#shipping_news

[theanthengroup]

Today Popular Cyprus Shipping News given by The Athenian Holding Group

Argentina has come the 100th Contracting State to the obligatory International Cruise and Maritime Organization (IMO) regulations on cutting air pollution from shipping. The regulations in Annex VI of the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Vessels (MARPOL) address air pollution from vessels and include energy effectiveness and energy quality conditions designed to reduce dangerous emigrations from shipping. With Argentina’s ratification, the regulations now apply to96.65 of world trafficker shipping by heftiness. IMO Secretary-General Kitack Lim ate the rearmost ratification. “ The Addition VI regulations limit air adulterants from shipping and ameliorate energy effectiveness, helping to combat climate change by reducing CO2 emigrations from shipping. I'm pleased that we now have 100 Contracting States and encourage others who haven't yet done so, to come a party to this important convention,” Mr Lim said. “ We all need to do our part to insure the health of people and the earth and to attack climate change. MARPOL Annex VI provides the obligatory nonsupervisory frame to limit dangerous emigrations from vessels,”Mr. Lim said. Mr. Lim noted that while the maturity of vessels by heftiness were formerly covered, all States, including littoral States, could profit from getting a party, since they can also exercise harborage State control over vessels flying any flag visiting their anchorages. MARPOL Annex VI ( Regulations for the forestallment of Air Pollution from Vessels) sets obligatory limits on sulphur oxide (SOx) and nitrogen oxide (NOx) emigrations from boat’s machine exhaust, it regulates onboard incineration and prohibits deliberate emigrations of ozone depleting substances. It includes vittles for designated emigration control areas with more strict norms for SOx, NOx and particulate matter. A chapter 4 espoused in 2011 includes obligatory specialized and functional energy effectiveness measures aimed at reducing hothouse gas emigrations from vessels, which have been extended and strengthened throughout the once decade furnishing the obligatory nonsupervisory frame that codifies the situations of ambition set out in IMO’s 2018 Original GHG Strategy. Parties to MARPOL Annex VI commit to give effect to the vittles of this Addition. His ExcellencyMr. Javier Esteban Figueroa, Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of Argentina deposited the instrument of accession withMr. Lim on Tuesday, 8 June. MARPOL Annex VI history The issue of controlling air pollution from vessels – in particular, noxious feasts from vessels’exhausts – was bandied in the early 1970s, as IMO developed what would come the 1973 MARPOL Convention. Still, it was decided not to include regulations concerning air pollution at the time. Meanwhile, air pollution was being bandied in other arenas. The 1972 United Nations Conference on the Mortal Terrain in Stockholm marked the launch of active transnational cooperation in combating acidification, or acid rain – largely caused by airborne deposits of sulphur dioxides and nitrogen oxides. Coal and canvas- burning power shops were the biggest source of sulphur dioxides while nitrogen oxides came from auto, truck – and boat – exhausts. In 1979, the Convention on Long ‑ range Transboundary Air Pollution was espoused by 34 governments and the European Community. This was the first transnational fairly binding instrument to deal with problems of air pollution on a broad indigenous base. Protocols were latterly inked on reducing sulphur emigrations (1985); nitrogen oxides (1988); unpredictable organic composites (1991) and farther reducing sulphur emigrations (1994). In 1987 the Montreal Protocol on substances that Deplete the Ozone Subcaste was drawn up and espoused under the aegis of the United Nations, to cut consumption and product of ozone- depleting substances including chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and halons to cover the ozone subcaste. Protocols were espoused in 1990 and 1992. At IMO, the Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) in themid-1980s had been reviewing the quality of energy canvases and the issue of air pollution was bandied. In 1988, the MEPC agreed to include the issue of air pollution in its work programme. In 1991, IMO espoused Assembly ResolutionA. 719 (17) on Prevention of Air Pollution from Vessels. The Resolution called on the MEPC to prepare a new draft Addition to MARPOL on forestallment of air pollution. IMO’s MARPOL Annex VI was espoused at a Conference in September 1997, through a Protocol to the MARPOL Convention, which included the new Annex. The Conference convened by IMO espoused a number of judgments, including an important resolution 8 on CO2emissions from vessels. This resolution invited the MEPC to consider what CO2 reduction strategies might be doable in light of the relationship between CO2 and other atmospheric and marine adulterants. The resolution also invited IMO, in cooperation with the UNFCCC, to shoulder a study of CO2 emigrations from vessels for the purpose of establishing the quantum and relative chance of CO2 emigrations from vessels as part of the global force of CO2 emigrations. (Meanwhile, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) was espoused in December 1992, entering into force in 1994. In December 1997, the Kyoto Protocol to the UNFCCC was espoused (it entered into force in 2005). Under the Protocol, States agreed to limit and reduce emigrations of hothouse gas emigrations not controlled by the Montreal Protocol from aeronautics and marine cellarage energies, working through the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) and the International Maritime Organization (IMO), independently ( Composition 2, paragraph 2)) .The Protocol of 1997 (MARPOL Annex VI) The Protocol including Addition VI of MARPOL entered into force on 19 May 2005. IMO Member States incontinently agreed to revise the Annex and modernize its conditions. This revised addition was espoused in 2008 and entered into force in 2010. This important modification included more strict limits on sulphur oxide emigrations from vessels, bringing in a global0.50 limit from 2020 – subject to a review. The review was completed – and the date of 2020 verified in 2016. The “ IMO 2020” sulphur limit has really contributed to a major cut in sulphur oxide emigrations from vessels, as vessels switched to veritably low sulphur energy canvas or have installed exhaust gas cleaning systems to “ clean” emigrations with an onboard system and meet the conditions. In 2011, IMO espoused a new chapter on energy effectiveness, bringing in obligatory conditions for vessels to ameliorate their energy effectiveness – and contribute to the fight against climate change by reducing their CO2 emigrations. The Original IMO strategy on reduction of GHG emigrations from vessels was espoused in 2018.

