DUE to the warming of the Arctic and subsequent thinner ice layers and a lengthened summer season, the Northern Sea Route (NSR) has become navigable for longer periods. Is this a good thing or a disaster waiting to happen?

Using the NSR from China to Western Europe, sailing through the Arctic north of Russia can save up to 10 days steaming time instead of using the Suez Canal (as well as savings in Canal fees). Even doubling that time saved (i.e. 20 days) if the route goes via the Cape of Good Hope, which is currently being used by several shipping lines due to the threat of the Houthis targeting vessels in the Red Sea.

An increasing number of vessels are now using the NSR, such as LNG carriers, although they are ice-class vessels. However, the number of non-ice-class vessels, including container vessels and tankers, has also steadily increased during the last few years in an effort to save costs and to take advantage of a prolonged open 'summer season'. Some of these vessels are a part of the 'shadow fleet', that is ships used to circumvent sanctions imposed by many countries on the sale of crude oil and LNG from Russia, while others are trying to avoid other sanctions and fly a 'flag of convenience', like that of Sierra Leone or Gabon.

Non-ice class vessels are using the Northern Sea Route (NSR) primarily during the summer/autumn season with Russian permits, but they are restricted to ice-free or light ice conditions and often require icebreaker assistance. Russian authorities have permitted numerous non-ice class vessels, including older tankers, some more than 20 years old, and container ships, to navigate the route, although experts warn this increases the risk of environmental disaster due to a lack of ice-strengthened hulls.

It is an international requirement that ships entering the Arctic region must meet the requirements of the Polar Code, which includes a separate Polar Certificate, training of captains and crews, and more. Maritime experts believe many of these ships do not have the required certification to transit the NSR.

Currently, container shipping via the Arctic is limited to a period of four to five months between July and November. Chinese operator Newnew Shipping continues to expand its Arctic offering since starting the service in 2023; last year the company completed 13 voyages using the NSR. Chinese companies aim to launch year-round routes via the NSR by 2030. Working with Russia's state corporation Rosatom, Newnew Shipping expects to place an order for five Arc7 ice-class container ships, each with a capacity of 4,400 TEU. Users of the NSR argue that it is good for the environment with ships emitting about 50% less GHG using the route as compared to the Suez Canal route.

Maersk conducted a trial in 2018 using a 3,596 TEU ice-class container vessel transiting the NSR. Despite the trial's success, Maersk underlined that the passage was a one-off trial designed to gain operational experience in a new area and to test vessel systems.

"Currently, we do not see the Northern Sea Route as a viable commercial alternative to existing east-west routes," a Maersk spokesperson said.

"In general, we plan new services according to trading patterns, population centres and our customers demand."

Maersk also said ice-classed vessels are required for using this route, which means additional investment.

Shipping companies such as Mediterranean Shipping Company, CMA CGM and Hapag Lloyd have publicly stated they will avoid the NSR. These decisions stem from the route's risks, including difficulties with navigation due to ice, limited infrastructure, and potential harm to the fragile Arctic ecosystem. CMA CGM has also ruled out using the Northwest Passage, across the top of North America.

One of the main arguments is that, if an incident were to occur, there is limited availability of salvage equipment and oil spill equipment in the area, which, combined with the extreme cold environment makes it very difficult to clean up the subsequent pollution.

An example of this is the Exxon Valdez which spilled 37,000 tonnes of crude oil in 1989 in the Prince William Sound off the coast of Alaska. The remote location, accessible only by helicopter, plane, or boat, made government and industry response efforts difficult and made existing response plans especially hard to implement.

The recent grounding of the Dutch cargo ship the MV Thamesborg in the Northwest Passage is another example of the difficulties in salvaging a vessel in distress in a remote location. It took six weeks for salvage operations to commence. Luckily there has been no major oil pollution in this case.

So where does all this lead? Climate change and a further warming of the Arctic will no doubt make it more attractive for less safety-conscious operators to start using the NSR. Maybe the alternative, if businesses are looking for shorter transit times, is the use of the China-Europe Railway Express, with multiple routes and options for different needs. These services provide a faster alternative to sea freight and a cheaper, more environmentally friendly option than air freight.

Northern Sea Route - a viable shorter passage or disaster in the making?