very strong,” with equal risk between the two. This means that based on the current weather models, there is essentially a 50/50 risk that by the end of the year we will have an El Niño pattern of a magnitude that historically has a high likelihood of significantly reducing the water levels in Lake Gatun. And with this comes the risk of renewed, albeit temporary, capacity restrictions through the canal. Weather and climate forecasts are, by nature, probabilistic, and no one can give a certain prediction. Instead, shippers depending on cargo flows through the Panama Canal might at this time contemplate whether this 50/50 risk should be ignored, be used as a reason for planning contingency measures or be used to look at possible changes to the current supply chain setup. Lars Jensen is CEO and partner at Vespucci Maritime. Contact him at lars.jensen@vespucci-maritime.com .

El Niño forecast suggests risk of low water levels along Panama Canal

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The start to the year was largely unaffected by the Middle East conflict, but the lagging effect of high bunker fuel prices will be felt from the second quarter onward. </div>

The start to the year was largely unaffected by the Middle East conflict, but the lagging effect of high bunker fuel prices will be felt from the second quarter onward.

<div class="phx-topic">OOCL recorded a 7.6% year-over-year drop in first-quarter revenue amid lower demand on most trades and softening rates. The Cosco subsidiary booked revenue of $2.13 billion in the first three months, with topline sales down across all four main trade lanes as capacity increased 4.3%. The carrier’s total volume rose 1.7% to just under 2 million TEUs, while the overall load factor was 2.1% lower than during the same period in 2025. Trans-Pacific liner revenue at OOCL fell 17% year over year to $744 million, Asia-Europe revenue was down 4.5% at $482 million, trans-Atlantic revenue fell 4.3% to $163 million, and intra-Asia/Australasia revenue slipped 0.7% to $748 million. The slight increase in first-quarter volume was thanks to the Asia-Europe corridor, the only trade lane to record growth in the quarter. The carrier handled 384,893 TEUs on Asia-Europe, up 12% year over year. Trans-Pacific volume fell 6% to 523,385 TEUs, trans-Atlantic volume was down 1.3% at 133,910 TEUs, and intra-Asia/Australasia volume declined 3% to 954,464 TEUs. <h3>Lagging impact of high bunker fuel price </h3>While the oversupplied container shipping business appears to be heading for a weak first quarter largely unaffected by disruption from the Middle East war, the industry bill for a sharp increase in bunker prices will be due from the second quarter onward, according to investment bank J.P. Morgan. “The Persian Gulf disruption remains a highly fluid situation and given the time lag in loaded rates, bunker adjustment factors for contracts, and Maersk’s two-month bunker fuel inventory, we see the impact skewed to Q2 2026 onwards,” the bank wrote in a note to Maersk investors Friday. J.P. Morgan is expecting Maersk’s first-quarter earnings out May 7 will also reflect a muted first quarter, given the decline in freight rates through the end of February and the effects of Persian Gulf disruption not really impacting the first quarter. But the investment bank highlighted the impact of high bunker fuel prices that carriers are trying to recover through bunker adjustment factors (BAFs) and emergency fuel surcharges. “We have factored into our 2026 estimates [for Maersk] our assumption that these disruptions will last at least six months, with bunker fuel cost increases post Q2 the biggest drag on earnings that will need to be recovered through firmer spot rates and BAF compliance,” J.P. Morgan said. The bank expects the 2026 bunker fuel bill for Maersk to increase by $1.2 billion to a full-year cost of $7.3 billion on the back of an average price of $693 per ton versus $539 in 2025. “Maersk reportedly has two months of bunker fuel inventory, which shields it from the current volatility,” the bank said. “The bunker fuel adjustment factor for contracts will be recovered in Q3, and therefore there is a lagged fuel cost recovery.” Reflecting this dynamic, J.P. Morgan has forecast that Maersk will report an earnings before interest and taxes loss of $2.6 billion for the year, up from a previous expectation of a $2.8 billion loss. Contact Greg Knowler at <a href="mailto:greg.knowler@spglobal.com">greg.knowler@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

