FMC calls for comments on slow steaming

FMC calls for comments on slow steaming    The U.S. Federal Maritime Commission on Monday issued a notice of inquiry, asking the public to comment on how slow steaming, the practice of operating ships at reduced speeds, has affected ocean liner carrier operations and shippers' international supply chains, ocean liner service costs, and greenhouse gas emissions
   The agency posted a list of questions as part of its investigation and asked the public to respond by April 5. The notice of inquiry details the FMC’s rationale for the study.
   The agency said data from information service Alphaliner shows more than half of the 45 weekly services operating between U.S. West Coast and Asia ports are slow steaming, while more than three-fourths of the 15 weekly services operating between U.S. East Coast and Asia ports are doing so. In contrast, just 20 percent of the 15 weekly services operating between the United States and North Europe are slow steaming.
   A year ago, the Transpacific Stabilization Agreement added authority to its basic agreement that allowed its member lines to discuss and reach agreement on programs to reduce sources of environmental pollution caused by ocean liner operations.
   “When carriers are experiencing high bunker costs and low charter rates, slow steaming becomes more attractive to the carrier,” the FMC said. “In the coming years, potential increases in fuel costs and planned vessel deliveries will weigh in favor of carriers continuing or expanding slow steaming, but a continued recovery in demand and rates will tend to mitigate the trend.”
   The commission said information is limited on how slow steaming has impacted U.S. exporters and importers. 'In cases where shippers of low-value commodities receive lower rates as a result of the carrier passing along some of the fuel savings achieved through slow steaming, the additional time for transport may not be an issue for these shippers. On the other hand, shippers of high-value commodities may not find slow steaming advantageous because a potentially lower freight rate may not outweigh the added delay in accessing payments for goods rendered. Likewise, shippers of chilled meat and fresh produce may find slow steaming disadvantageous because the resulting longer transit times could lead to increased spoilage and less shelf-time in grocery stores.
   “These tradeoffs for U.S. importers and exporters assume that carriers pass at least a portion of the cost savings from slow steaming on to their customers. In the U.S. trades, where the vast majority of liner cargo travels under annual service contracts, it is unclear whether ocean carriers' customers have received those savings — either through adjustments to bunker fuel surcharges or the underlying rates,” the FMC said.
   “Finally, slow steaming has efficiency and environmental benefits that should be factored into both carriers' and shippers' equations. But an accurate analysis of the impact requires reliable methods to measure and quantify those environmental benefits. Better information and more transparency on emissions savings from slow steaming would allow carriers and their customers to make shipping choices that reduce their carbon emissions — and receive full credit for those measures,” the FMC said. ' Chris Dupin