[correctsuccess]

Aon: Bunker Insurance Offers Price Volatility Protection Bunker gas: value threat. File Picture / Pixabay. World insurer Aon, which launched a new bunker fuel insurance product last week, has mentioned the product was developed to satisfy the anticipated market volatility emanating from IMO2020. The product is geared toward "any agency which consumes giant quantities of... #aon #bunker #bunker_fuel #bunker_indications #bunker_markets #bunker_news #bunker_prices #bunkering #correct_insurance #correct_success #credit #financial_management #general_news #insurance #marine_fuel #marine_news #offers #price #prices #protection #risk_management #shipping_news #volatility

[possiblycorrectfm]

@talk2themike I was listening to @alexismadrigal excellent #Containers #podcast today when coincidentally I was asked to pick up a container. TY @theromanmars #cool #iphone @maerskgroup @mytravelmission @adventurousmiriam @hyunah_aa @shipping_news @livingcontainers @container_houses @hellointernetFM @_ladybrady_ @fiat_industrial @carolnguyen57

[theanthengroup]

Cruise and Maritime News Today

The Athenian Holding Group provides to people Cruise and Maritime News of the Globe. Our sharing all royal maritime News is very valuable and useful. You can keep with globe trough our top world news.  

[theanthengroup]

Hellenic Shipping News Popular Today

Container ships are stacking up again off Southern California’s jammed ports, as a flood of imports and logjams in domestic logistics networks hit operations at the biggest U.S. gateway for seaborne trading.

Thirty-seven container ships were anchored off the adjacent ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach in recent days, according to the Marine Exchange of Southern California, the highest number since February, when 40 ships waited there.

Aboard are hundreds of thousands of boxes stuffed with goods bound for manufacturers and retailers as U.S. businesses hustle to restock inventories and prepare for the holiday shopping season. Just a couple of months ago, the number of container ships at anchor in the two ports, which together handle more than a third of all U.S. seaborne imports, had dwindled to nine. In normal times, the number is one, or none.

Leaders of the two ports say the armada of cargo ships is due to surging volumes and unpredictability in global supply chains caused by the Covid-19 pandemic, and exacerbated by shippers pulling holiday-season imports forward to avoid delays later.

American importers are bringing in cargo earlier “knowing that it probably will take longer to get it into their systems,” said Port of Los Angeles Executive Director Gene Seroka.