OOCL recorded a 7.6% year-over-year drop in first-quarter revenue amid lower demand on most trades and softening rates. The Cosco subsidiary booked revenue of $2.13 billion in the first three months, with topline sales down across all four main trade lanes as capacity increased 4.3%. The carrier’s total volume rose 1.7% to just under 2 million TEUs, while the overall load factor was 2.1% lower than during the same period in 2025. Trans-Pacific liner revenue at OOCL fell 17% year over year to $744 million, Asia-Europe revenue was down 4.5% at $482 million, trans-Atlantic revenue fell 4.3% to $163 million, and intra-Asia/Australasia revenue slipped 0.7% to $748 million. The slight increase in first-quarter volume was thanks to the Asia-Europe corridor, the only trade lane to record growth in the quarter. The carrier handled 384,893 TEUs on Asia-Europe, up 12% year over year. Trans-Pacific volume fell 6% to 523,385 TEUs, trans-Atlantic volume was down 1.3% at 133,910 TEUs, and intra-Asia/Australasia volume declined 3% to 954,464 TEUs. Lagging impact of high bunker fuel price While the oversupplied container shipping business appears to be heading for a weak first quarter largely unaffected by disruption from the Middle East war, the industry bill for a sharp increase in bunker prices will be due from the second quarter onward, according to investment bank J.P. Morgan. “The Persian Gulf disruption remains a highly fluid situation and given the time lag in loaded rates, bunker adjustment factors for contracts, and Maersk’s two-month bunker fuel inventory, we see the impact skewed to Q2 2026 onwards,” the bank wrote in a note to Maersk investors Friday. J.P. Morgan is expecting Maersk’s first-quarter earnings out May 7 will also reflect a muted first quarter, given the decline in freight rates through the end of February and the effects of Persian Gulf disruption not really impacting the first quarter. But the investment bank highlighted the impact of high bunker fuel prices that carriers are trying to recover through bunker adjustment factors (BAFs) and emergency fuel surcharges. “We have factored into our 2026 estimates [for Maersk] our assumption that these disruptions will last at least six months, with bunker fuel cost increases post Q2 the biggest drag on earnings that will need to be recovered through firmer spot rates and BAF compliance,” J.P. Morgan said. The bank expects the 2026 bunker fuel bill for Maersk to increase by $1.2 billion to a full-year cost of $7.3 billion on the back of an average price of $693 per ton versus $539 in 2025. “Maersk reportedly has two months of bunker fuel inventory, which shields it from the current volatility,” the bank said. “The bunker fuel adjustment factor for contracts will be recovered in Q3, and therefore there is a lagged fuel cost recovery.” Reflecting this dynamic, J.P. Morgan has forecast that Maersk will report an earnings before interest and taxes loss of $2.6 billion for the year, up from a previous expectation of a $2.8 billion loss. Contact Greg Knowler at greg.knowler@spglobal.com .

Asia-Europe

OOCL posts revenue decline in muted first quarter

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">An increasing number of lawmakers at the federal, state, and municipal levels are taking steps to freeze data center development, which serves as an important cargo source. </div>

An increasing number of lawmakers at the federal, state, and municipal levels are taking steps to freeze data center development, which serves as an important cargo source.

<div class="phx-topic">Growing calls to place moratoriums on data center construction across the US present a concern for project cargo specialists who are counting on power generation shipments and other key cargoes required to meet the enormous demands of the mega projects. An increasing number of lawmakers at the federal, state and municipal levels are taking steps to freeze data center development, which serves as an important cargo source. Opponents say the centers drain power supplies, raise energy costs, and can harm the environment. Beyond the physical construction of data centers — the largest of which exceed 4 million square feet in the US and can consume as much energy and water as a small town — the development of these facilities is driving large volumes of cargo for infrastructure projects to support their massive utility needs. Data center construction is already facing setbacks related to tariffs and equipment scarcity. According to an April 1 report by Bloomberg, nearly half of data centers planned for this year in the US are expected to experience delays or cancellations because of a shortage of electrical equipment including transformers, switchgear and batteries to build out the power infrastructure for the centers. The parts primarily come from China, subjecting them to heavy tariffs and taking 24 to 30 months to arrive — up to a year later than data center developers say they need the equipment. For project logistics providers, delays from moratoriums can create significant setbacks for cargo shipments. “Long-lead equipment may already be manufactured or in transit, requiring additional storage, rerouting or resequencing of deliveries,” John Lu, global sector head for semiconductor and cloud construction with DHL Global Forwarding Industrial Projects, told the Journal of Commerce. For large artificial intelligence and data center developments, planning around power, water and sustainability often starts well before projects are publicly announced, Lu said. “Projects of this scale are complex and typically involve multiple layers of local, state and federal approvals,” he said. <h3>Maine set to impose first statewide ban </h3>Legislative efforts to rein in data centers are playing out on all levels of government — some with more support than others. In March, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vermont) and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-New York) introduced legislation in the Senate and House, respectively, that they said would enact a “reasonable pause” on the development of new AI data centers in the US “to ensure the safety of humanity.” If the bill becomes law, it would institute “an immediate federal moratorium on AI data centers until strong national safeguards are put in place” to ensure AI is safe and effective, does not increase electricity or utility prices, or harm communities or damage the environment. Although the legislation is unlikely to advance, its introduction follows efforts by more than a dozen states and several cities and counties pushing forward with moratorium proposals. Maine is set to become the first US state to temporarily outlaw the development of most new data centers after a proposed ban received state House approval April 6. The bill advances to the state Senate, which is expected to pass the legislation. The moratorium would freeze construction of any data center consuming at least 20 megawatts of electricity until Nov. 1, 2027. Lawmakers have proposed data center bans or restrictions in 12 other states: Georgia, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New York, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Vermont, and Virginia. On the municipal level, the city of New Orleans in January passed a one-year moratorium on the construction of data centers, and city council members — who unanimously approved the measure — say the ban will likely become permanent. Cities in North Carolina and Wisconsin also approved temporary bans earlier this year, while Dallas and Denver are considering their own restrictions. Global spending on data centers is projected to reach $7 trillion by 2030, according to consultant McKinsey. Of the 4,088 data centers now in the US, Virginia and Texas are the top two states for data center construction, with 579 and 411 facilities, respectively, according to industry website Data Center Map. DHL is in the process of expanding its North American infrastructure to support data center logistics, adding 10 warehouse sites with over 7 million square feet of capacity. The facilities are set go live sometime in 2026, according to DHL. Contact Autumn Cafiero Giusti at <a href="mailto:autumn@autumngiusti.com">autumn@autumngiusti.com</a>. </div>

