Generic Hero BannerGeneric Hero Banner
Latest market news

Trump-Panama tiff highlights rising transit cost

  • Market: Biofuels, Oil products
  • 24/12/24

US president-elect Donald Trump's threat on Saturday to reclaim the Panama Canal for the US put a spotlight on rising costs this year and additional fees planned by the Panama Canal Authority (ACP) for 2025 in the ongoing fallout of a 2023 drought in Central America.

Trump claimed that the US is the "number one user" of the Panama Canal, with "over 70pc of all transits heading to, or from, US ports" on 21 December. ACP data for ships destined for or departing from the US puts this percentage at 73pc in 2023 and 75.5pc in 2024 based on total tonnage of commodities moved through the canal.

"This complete ‘rip-off' of our Country will immediately stop…" Trump said.

The base transit tolls at the Panama Canal have been on the rise and are largely in line with those at the Suez Canal, but Panama Canal costs can be much higher for vessel operators that compete in auctions to enter the Central American passageway.

The operator of a medium range (MR) tanker traveling laden through the Panama Canal would pay $279,564.87 in transit fees, while the operator of a laden very large gas carrier (VLGC) would pay $505,268.24 without accounting for reservation costs, ACP estimates. Suez Canal fees have also been on the rise, with MR tanker at $274,001 throughout 2024, while a VLGC operator would pay $487,562.

But after last year's drought caused the ACP to temporarily limit transits, ACP required shippers to book transit reservations. Shippers unable to secure reservations via pre-booking often resort to the transit slot auction, where winning bids vary wildly.

Pre-booked transit slots often quickly sell out to the containership and LPG vessel owners that dominate the top spots on the ACP's client list.

Auction prices for the Neopanamax locks, which have a starting bid of $100,000 and handle large vessels like VLGCs, are at about $220,000, per Argus assessments. Auction prices for the Panamax locks, which have a starting bid of $55,000 and handle vessels like MR tankers, are around $75,000. The highest Neopanamax auction price was nearly $4mn, with the highest Panamax auction price at about half that level.

In December 2023, 30pc of Panamax lock tanker transits were reserved via the auction system, according to ACP.

The president-elect's criticism of the ACP's handling of Panama Canal fees comes as the administrators of the waterway bounce back from a severe drought throughout 2023. Freshwater levels in the manmade Gatun Lake that helps to feed the canal have recovered because of the return of the rainy season this year, but ACP has maintained its requirement that shippers wishing to transit have reserved transit slots. Prior to the drought, ACP maintained a first-come, first-serve basis for vessels without reservations.

ACP ups reservation costs, adds fees for 2025

Starting in 2025, ACP is maintaining the auction system while also increasing pre-booking costs and adding other fees.

ACP will raise transit reservation fees from $41,000 to $50,000 for Panamax lock transits for "Super" category vessels, including MR tankers. Neopanamax lock transit reservation fees will climb from $80,000 to $100,000 on 1 January.

ACP announced a third transit option in late 2024 for vessel operators in the form of the "Last Minute Transit Reservation" (LMTR) fee to start 1 January 2025 alongside other new fees and higher existing reservation fees.

ACP set the cost of the LMTR fee at about twice the starting bid of an auction, or $100,000 for Supers and $200,000 for Neopanamax, and will likely offer the LMTR fee to vessels that fail to secure a transit slot at auction.

Furthermore, vessel operators that cancel within two days of their transit will be charged a fee at 2.5 times the transit reservation fee, described by the ACP as a surcharge to the existing cancellation fee, which ranges up to 100pc of the transit reservation fee depending on how close to the transit date that an operator cancels.

This means that a Super vessel that cancels within two days of its transit date will receive the 2.5 times surcharge on top of the 100pc transit reservation cancellation fee and pay a total of $175,000. A Neopanamax vessel will pay a total of $350,000.