The West Coast congestion is one of a number of global bottlenecks as ports juggle strong consumer demand and shortages of workers and equipment caused by pandemic-related health and safety measures. Twice this year dozens of container ships had to wait at anchor in major Chinese ports because of slowdowns in operations after coronavirus outbreaks.

Some shippers have sought alternatives to ocean carriers.

“These challenges have been leading [to] significant delays and additional logistics costs, particularly as we’ve been making more use of airfreight,” Adidas AG Chief Executive Kasper Rorsted said on a recent earnings call.

But airfreight isn’t an option for many shippers because of the expense. Liner companies say in most cases diverting cargo to less congested seaports isn’t possible because they aren’t equipped to handle tens of thousands of containers, many bound for inland destinations thousands of miles away.

“Sometimes you accept the wait time,” said Nils Haupt, a spokesman for German container line Hapag-Lloyd AG . “The port is too important.”

The Southern California port complex, which has rail links to key Midwestern freight hubs in Chicago, is handling a record amount of cargo.

Last year, the two ports moved a combined record 17 million 20-foot-equivalent units, or TEUs, of containers, despite a Covid-related slump in the first half of 2020, said Mario Cordero, executive director of the Port of Long Beach. This year, the ports are forecast to surpass that and move a combined 19 million TEUs, he said.

The crush of imports is overwhelming Southern California warehouses, driving up rents and making space harder to find. Last month, the two main railroads carrying containers from the ports temporarily restricted shipments from the West Coast into Chicago because boxes were piling up at their Midwestern hubs as containers arrived faster than they could be switched for onward transport.

Containers are stacking up at marine terminals, too, as the record volumes strain truck and rail capacity. At APM Terminals in Los Angeles, part of the A.P. Moeller-Maersk A/S group, boxes are being stored for an average of nine to 10 days before they move inland, compared with a pre-pandemic average of two to three days, said Tom Boyd, a spokesman for Maersk, which has six container ships at anchor waiting for a berth.

“There’s nobody to blame for this,” Mr. Boyd said. “We don’t have unlimited capacity of ships or railcars or trucks in the supply chain, so what you are seeing is just immense cargo shipping volumes coming in every week and the system has slowed.”

[theanthengroup]

Tanker Shipping News Highlight Today

Tanker shipping equities: State of the market and rising asset prices

With investors experiencing a huge upside in earnings also as stock returns in container and dry bulk shipping, expectations have risen to similar levels for tanker shipping also . However, unlike container and dry bulk sectors the story for tanker shipping has been marred by several factors, with demand being the first factor. Global oil demand surpassed 100 mbpd in 2H19 before plunging by 9% to an annual average of 90.80 mbpd in 2020 thanks to the pandemic-linked demand destruction in 2Q20. OPEC’s latest report forecasts demand growth of 5.95 mbpd for 2021 followed by another 3.28 mbpd next year, effectively restoring the lost demand by 4Q22. For its part, the IEA sees global oil demand recovering from 90.80 mbpd on the average in 2020 to 96.20 mbpd in 2021 and 99.30 mbpd in 2022, slightly more bearish than OPEC.