Growing calls to place moratoriums on data center construction across the US present a concern for project cargo specialists who are counting on power generation shipments and other key cargoes required to meet the enormous demands of the mega projects. An increasing number of lawmakers at the federal, state and municipal levels are taking steps to freeze data center development, which serves as an important cargo source. Opponents say the centers drain power supplies, raise energy costs, and can harm the environment. Beyond the physical construction of data centers — the largest of which exceed 4 million square feet in the US and can consume as much energy and water as a small town — the development of these facilities is driving large volumes of cargo for infrastructure projects to support their massive utility needs. Data center construction is already facing setbacks related to tariffs and equipment scarcity. According to an April 1 report by Bloomberg, nearly half of data centers planned for this year in the US are expected to experience delays or cancellations because of a shortage of electrical equipment including transformers, switchgear and batteries to build out the power infrastructure for the centers. The parts primarily come from China, subjecting them to heavy tariffs and taking 24 to 30 months to arrive — up to a year later than data center developers say they need the equipment. For project logistics providers, delays from moratoriums can create significant setbacks for cargo shipments. “Long-lead equipment may already be manufactured or in transit, requiring additional storage, rerouting or resequencing of deliveries,” John Lu, global sector head for semiconductor and cloud construction with DHL Global Forwarding Industrial Projects, told the Journal of Commerce. For large artificial intelligence and data center developments, planning around power, water and sustainability often starts well before projects are publicly announced, Lu said. “Projects of this scale are complex and typically involve multiple layers of local, state and federal approvals,” he said. Maine set to impose first statewide ban Legislative efforts to rein in data centers are playing out on all levels of government — some with more support than others. In March, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vermont) and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-New York) introduced legislation in the Senate and House, respectively, that they said would enact a “reasonable pause” on the development of new AI data centers in the US “to ensure the safety of humanity.” If the bill becomes law, it would institute “an immediate federal moratorium on AI data centers until strong national safeguards are put in place” to ensure AI is safe and effective, does not increase electricity or utility prices, or harm communities or damage the environment. Although the legislation is unlikely to advance, its introduction follows efforts by more than a dozen states and several cities and counties pushing forward with moratorium proposals. Maine is set to become the first US state to temporarily outlaw the development of most new data centers after a proposed ban received state House approval April 6. The bill advances to the state Senate, which is expected to pass the legislation. The moratorium would freeze construction of any data center consuming at least 20 megawatts of electricity until Nov. 1, 2027. Lawmakers have proposed data center bans or restrictions in 12 other states: Georgia, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New York, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Vermont, and Virginia. On the municipal level, the city of New Orleans in January passed a one-year moratorium on the construction of data centers, and city council members — who unanimously approved the measure — say the ban will likely become permanent. Cities in North Carolina and Wisconsin also approved temporary bans earlier this year, while Dallas and Denver are considering their own restrictions. Global spending on data centers is projected to reach $7 trillion by 2030, according to consultant McKinsey. Of the 4,088 data centers now in the US, Virginia and Texas are the top two states for data center construction, with 579 and 411 facilities, respectively, according to industry website Data Center Map. DHL is in the process of expanding its North American infrastructure to support data center logistics, adding 10 warehouse sites with over 7 million square feet of capacity. The facilities are set go live sometime in 2026, according to DHL. Contact Autumn Cafiero Giusti at autumn@autumngiusti.com .

