China’s latest foray into the Northern Sea Route — using the channel between Russia and the North Pole to ship goods — has led some of the world’s largest container carriers to reiterate that the Arctic for them is still not safe, environmentally friendly or commercially viable.
MSC Mediterranean Shipping Co., the world’s biggest container carrier, issued a client advisory this week to “reaffirm” its commitment to avoiding the Arctic passage, a course which can halve the 40-day Asia-to-Europe trip via southern Africa. Attacks by Houthis in the Red Sea have effectively shut off the only other shorter alternative, though the Suez Canal.
Increased Arctic traffic could “impact the fragile ecosystem of the region and the ice caps,” as well as remote Arctic communities, MSC said in the Sept. 29 advisory. “The Northern Sea Route remains underdeveloped for commercial shipping since safe navigation and transit are not assured.”
Three of the other top five players — A.P. Moller-Maersk A/S, CMA CGM SA and Hapag-Lloyd AG — also said they will not be looking to use the shipping lane, which follows Russia’s Arctic coast for more than 3,000 nautical miles, in line with a voluntary commitment they made in 2019. Cosco Shipping Holdings Co., No. 4 by capacity, hasn’t signed up to that pledge and didn’t immediately reply to a request for comment during a holiday in China.
Russia has promoted use of the shipping lane, including as a way of moving oil and natural gas to crucial markets in Asia, but ships still require clearance from Moscow to use the route. The passage can have ice even in the warmest months and freezes over with a thick cover in the northern hemisphere winter — making it accessible only to specialized vessels and increasing the risk of accidents that could damage the pristine environment.
As of Aug. 31, 10 container ships had used the NSR this year, as well as tankers and other vessels, according to the Centre for High North Logistics at Norway’s Nord University. Those were all carrying cargo between China and Russia.
One of the last container ships to do so was the Istanbul Bridge, which left St. Petersburg in Russia in mid-August and sailed along the Northern Sea Route before reaching Qingdao in China some weeks later, according to vessel-tracking data. After that, the ship docked near the cities of Dalian, Shanghai, Fuzhou and Ningbo before sailing north again to enter the Arctic route, listing its destination as Felixstowe in the UK.
The vessel is inaugurating a new “Arctic Express” service to connect major domestic ports with European ports including Felixstowe, Rotterdam and Hamburg, the local government-run Fuzhou Daily newspaper reported on Sept. 22. The ship’s cargo includes lithium batteries made by Contemporary Amperex Technology Co. and other chemical products, it said.
Istanbul Bridge’s registered owner is listed as British Virgin Islands-based Neom Line Holding Ltd., an official database managed by a United Nations agency shows. No phone or email contact details were listed for the company. Its manager is marked as Ocean Fleet Shipmanage Ltd., based in Qingdao, which didn’t immediately reply to an email sent during the holiday in China. It, in turn, is listed on the website of ship operator Sea Legend Line Ltd., which also didn’t immediately reply to requests for comment.
The fact that the Istanbul Bridge is docking at several points in China and Europe is “symbolically important,” because it’s the first attempt at a multi-port line of service, said Patrik Andersson, an analyst with the Swedish National China Centre in Stockholm.
He expects to see more such voyages as China seeks to gain operational experience in Arctic shipping, as part of its own long-term push to diversify trading routes. Beijing has long been concerned with its vulnerability to chokepoints for seaborne oil, including the Malacca Strait near Singapore.
Arctic waters can be hazardous and, for most of the year, require ice-breakers to accompany ships — even if climate change is shrinking the extent of sea ice.
The Istanbul Bridge is a reinforced ship capable of handling a very thin layer, but would need icebreaker assistance for anything thicker, according to Simon Heaney, senior manager for container research at Drewry, a maritime consultancy. The need for stronger vessels or icebreaker support, coupled with high fuel consumption, means the route is not “commercially viable at scale,” he said.
Still, proponents say the faster route could lower the carbon footprint of the shipping industry while freeing up capacity. Tariff disruptions have led to delays at European ports this year, putting a premium on speed.
Read More: China’s Arctic Dreams Make a Tiny Port a Global Prize
Maersk, Hapag-Lloyd and CMA CGM all said the passage was not an option.
“The environmental risks are significant, and from an operational standpoint, there are considerable limitations regarding navigable time windows, infrastructure, vessel size, vessel type and safety in general,” Maersk said in an emailed statement. “Also, we do not have any business activities in Russia.”
The four European container carriers are signatories of the Arctic Corporate Shipping Pledge, a voluntary commitment not to send ships through the region. Retail brands including Nike Inc., Hennes & Mauritz AB and Ralph Lauren Corp. have also signed the pledge.
The move by China to send container ships to western Europe “looks a lot like an experiment,” similar to Russia’s exploratory efforts to send oil and gas tankers through northern routes, said Scott Highleyman, a senior adviser to the Ocean Conservancy, a Washington-based nonprofit group. He emphasized it was also within regulations.
“The big question is — for container ship traffic and for oil and gas tankers — is the Arctic ready to be the new Suez Canal?” Highleyman said. “Clearly the answer is no.”
Discover the latest Business News, Sensex, and Nifty updates. Obtain Personal Finance insights, tax queries, and expert opinions on Moneycontrol or download the Moneycontrol App to stay updated!