Be that because it may, a production cut of ~10 mbpd by OPEC+ in May 2020 including well shut-ins by several oil majors still have cascading effects on the tanker shipping industry. Crude tanker earnings are struggling across vessel classes, driven by ample availability of tonnage at key loading ports which increased the bargaining power of charterers. At USD 1,000pd, average VLCC spot earnings on the AG-Japan route hit a historical low within the past 20 years within the 1Q21 high season , in contrast to USD 30,500pd average earnings for VLCCs within the half-moon of each year for the past 11 years. The story remained an equivalent in 2Q21 also since demand remained muted. Recently, Euronav a serious tanker owner, posted a net loss of USD 89.7mn in 2Q21 after registering a record profit of USD 259.6mn during an equivalent period of last year, as its VLCC spot earnings averaged USD 11,250pd in 2Q21 versus USD 81,500pd in 2Q20. There was some positive development when petroleum prices hit a 30-month high within the last week of July this year but demand concerns thanks to the rising Delta variant Covid infections in China and increased OPEC+ output from 1 August took the costs down. Nevertheless, on a YTD basis, petroleum prices have jumped by 29%, partially driven by a rise in petroleum consumption also as its trade over the past 16 months. Key market indices were largely on an uptrend since the start of 2021 with S&P 500, Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) and Nasdaq Composite gaining 17%, 14% and 13% YTD (as of 19 August) respectively while Drewry crude tanker index was relatively more volatile. Tanker equities also surged within the first six months on the rear of demand optimism before they slid in July and August on concerns of more contagious Delta variant of the virus amid seasonal weakness. Accordingly, Drewry crude tanker index plunged by 21% within the past two month which offset the gains realised in 1H21 as weak vessel earnings across vessel classes put pressure on stock prices. Meanwhile, tanker shipping continues to suffer from the 9% plunge in global oil demand in 2020 and protracted oversupply as vessel owners preferred to delay scrapping of older tonnage expecting a recovery. With the surge in steel prices thanks to strong steel demand, average demolition prices jumped by 36% within the past seven months to USD 560 per ldt (light displacement tonnage), ensuring that second-hand oil tankers command a premium over scrap prices and taking asset prices higher since the start of 2021. Second-hand prices of crude carriers are primarily influenced by prevailing vessel earnings and supply a far better assessment of the prevailing supply-demand situation within the market. During extended periods of high charter rates, vessel values tend to understand and the other way around . Historical data suggests that second-hand values (5-year-old vessels) have occasionally surpassed newbuilding prices when vessel earnings are high; as an example in 2007-08 second-hand values were occasionally above newbuilding prices. More recently, asset prices were on the increase in March and April 2020 thanks to the sudden surge in vessel earnings due to increased demand of oil carriers to store excess petroleum supply. A reversal was soon witnessed when asset prices declined from May to December 2020 because the spot TCE rates plunged across vessel classes due to limited demand and ample tonnage availability. In 2021, crude tanker spot TCE rates are declining thus far with vessel day rates falling even below the rates seen during the tanker market downcycle in 2018. Yet, asset prices are trending upwards since the start of 2021. So, what's driving tanker asset prices when the market is subdued? 1. Increased bargaining power of shipyards: VLCC newbuild prices moved up by 16% between December 2020 and July 2021 to USD 100mn whereas Suezmax newbuild prices increased by ~20% to USD 67mn over an equivalent period. We believe the uptrend in newbuild prices despite weak vessel earnings has been fuelled by the increased bargaining power of shipyards that have emerged as price setters with yards flushed with excess ordering, albeit from other shipping sectors, and are hence hard pressed for time for any new orders. Tanker shipowners also are willing to pay extra sums in anticipation of improved market at the time of delivery of the vessels. 