Push for data center bans in US threatens project cargo surge

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Most of the increases represent a significant premium on current pricing levels, but it remains to be seen how sticky the aspirational rates will be with cargo markets also under pressure from high energy prices. </div>

Most of the increases represent a significant premium on current pricing levels, but it remains to be seen how sticky the aspirational rates will be with cargo markets also under pressure from high energy prices.

<div class="phx-topic">Ocean carriers have unveiled a raft of rate increases and emergency fuel surcharges on multiple trade lanes as high bunker prices push up operating costs across shipping networks. Most of the increases represent a significant premium on current pricing levels, but it remains to be seen how sticky the aspirational rates will be with cargo markets also under pressure from high energy prices. Carriers have been pushing general rate increases (GRIs) on Asia-US trade lanes to lift prices on the trans-Pacific. As of April 9, Asia-US East Coast rates of $3,525/FEU were up 20% compared with levels before the April 1 GRIs, with Asia-West Coast up 24% at $2,525/FEU, according to Platts, a sister company of the Journal of Commerce within S&amp;P Global. Mediterranean Shipping Co. will increase its Asia-North America emergency fuel surcharge (EFS) on May 1, with the Asia-North America West Coast EFS rising 70% to $467/FEU and the East Coast levy up 50% at $644/FEU. On Asia-North Europe, rates eased this week despite Maersk announcing freight-all-kinds (FAK) prices that set higher rate levels ranging from $3,500 to $3,900/FEU depending on destination ports. Data from rate benchmarking platform Xeneta shows Asia-North Europe rates unchanged this week near $2,854/FEU. Other upcoming increases announced this week include CMA CGM planning an April 16 FAK rate of $4,300/FEU from Northwest India and Pakistan to North Europe, the Mediterranean and North Africa, more than 70% higher than the current rate, while Hapag-Lloyd will be adding $1,000/FEU on the Indian Subcontinent, Pakistan and Middle East to the US and Canada. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="d915cdd3-263b-4835-b993-5efb9468dc03"></dynamic-object></div>Hapag-Lloyd’s EFS of $160/TEU, in effect since mid-March on routes not regulated by the US Federal Maritime Commission (FMC), was implemented on US trades this week. The FMC requires <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/fmc-rejects-requests-by-carriers-to-waive-waiting-period-for-middle-east-surcharges-6191881">a 30-day notice period from carriers</a> before they can implement rate increases and surcharges on US routes. Ocean Network Express on April 2 implemented an inland fuel surcharge for carrier haulage in Latin America and across all non-FMC regulated trade routes and services and will extend that to FMC-regulated routes on May 2. “The evolving security situation in the Middle East continues to pose significant challenges, affecting logistics operations and customer supply chains,” ONE said in its surcharge announcement this week. “Many refineries are also operating at reduced capacity, limiting export volumes and causing substantial disruptions in global fuel supply chains,” the carrier added. <h3>Shipping reluctant to pass through Hormuz </h3>The Strait of Hormuz that links the Persian Gulf with the Gulf of Oman is a key energy transport route with about 20% of the world’s oil and gas supplies passing through the waterway. It has been effectively closed since the war started on Feb. 28, and despite <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/ocean-carriers-wait-for-clarity-on-safe-hormuz-passage-after-us-iran-ceasefire-6201132">the two-week US-Iran ceasefire agreed to earlier this week</a>, shipping remains reluctant to pass through the strait until safety can be guaranteed. Jan Christensen, senior director of fuel purchasing at Hapag-Lloyd, highlighted the impact high prices and supply disruptions from the Hormuz blockade were having on bunkering operations. “Higher crude oil prices directly translate into higher bunker prices, which are the fuel costs for our vessels,” Christensen said in a recent interview. “Fuel is one of the largest cost components in container shipping, so these developments have a significant financial impact for all carriers. When oil prices move sharply upward, bunker costs follow very quickly, which increases operational expenses across the entire fleet.” <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/singapore-bunker-supply-continues-to-run-down-as-middle-east-war-drags-on-6198359">Fuel availability continues to tighten</a>, particularly in the Asian bunkering hubs in Singapore and South Korea. “Some suppliers are already signaling that they cannot fully guarantee contracted volumes, and it’s becoming increasingly difficult to secure bunker contracts for April and May,” Christensen said. <h3>Lingering Europe port congestion </h3>On top of the rising fuel costs, carriers are also facing delays when calling at gateway ports in North Europe and the Mediterranean. Yard density is high, with the lingering effects of severe storms in early March continuing to be felt. Kuehne + Nagel’s visibility tool SeaExplorer noted “heavily disrupted operations” at Antwerp, Hamburg and Felixstowe, with seven-day average vessel wait times of more than two days. “It’s been reported that yard density has reached over 75% at ports like Antwerp, Hamburg, and Rotterdam in the past few weeks and much of that was due to the berthing delays from storms in February and early March and their lingering impacts,” said Destine Ozuygur, senior market analyst at Xeneta. Another challenge for shippers on the Asia-North Europe trade lane is on-time performance. While schedule reliability in March of 32% into Northern Europe was a significant improvement on the 18% in February and 22% in January, Ozuygur noted it was barely above the average 29% on-time performance through 2025. “Any gains we’ve seen on this trade have been short-lived over the past 12 months,” she said, adding that only in March and May of last year did schedule reliability ever pass 40%. From a deployed capacity perspective, the Asia-Mediterranean trade lane has seen an 8% increase from April to May, with carriers adding 69,000 TEUs to the corridor to serve rerouted Persian Gulf cargo, Xeneta data shows. Planned capacity on Asia-Mediterranean routes of 844,862 TEUs in April is an increase of 25% compared with March and will jump to 913,285 TEUs in May. “The Far East-Med is being used to route Gulf Cooperation Council-bound cargo through Jeddah, King Abdullah and Mersin,” Ozuygur said. “The challenges that could potentially bring to other Mediterranean ports if this becomes a long-term routing option that gains favor over Khor Fakkan, Mundra, Nhava Sheva, etc. is one worth noting.” Contact Greg Knowler at <a href="mailto:greg.knowler@spglobal.com">greg.knowler@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

