Abstract
Some scholars consider that today’s market conditions are in favor of the Northern Sea Route (NSR) rather than the Suez Canal Route (SCR). However, the number of bulk carriers using the NSR remains extremely limited, despite higher fuel prices since 2009 and subsequent significant fuel savings. In 2013, there were 53 transits via the Arctic, out of which 27 by oil tankers and 6 by bulk carriers. In this article we show that this result might be attributable to a factor, which is not considered in most studies: the spot freight rate to fuel ratio which governs ship owners’ decisions regarding the sailing speed. Due to a low ratio since 2011, the speed of vessels on the SCR is at its lowest level, and potential NSR fuel savings are too limited to provide a viable alternative. We further argue that, contrary to most studies, internalizing NSR environmental benefits marginally improves the attractiveness of the NSR.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
