In the first nine months of 2008, container throughput in Rotterdam was 6% up, from 77.8 to 82.4 million tonnes. Incoming trade rose slightly more sharply than outgoing, by 6.9% to 40.8 million tonnes and 5.2% to 41.7 million tonnes respectively.
Expressed in TEU (20-foot container units), throughput was 8.2 million units, an increase of 2%. The difference between units and weight is a consequence of the regulation of empty containers by the big terminals.
Throughput from January to the end of September, in thousands of TEU, was:
2007 2008 Difference
Laden 6 257 6 563 +5%
Empty 1 768 1 662 -6%
Total 8 025 8 225 +2%
Of the main trades, North America performed best in the first three quarters (+12%), followed by South America (+5%), Asia (+2% to 3.9 million TEU) and Europe (+1% to 2.7 million TEU). Together, the Americas accounted for 1.4 million TEU (+9%).
Within Europe, there was evidence of shrinkage on the ‘short sea’ routes. The main countries involved here are the U.K. and Ireland, where the economic decline already started early this year. In 2007, the two countries still accounted for around 2 million TEU. This was 52% of Rotterdam’s ‘European’ container throughput and almost 20% of its total container throughput. In scale, they are followed by the Iberian Peninsula, where Spain – accounting for 280,000 TEU in 2007 – was hit in the course of the year. In the north, Sweden, Norway and Iceland bore up relatively well until September. The ‘feeder market’ grew by close on 5% until the end of this month. This market again covers the U.K., but mainly the Baltic area and more specifically Russia, with around 500,000 TEU in 2007. Theoretically, the growth of the Russian market should remain intact the best/longest. European traffic actually declined more strongly towards the end of the quarter. Traffic with Asia, on the other hand, improved slightly. This is related to the traditional level of imports prior to the festive season and the build-up of volume by the CKYH alliance for the Euromax terminal.
FEFC, other ports
Just before it was folded up, the Far Eastern Freight Conference (FEFC) announced that the members (accounting for three quarters of the total Far East-Europe volume) achieved 1.9% growth in the first nine months. Although this refers to the westbound traffic and there are differences between Rotterdam’s “Asia” and the area the FEFC used to cover, the Rotterdam picture coincides well with the general one. Hamburg, also with a lot of Asia cargo, is expected to come close to this. Antwerp and Bremerhaven, both strong on the North America trade, could/should be able to record higher growth figures.
In comparison with the situation/development in 2007 (total throughput 10.8 million TEU) in Rotterdam:
TEUx1000 +/- 2006 Share of total
Asia 4 855 17% 45%
Europe 3 985 10% 37%
America 1 683 14% 16%
Consequences of decline
One way in which the shipping lines are responding to the current malaise is by restricting capacity. Maersk Line and the New World Alliance (APL, Hyundai, MOL) will shortly be abandoning a complete Asia service. Together with the ZIM service that has already been halted, this removes 18,000 TEU (-6.5%) capacity a week from container shipping between northern Europe and Asia. The CKYH Alliance is deploying smaller ships on a service between North America and Europe (-15,000 TEU on an annual basis). It can be expected that other shipping lines/services will follow suit. On the other hand, UASC and Hanjin are persevering with the start of a new service between China and northern Europe and CMA CGM has actually doubled its capacity on the South America trade.
Generally speaking, Rotterdam will continue to be included in the modified sailing schedules. The loss of cargo can then be limited by transferring cargo to other services operated by a shipping line/alliance or by ‘slot sharing’. Termination of a service does have a direct impact on turnover from bunker oil. A (large) ship on an Asian trade easily bunkers 7000 tonnes in Rotterdam. Termination of a service makes an annual difference of some 350,000 tonnes and costs the bunker sector, given a price of around $325 a barrel (on 23 October), about $110 million in turnover.
A lot of bunker oil is brought in by boat from Russia and that is also why revenues from port dues are declining. This trend comes on top of the attempts by shipping lines to save fuel, by sailing more slowly, introduced earlier this year. As they are also sailing more slowly in Asia and services are being dropped, the export eastwards of bunker oil via Rotterdam is also falling.