Ocean carriers have unveiled a raft of rate increases and emergency fuel surcharges on multiple trade lanes as high bunker prices push up operating costs across shipping networks. Most of the increases represent a significant premium on current pricing levels, but it remains to be seen how sticky the aspirational rates will be with cargo markets also under pressure from high energy prices. Carriers have been pushing general rate increases (GRIs) on Asia-US trade lanes to lift prices on the trans-Pacific. As of April 9, Asia-US East Coast rates of $3,525/FEU were up 20% compared with levels before the April 1 GRIs, with Asia-West Coast up 24% at $2,525/FEU, according to Platts, a sister company of the Journal of Commerce within S&P Global. Mediterranean Shipping Co. will increase its Asia-North America emergency fuel surcharge (EFS) on May 1, with the Asia-North America West Coast EFS rising 70% to $467/FEU and the East Coast levy up 50% at $644/FEU. On Asia-North Europe, rates eased this week despite Maersk announcing freight-all-kinds (FAK) prices that set higher rate levels ranging from $3,500 to $3,900/FEU depending on destination ports. Data from rate benchmarking platform Xeneta shows Asia-North Europe rates unchanged this week near $2,854/FEU. Other upcoming increases announced this week include CMA CGM planning an April 16 FAK rate of $4,300/FEU from Northwest India and Pakistan to North Europe, the Mediterranean and North Africa, more than 70% higher than the current rate, while Hapag-Lloyd will be adding $1,000/FEU on the Indian Subcontinent, Pakistan and Middle East to the US and Canada. Hapag-Lloyd’s EFS of $160/TEU, in effect since mid-March on routes not regulated by the US Federal Maritime Commission (FMC), was implemented on US trades this week. The FMC requires a 30-day notice period from carriers before they can implement rate increases and surcharges on US routes. Ocean Network Express on April 2 implemented an inland fuel surcharge for carrier haulage in Latin America and across all non-FMC regulated trade routes and services and will extend that to FMC-regulated routes on May 2. “The evolving security situation in the Middle East continues to pose significant challenges, affecting logistics operations and customer supply chains,” ONE said in its surcharge announcement this week. “Many refineries are also operating at reduced capacity, limiting export volumes and causing substantial disruptions in global fuel supply chains,” the carrier added. Shipping reluctant to pass through Hormuz The Strait of Hormuz that links the Persian Gulf with the Gulf of Oman is a key energy transport route with about 20% of the world’s oil and gas supplies passing through the waterway. It has been effectively closed since the war started on Feb. 28, and despite the two-week US-Iran ceasefire agreed to earlier this week , shipping remains reluctant to pass through the strait until safety can be guaranteed. Jan Christensen, senior director of fuel purchasing at Hapag-Lloyd, highlighted the impact high prices and supply disruptions from the Hormuz blockade were having on bunkering operations. “Higher crude oil prices directly translate into higher bunker prices, which are the fuel costs for our vessels,” Christensen said in a recent interview. “Fuel is one of the largest cost components in container shipping, so these developments have a significant financial impact for all carriers. When oil prices move sharply upward, bunker costs follow very quickly, which increases operational expenses across the entire fleet.” Fuel availability continues to tighten , particularly in the Asian bunkering hubs in Singapore and South Korea. “Some suppliers are already signaling that they cannot fully guarantee contracted volumes, and it’s becoming increasingly difficult to secure bunker contracts for April and May,” Christensen said. Lingering Europe port congestion On top of the rising fuel costs, carriers are also facing delays when calling at gateway ports in North Europe and the Mediterranean. Yard density is high, with the lingering effects of severe storms in early March continuing to be felt. Kuehne + Nagel’s visibility tool SeaExplorer noted “heavily disrupted operations” at Antwerp, Hamburg and Felixstowe, with seven-day average vessel wait times of more than two days. “It’s been reported that yard density has reached over 75% at ports like Antwerp, Hamburg, and Rotterdam in the past few weeks and much of that was due to the berthing delays from storms in February and early March and their lingering impacts,” said Destine Ozuygur, senior market analyst at Xeneta. Another challenge for shippers on the Asia-North Europe trade lane is on-time performance. While schedule reliability in March of 32% into Northern Europe was a significant improvement on the 18% in February and 22% in January, Ozuygur noted it was barely above the average 29% on-time performance through 2025. “Any gains we’ve seen on this trade have been short-lived over the past 12 months,” she said, adding that only in March and May of last year did schedule reliability ever pass 40%. From a deployed capacity perspective, the Asia-Mediterranean trade lane has seen an 8% increase from April to May, with carriers adding 69,000 TEUs to the corridor to serve rerouted Persian Gulf cargo, Xeneta data shows. Planned capacity on Asia-Mediterranean routes of 844,862 TEUs in April is an increase of 25% compared with March and will jump to 913,285 TEUs in May. “The Far East-Med is being used to route Gulf Cooperation Council-bound cargo through Jeddah, King Abdullah and Mersin,” Ozuygur said. “The challenges that could potentially bring to other Mediterranean ports if this becomes a long-term routing option that gains favor over Khor Fakkan, Mundra, Nhava Sheva, etc. is one worth noting.” Contact Greg Knowler at greg.knowler@spglobal.com .