2. Uptrend in newbuild and demolition prices is pushing second-hand asset prices: We have also witnessed limited scrapping this year despite weak vessel day rates. a part of the matter also lies with the upper steel prices that led to a 36% increase in demolition prices to USD 560 per ldt between December 2020 and July 2021. The uptrend in newbuild tanker prices including higher demolition prices has pushed up second-hand vessel prices across vessel classes. for instance , asset prices of a five-year-old VLCC and Suezmax moved up by 12.5% and 11.4% to USD 72mn and USD 49mn respectively over an equivalent period. 3. Expectations of demand recovery is supporting asset prices: In July 2021, global petroleum consumption jumped by 22% to 98.10 mbpd from the record low of 80.35 mbpd in April 2020 with easing lockdown restrictions and opening from several economies in 2H20. this is often a positive development despite the negative news of Covid and its variants which is resulting in lockdowns in many countries. But what's encouraging is that the rollout of several vaccines and an increased vaccination drive which will sustain the uptrend in global oil consumption and trade. While the demand for gasoline, gasoil and naphtha is already on the brink of the pre-pandemic levels, that of jet kerosene remains nearly 32% lower due to restrictions on international travel. We expect demand and trade of refined products including jet kerosene to recover over subsequent 18 months thanks to the vaccination drives and overall recovery within the global economy which could further support the recent uptrend in crude tanker asset prices. 4. Expectation of return of Iranian crude: Ongoing negotiations between P5+1 and Iran in Vienna to revive the 2015 nuclear deal have seen many ups and downs since April 2021, but both the US and Iran are hopeful of reaching an agreement by ironing out their differences. Anticipating the resolution, Iran is all prepared to build up oil output to revive production to three .38 mbpd within a month of removal of sanctions. We don't expect Iran to be a part of the OPEC+ production cut, and thus believe that the return of Iranian crude to the international oil market will lower the petroleum prices, a move that's expected to support the demand and trade once sanctions are lifted. Moreover, lower crude prices could encourage major importers like China and India to extend their stockpiling activities to create strategic petroleum reserves (SPRs) that might also support the asset prices of crude carriers. Although the market expects an upside from a possible return of Iranian crude, the return of Iranian crude is subject to high uncertainty with the potential of bringing in additional effective capacity to the present global tanker fleet. How does this impact tanker shipping equities? Although tanker shipping companies are expected to report net losses within the near term, we believe the tanker shipping market has bottomed out and losses will shrink further over subsequent one year with companies’ earnings turning to the black from 2H22. Rising asset prices and shrinking losses are expected to support the uptrend in crude tanker shipping stocks over subsequent two years, but a minor correction can't be ruled out during the weak seasonal demand within the summer of 2021 and 2022. Conclusion: Newbuild also as second-hand crude tanker prices were on the increase across vessel classes since the start of 2021 despite weak vessel earnings. Increased bargaining power of shipyards and rising steel prices played crucial roles in driving the asset prices over the past seven months. We expect crude tanker asset prices to still grow over subsequent six month albeit at a slower pace as steel prices are higher and shipping market optimism has increased the bargaining power of shipyards.

