BUNKER surcharges should be falling faster than fuel prices because of more efficient ships, but this is not happening and shippers are asking, says London's Drewry Maritime Research.
Shippers ask why high bunker surcharges if ships are so fuel-efficient
BUNKER surcharges should be falling faster than fuel prices because of more efficient ships, but this is not happening and shippers are asking, says London's Drewry Maritime Research.
No change is evident in bunker surcharges despite the arrival of Maersk's first fuel efficient 18,000 TEUer, and the availability of cheap fuel at Russian ports, said the report.
The new 18,000 TEU vessels burn 35 per cent less fuel per TEU carried on a round voyage between Asia and North Europe than 13,100 TEU vessels, which in turn burn 20 per cent less than a 9,000 TEUer, assuming constant speeds of 20 knots westbound and 14.6 knots eastbound.
In the third quarter of 2011, the average size of vessel on the Asia-Europe run was 9,158 TEU, which increased eight per cent over the next year to 9,881 TEU, then by another nine per cent over the following year to 10,800 TEU.
Mathematically, this means bunker surcharges should be falling faster than fuel prices, which is not immediately apparent except for Maersk Line.
The availability of cheap Russian bunker oil since the beginning of the year should have brought down fuel surcharge levels. But carriers do not calculate surcharges on the basis of Russian prices.
Pressure from shippers for lower or fixed bunker surcharges is expected to remain high.