Cost-hit ocean carriers roll out series of rate increases, fuel surcharges

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Rising fuel prices and memory costs may force buyers to re-think, or at least delay, purchases of pricey electronics this year. </div>

Rising fuel prices and memory costs may force buyers to re-think, or at least delay, purchases of pricey electronics this year.

<div class="phx-topic">(The following story appears in the Top 100 Importers and Exporters issue of the Journal of Commerce magazine to be published May 4, 2026.) Importers of consumer electronics affected by rising costs on US households in 2025 are facing dual threats to growth prospects in the year ahead: the impact of increased fuel costs on consumer discretionary spending and the skyrocketing price of memory due to demand from data center construction. That means there might be little respite for consumer electronics manufacturers and retailers after they saw containerized imports of those products dip 2.2% in 2025, according to data from PIERS, a sister product of the Journal of Commerce within S&amp;P Global. “Energy prices and gas prices, that’s going to be a headline budgetary impact on the average household,” Paul Gagnon, vice president of consumer technology at market research firm Circana, told the Journal of Commerce. “We were already expecting consumer demand to not be great this year and that tariffs would have an impact. But food and other necessary purchases will delay demand for discretionary purchases.” A potentially bigger headwind for consumer electronics sales is the impact of memory prices. Gagnon said pricing for memory is up 400% year over year in the last few months. “Data centers use huge amounts of high bandwidth memory and the generators of that memory don’t have bandwidth to supply data centers and lower value memory that goes into consumer products,” he said. The impact of that dynamic won’t be isolated to the types of products most associated with memory, like laptops and tablets, but will be more widespread since virtually every consumer electronic good now has a memory component. “Any product that uses a lot of memory will be susceptible,” Gagnon said. “Even things that use memory indirectly, prices will go up.” Sony, during its fiscal third-quarter earnings call in February, noted the memory cost issue. “We are already in a position to secure the minimum quantity necessary to manage the year-end selling season of next fiscal year,” Sony Group CFO Lin Tao said. “Going forward, we intend to further negotiate with various suppliers to secure enough [memory] supply to meet the demand of our customers.” The way these trends manifest into container volume is not entirely clear, but Gagnon cautioned that with prices likely to increase due to the memory cost issue, retailers might see sales stay steady or rise, but on a lower volume of units. That would, in turn, hit import volume. “It will definitely have a negative impact on volumes,” he said. “Retailers don’t care about volume as much as revenues. And it might be a situation where their revenues hold up because people are willing to pay more or need something and end up having to pay more.” <h3>Sourcing shift </h3>Another sectoral trend affecting volume is changes in sourcing patterns of consumer electronics tied to the size of a product and the composition of parts needed, Gagnon explained. For instance, television supply chains had long ago shifted production to Mexico, but during 2025 saw even more concentration in that market. “What had left China had gone to Southeast Asia but even that had moved to Mexico,” Gagnon said. "But the shift to Mexico didn’t happen broadly outside of large physical size products. For smaller products, there’s not a big benefit to have it more local.” He also said Mexico is suitable to television production because the some of the major component parts — metals and plastics — are not as sophisticated as those needed in other consumer product categories. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="df66d4d5-06ca-41b6-986e-bdb3b6d0346d"></dynamic-object></div>Meanwhile, historical behavior in the electronics sector suggests that when prices rise, consumers will either put off purchases, whether new or replacement, or they will engage in what Gagnon called “trade down behavior,” choosing a less expensive option if they need to buy. The forecast for consumer electronics manufacturing is not much better. S&amp;P Global Market Intelligence in late February revised its projection for global production of consumer electronics downward from 5.5% to 4.4%. The forecast noted that consumer electronics production tends to correlate loosely with global GDP. “Historically, the industry overperformed the global economy by 1.6 percentage points,” the report said. “Over the last 10 years, the gap between industry and global growth even got wider. The industry grew 5.2% on average per year, over-performing GDP growth by 2.4 percentage points.” So a tick down from the average growth rate over the past decade would indicate a slowing sector in a slowing economy. US imports of consumer electronics have lost ground three of the last four years, with 2024 being the outlier, according to PIERS data, adding weight to the slowdown theory not being an isolated trend. While China dominates the supply chain for consumer electronics — it accounted for 53% of global production in 2025 — S&amp;P Global Market Intelligence said the next 10 years will see supply concentration decrease. PIERS data shows that process already occurring, with Vietnam growing its share of US consumer electronic imports from 10.1% in 2020 to 18.1% in 2025, while China’s share decreased from 56.6% to 40.7% in the same period. Contact Eric Johnson at <a href="mailto:eric.johnson@spglobal.com">eric.johnson@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