[theanthengroup]

Popular Carbon Neutral Fuel News

Maersk secures green e-methanol for the world’s first container vessel operating on carbon neutral fuel

European Business shippers reception and abroad face increasingly unfair competition from China’s state-owned shipper, COSCO. But there are several measures the EU could use to counter this, argues Jacob Gunter. When COSCO, China’s gigantic state-owned shipper, attempted to need shares within the Port of Hamburg recently it reignited the mention imbalances in access to European and Chinese shipping markets. it's considerably easier for China’s shippers to access European markets than the other way around. This presents a long-term risk to European competitiveness within the industry. Europe has options at its disposal to remedy this, and thus the earlier it does so, the upper. The imbalance, explained Nearly every country has cabotage laws – rules that restrict foreign-flagged vessels from engaging in domestic shipping. European countries aren't any different. EU cabotage laws demand that only locally-flagged vessels can participate. This includes inland bodies of water, but also shipping between ports within an equivalent country. China’s cabotage laws go one step further. Domestic shipping can only be performed by Chinese-flagged vessels that are also owned by a Chinese company. What the laws means in practice is that, as an example , a Chinese-flagged vessel cannot ship goods between Dutch cities on the lower Rhine, whilst a Dutch-flagged vessel cannot ship goods along the Yangtze. The Chinese-flagged vessel would even be barred from onloading goods in Amsterdam and offloading them in Rotterdam across the North Sea , whilst the Dutch-flagged vessel couldn't take goods from Qingdao to Fuzhou along the East China Sea. However, whereas COSCO could invest during a subsidiary within Netherlands and run Dutch-flagged vessels between inland and coastal ports alike, a Dutch shipper couldn't invest during a subsidiary in China to run Chinese-flagged vessels. The issue extends to a practice mentioned as international relay – the reorganizing of products collected from multiple ports within an equivalent country for shipment abroad. Chinese-flagged vessels can do this between ports during one EU-member state, also as between different countries. Three Chinese-flagged vessels owned by COSCO could load on beer in Hamburg, cheese in Rotterdam and chocolate in Antwerp, then all meet at one port and redistribute their cargo so as that one could attend Canada, another to South Africa and thus the last to Singapore. This enhances global shipping efficiency and explains why China is keen to require an edge in European ports like Hamburg – an honest place to transship for northern Europe – and Piraeus – a superb transshipment site for southern Europe that's also just across the ocean from the Suez Canal . Unfortunately, the same rules in China governing domestic shipping hold true for international relay – it isn't enough to be Chinese-flagged, an organization must even be indigenous to the market. So, three Dutch-flagged vessels owned by a Dutch shipper couldn't onload fruit from Qingdao, rice wine from Ningbo and tea from Quanzhou, then all shuffle cargo during a port in China . Instead, they could need to attend a close-by country like South Korea or Japan to redistribute goods to send off to varied destinations. European shippers are clearly at an obstacle to Chinese ones. this is often often especially pronounced because of the number of products that are exported out of China , which boasts nine of the world’s twenty busiest ports across an enormous coastline. as compared , the Chinese vessels going between Hamburg, Rotterdam and Antwerp all have a visit shorter than the one between Tianjin and Qingdao. The implications of inaction This imbalance is troublesome for European shippers both now and within the long-term. Europe currently boasts four of the five largest shipping companies within the planet as measured by freight (COSCO is that the third largest). For now, European shippers have scale on their side. However, with a protected domestic market, COSCO and other Chinese shipping companies are build up massive scale which can then be exerted into other markets. Yet, the challenges presented by COSCO transcend just this imbalance. COSCO is directly controlled by SASAC (State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission of the State Council), which governs China’s biggest State-owned enterprises (SOEs), including most of the upstream value chain that feeds into COSCO. because the ecu Union Chamber of Commerce in China put it within the ir 2020 report on European involvement within the Belt and Road Initiative: “Chinese shippers use ports built and pass by SOEs using steel and cement provided by SOEs; they use vessels built by [China’s state-owned ship-building monopoly] using steel made by SOEs, which is produced using iron and coal from SOEs; all of which is financed by SOE banks.” China’s SOEs benefit not only from subsidies, they also enjoy privileged access to factors of production like free land and dirt-cheap capital. This support can become hidden within the upstream value chain that feeds into the highest user – COSCO. Additionally, anywhere along this value chain, cheaper prices and favorable deals at one or more stages can ultimately benefit shippers. When combined with the unbalanced playing field and thus the protected domestic market, the long-term implications for European shippers could be bleak. A blueprint for reciprocity, positive or otherwise While Europe discusses the fate of the Port of Hamburg, it should also consider the broader situation. If sufficient political will are often mustered, a few of straightforward measures could be introduced within the EU. A common market cabotage law could be developed that allows member states to require care of their current rules domestically while also preventing Chinese shipping companies from exploiting the close proximity of European ports that lie across national borders. A reciprocity review mechanism that's almost just like the proposed International Procurement Instrument could be legislated. this is often ready to allow the EU to measure the extent of openness of foreign markets to European shippers, then impose reciprocal restrictions on companies and vessels from that market. Ideally, these measures would yield swift negotiations with Beijing that leave its shipping markets as open as those of the EU. If Beijing refuses to budge, then this toolkit would a minimum of protect Europe’s shipping market from China’s distortions. It would not necessarily be easy to make consensus between all member states, but if achieved, it'd be an honest test for the EU to make out a toolkit that advances reciprocity. Compared to other efforts at showing Beijing that Brussels shipping can play hardball, this is often ready to be low-hanging fruit, and can do considerably sort of a confidence-building exercise within the broader competition with China within the economic arena.

[theanthengroup]

Top Sports News Today

The Athenian Holding Group, a popular top news Magazine provides the latest news. If you want to know about the Olympic Games of the world, we offer all of sports news to people. People enable their mind and get varieties of knowledge through our top world news

[theanthengroup]

Top Shipping News of India

The Athenian Holding Group is an Online Magazine that delivers very fast and current Shipping News and others. Our shipping forecast news is trustworthy and abjectly. People believe in our work. We have so many experiences to advertise

[theanthengroup]

Top wealth management News

Do you want to new about the top wealth management news? The Athenian Holding Group explores useful your preferable business news through that you can empower yourself and increase knowledge and varieties of the best ideas.

[theanthengroup]

Know About Latest New Technology News

The Athenian Holding Group is a most popular of New York Magazine. It energies people around their interest on New Technology, economy News, Sports news , Shipping container and Sedentary Lifestyle.