Sea Ice
- About
- Imprint
- Scenarios
- Arctic Marine Transportation by 2030
- Introduction
- Aim of this Study
- Key Factor Classification
- Definitions of Key Factors and Future Projections
- 1. Climate
- 2. Legal framework
- 3. Global Trade Dynamics – Global economic growth
- 4. Safety of other Routes
- 5. Socio-economic impact of global climate change
- 6. Oil Price
- 7. Major Arctic Shipping Disasters
- 8. Windows of Operation
- 9. Maritime Insurance Industry
- 10. Collaboration in resource extraction by China, Japan and Russia
- 11. Transit fees
- 12. Conflict between indigenous and commercial use
- 13. Arctic Enforcers
- 14. Energy sources for propulsion
- 15. New resource discovery
- 16. World Trade Patterns
- 17. Regulation in the Arctic
- Consistency matrix
- Scenarios
- Suggest Wild Cards
- Suggest Key Factors
- References
- Glossary
- Yakutat Community Energy Scenarios
- Introduction to Scenario-Management
- The Consistency and Robustness Analysis
- 1. Key Factors and their Future Projections
- 2. Assigning plausibility values to future projections
- 3. Projection Bundles
- 4. Assigning consistency values
- 5. Obtaining overall consistency values for the projection bundles
- 6. The combinatorial problem of the consistency analysis
- 7. The Robustness of a projection bundle
- Disruptive event analysis – Wild Cards
- ScenLab v1.7 Client download
- Arctic Marine Transportation by 2030
11. Transit fees
AMSA Evaluation: Importance: 4, Uncertainty: 7, Sum: 11
Classification: Economics, Politics
For transit shipping, that is for shipping without destination in the Arctic, the
use of the Arctic shipping routes only makes sense if the overall costs of using the
routes can compete with alternatives such as the Panama canal. For example, the
fees for a Panamax container ship (4,400 TEU) to pass the Panama canal are US$
237,600 [Panama Canal Authority], plus the cost of any other services such as pilots, tugging, etc.
However, some of these costs are saved by the shorter route through the canal.
It has to be considered, that if a more cost-effective route opens in the North
other routes might reduce their fees to compete.
11.1 Economically viable fees
Plausibility: 0.5
Transit fees through the Arctic can compete with those of alternative routes.
11.2 Excessive and unpredictable fee structure
Plausibility: 0.5
Fees for shipping good through the Arctic are very high. It does not make any
sense to ship through the Arctic unless the cargo’s destination is in the area.