(The following story appears in the Top 100 Importers and Exporters issue of the Journal of Commerce magazine to be published May 4, 2026.) Importers of consumer electronics affected by rising costs on US households in 2025 are facing dual threats to growth prospects in the year ahead: the impact of increased fuel costs on consumer discretionary spending and the skyrocketing price of memory due to demand from data center construction. That means there might be little respite for consumer electronics manufacturers and retailers after they saw containerized imports of those products dip 2.2% in 2025, according to data from PIERS, a sister product of the Journal of Commerce within S&P Global. “Energy prices and gas prices, that’s going to be a headline budgetary impact on the average household,” Paul Gagnon, vice president of consumer technology at market research firm Circana, told the Journal of Commerce. “We were already expecting consumer demand to not be great this year and that tariffs would have an impact. But food and other necessary purchases will delay demand for discretionary purchases.” A potentially bigger headwind for consumer electronics sales is the impact of memory prices. Gagnon said pricing for memory is up 400% year over year in the last few months. “Data centers use huge amounts of high bandwidth memory and the generators of that memory don’t have bandwidth to supply data centers and lower value memory that goes into consumer products,” he said. The impact of that dynamic won’t be isolated to the types of products most associated with memory, like laptops and tablets, but will be more widespread since virtually every consumer electronic good now has a memory component. “Any product that uses a lot of memory will be susceptible,” Gagnon said. “Even things that use memory indirectly, prices will go up.” Sony, during its fiscal third-quarter earnings call in February, noted the memory cost issue. “We are already in a position to secure the minimum quantity necessary to manage the year-end selling season of next fiscal year,” Sony Group CFO Lin Tao said. “Going forward, we intend to further negotiate with various suppliers to secure enough [memory] supply to meet the demand of our customers.” The way these trends manifest into container volume is not entirely clear, but Gagnon cautioned that with prices likely to increase due to the memory cost issue, retailers might see sales stay steady or rise, but on a lower volume of units. That would, in turn, hit import volume. “It will definitely have a negative impact on volumes,” he said. “Retailers don’t care about volume as much as revenues. And it might be a situation where their revenues hold up because people are willing to pay more or need something and end up having to pay more.” Sourcing shift Another sectoral trend affecting volume is changes in sourcing patterns of consumer electronics tied to the size of a product and the composition of parts needed, Gagnon explained. For instance, television supply chains had long ago shifted production to Mexico, but during 2025 saw even more concentration in that market. “What had left China had gone to Southeast Asia but even that had moved to Mexico,” Gagnon said. "But the shift to Mexico didn’t happen broadly outside of large physical size products. For smaller products, there’s not a big benefit to have it more local.” He also said Mexico is suitable to television production because the some of the major component parts — metals and plastics — are not as sophisticated as those needed in other consumer product categories. Meanwhile, historical behavior in the electronics sector suggests that when prices rise, consumers will either put off purchases, whether new or replacement, or they will engage in what Gagnon called “trade down behavior,” choosing a less expensive option if they need to buy. The forecast for consumer electronics manufacturing is not much better. S&P Global Market Intelligence in late February revised its projection for global production of consumer electronics downward from 5.5% to 4.4%. The forecast noted that consumer electronics production tends to correlate loosely with global GDP. “Historically, the industry overperformed the global economy by 1.6 percentage points,” the report said. “Over the last 10 years, the gap between industry and global growth even got wider. The industry grew 5.2% on average per year, over-performing GDP growth by 2.4 percentage points.” So a tick down from the average growth rate over the past decade would indicate a slowing sector in a slowing economy. US imports of consumer electronics have lost ground three of the last four years, with 2024 being the outlier, according to PIERS data, adding weight to the slowdown theory not being an isolated trend. While China dominates the supply chain for consumer electronics — it accounted for 53% of global production in 2025 — S&P Global Market Intelligence said the next 10 years will see supply concentration decrease. PIERS data shows that process already occurring, with Vietnam growing its share of US consumer electronic imports from 10.1% in 2020 to 18.1% in 2025, while China’s share decreased from 56.6% to 40.7% in the same period. Contact Eric Johnson at eric.johnson@spglobal.com .