Expressed in TEU (20-foot container units), throughput was 8.2 million units, an increase of 2%. The difference between units and weight is a consequence of the regulation of empty containers by the big terminals.
Throughput from January to the end of September, in thousands of TEU, was:
2007 2008 Difference
Laden 6 257 6 563 +5%
Empty 1 768 1 662 -6%
Total 8 025 8 225 +2%
Of the main trades, North America performed best in the first three quarters (+12%), followed by South America (+5%), Asia (+2% to 3.9 million TEU) and Europe (+1% to 2.7 million TEU). Together, the Americas accounted for 1.4 million TEU (+9%).
Within Europe, there was evidence of shrinkage on the ‘short sea’ routes. The main countries involved here are the U.K. and Ireland, where the economic decline already started early this year. In 2007, the two countries still accounted for around 2 million TEU. This was 52% of Rotterdam’s ‘European’ container throughput and almost 20% of its total container throughput. In scale, they are followed by the Iberian Peninsula, where Spain – accounting for 280,000 TEU in 2007 – was hit in the course of the year. In the north, Sweden, Norway and Iceland bore up relatively well until September. The ‘feeder market’ grew by close on 5% until the end of this month. This market again covers the U.K., but mainly the Baltic area and more specifically Russia, with around 500,000 TEU in 2007. Theoretically, the growth of the Russian market should remain intact the best/longest. European traffic actually declined more strongly towards the end of the quarter. Traffic with Asia, on the other hand, improved slightly. This is related to the traditional level of imports prior to the festive season and the build-up of volume by the CKYH alliance for the Euromax terminal.
FEFC, other ports
Just before it was folded up, the Far Eastern Freight Conference (FEFC) announced that the members (accounting for three quarters of the total Far East-Europe volume) achieved 1.9% growth in the first nine months. Although this refers to the westbound traffic and there are differences between Rotterdam’s “Asia” and the area the FEFC used to cover, the Rotterdam picture coincides well with the general one. Hamburg, also with a lot of Asia cargo, is expected to come close to this. Antwerp and Bremerhaven, both strong on the North America trade, could/should be able to record higher growth figures.
In comparison with the situation/development in 2007 (total throughput 10.8 million TEU) in Rotterdam:
TEUx1000 +/- 2006 Share of total
Asia 4 855 17% 45%
Europe 3 985 10% 37%
America 1 683 14% 16%
Consequences of decline
One way in which the shipping lines are responding to the current malaise is by restricting capacity. Maersk Line and the New World Alliance (APL, Hyundai, MOL) will shortly be abandoning a complete Asia service. Together with the ZIM service that has already been halted, this removes 18,000 TEU (-6.5%) capacity a week from container shipping between northern Europe and Asia. The CKYH Alliance is deploying smaller ships on a service between North America and Europe (-15,000 TEU on an annual basis). It can be expected that other shipping lines/services will follow suit. On the other hand, UASC and Hanjin are persevering with the start of a new service between China and northern Europe and CMA CGM has actually doubled its capacity on the South America trade.
Generally speaking, Rotterdam will continue to be included in the modified sailing schedules. The loss of cargo can then be limited by transferring cargo to other services operated by a shipping line/alliance or by ‘slot sharing’. Termination of a service does have a direct impact on turnover from bunker oil. A (large) ship on an Asian trade easily bunkers 7000 tonnes in Rotterdam. Termination of a service makes an annual difference of some 350,000 tonnes and costs the bunker sector, given a price of around $325 a barrel (on 23 October), about $110 million in turnover.
A lot of bunker oil is brought in by boat from Russia and that is also why revenues from port dues are declining. This trend comes on top of the attempts by shipping lines to save fuel, by sailing more slowly, introduced earlier this year. As they are also sailing more slowly in Asia and services are being dropped, the export eastwards of bunker oil via Rotterdam is also falling.