US imports of consumer electronics face threats to growth plans

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 SSFTW30 at checkout to save 30% on a Silver or Silver Plus annual subscription! 

Subscribe Now - FT to S/SP - Wide Box

SPRING SALE!

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

Use code SSLW30 at checkout and save 30% on an annual Silver or Silver Plus subscription!

Subscribe Now - Anonymous to S/SP - Wide Box

Access Journal of Commerce content for 30 days

Free Trial - Wide Box

START A FREE TRIAL TODAY

Use code SSGFTW895 at checkout to save $600 on first year of a Gold subscription!

Subscribe Now - FT to Gold - Wide Box

Use code SSLW895 at checkout and save $600 on first year of a Gold subscription!

Subscribe Now - Anonymous to Gold - Wide Box

SPRING SALE: Use code SSFTW30 to save 30% 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

SPRING SALE: Use code SSLW30 at checkout and save 30% on an annual Silver or Silver Plus subscription!

Subscribe Now - Anonymous to S/SP - Offer Box

SUBSCRIBE TODAY

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

Upgrade Subscription

SPRING SALE: Use code SSLW895 at checkout and save $600 on an annual Gold 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

SPRING SALE: Use code SSGFTW895 and save $600 on the first year of 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 only editorially independent conference for the breakbulk & project cargo industry

Breakbulk Conference - Rectangle Box

Attend Breakbulk26

The Journal of Commerce is the industry’s source for maritime news and analysis about ocean container shipping, logistics, supply chains, global shipping ports, shipping technology solutions and end-to-end connectivity. Coverage tracks the movement of containerized cargo — from origin to destination — handled by marine terminals in the US and abroad, depots, container ports, container lines, drayage, consignees and shippers, forwarders, non-vessel operating common carriers (NVOs) and off-dock warehousing providers, as well as pricing, capacity, volume and reliability on the trans-Pacific, Asia–Europe, North America–Caribbean, Central and South American and intra-Asia trades.

Discover comprehensive trucking news and trends with Journal of Commerce - from trucking LTL to regulation and trucking supply and demand.

Breakbulk News shipping | Journal of Commerce

Container shipping news and analysis of ocean container shipping, logistics, supply chains, technology and end-to-end connectivity.

Container Shipping News | Journal of Commerce

Stay informed on port news worldwide with Journal of Commerce. From decarbonization to labor updates, get insights on global developments.

Port News | Journal of Commerce

News and analysis of ocean containerized cargo movement, logistics, supply chains, technology, and end-to-end connectivity. Maritime news and analysis of containerized ocean cargo movement, breakbulk and roll-on and roll-off shipping from origin to destination.

Latest News

More News & Analysis

El Niño forecast suggests risk of low water levels along Panama Canal

OOCL posts revenue decline in muted first quarter

Push for data center bans in US threatens project cargo surge