"Vessels of war" should also vie for slots: ACP

Trump also suggested that the ACP was charging the US Navy, alongside US corporations, "exorbitant prices and rates of passage" and that these fees were "unfair and injudicious".

In March 2024, the ACP published an update on transit slot assignments for vessels of war, auxiliary vessels and other "government-owned" vessels encouraging their operators to participate in the transit system rather than waiting for the ACP to assign them a slot.

"Vessels of war, auxiliary vessels, and other government-owned vessels are encouraged to obtain a booking slot through the available booking mechanisms in order to have their transit date guaranteed and minimize the possibility of delays," the ACP said.

The ACP points out that these vessels of war are entitled to "expeditious transits" based on the Treaty Concerning Permanent Neutrality and Operation of the Canal and are technically not required to obtain a reservation to be considered for transit.

Panama president Jose Raul Mulino on Sunday rejected Trump's threat to retake the canal, which has been under full control of the Central American country since 1999. The canal's rates are established in a public and transparent manner, taking into account market conditions, Mulino said.

"Every square meter of the Panama Canal and its adjacent area is Panama's and will continue to be," Mulino said. "The sovereignty and independence of our country are non-negotiable."


Sharelinkedin-sharetwitter-sharefacebook-shareemail-share

Related news posts

Argus illuminates the markets by putting a lens on the areas that matter most to you. The market news and commentary we publish reveals vital insights that enable you to make stronger, well-informed decisions. Explore a selection of news stories related to this one.

News
25/03/25

Lula visits Japan to talk ethanol, Cop 30, beef

Lula visits Japan to talk ethanol, Cop 30, beef

Sao Paulo, 25 March (Argus) — Brazilian president Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva traveled to Japan on Tuesday in search of energy transition agreements and new market opportunities to improve trade relations between the countries. Bilateral Japan-Brazil trade fell to around $11bn in 2024, down from $17bn in 2011, the Brazilian government said. Brazil exported $730mn in goods to Japan in January-February, while importing $995mn from the Asian country in the period, according to Brazil trade ministry data. Exports dropped by almost 13.5pc from a year before in the two-month period, while imports grew by nearly 25pc. "Firstly, we have [a shortfall] to turn around," Lula said. Brazil will also ask Japan to join its growth acceleration plan . He is accompanied by 11 ministers and four members of congress, including senate president Davi Alcolumbre and lower house president Hugo Motta. Ethanol market Brazil aims to sell more ethanol to Japan, as the Asian country expects to increase its ethanol blend to 10pc from 3pc by 2030. "If Japan blends 10pc of ethanol into gasoline, it will be an extraordinary step not only for us to export to them but for them to be able to produce in Brazil," Lula said. Japan received 3.4pc of Brazil's ethanol exports, according to Brazil's development and trade ministry. Cop 30 and energy transition Lula's visit also seeks to attract investment in renewable energy, forest revamps and new donations to the Amazon Fund, as well as a "strong commitment" from Japan at the Cop 30 summit, to be held in Brazil later this year. Brazil aims to export clean fuels to generate power to Japan, as power imports account for more than 80pc of all Japanese power demand and "a large share of it comes from fossil sources," according to the Brazilian foreign relations ministry's Asia and Pacific secretary Eduardo Saboia. Brazilian and Japanese companies announced earlier this year plans to produce biomethane in Brazil . The renewable fuel would supply both countries. Brazil and Japan should also sign a deal to help recover the Cerrado biome, which is the second largest biome in Brazil and the second most endangered. It comprises of savanah grasslands and forest and makes up about 25pc of the nation's territory. The Cerrado lost 9.7mn hectares to wildfires in 2024, up by almost 92pc from 2023, according to environmental network MapBiomas' fire monitor researching program. Deforestation is one of Brazil's flagship issues for Cop 30 this year. The country has been pushing for forest protection and recovery initiatives as most of Brazil's past Cop pledges cannot be met with only its remaining forests. Japan and Brazil should talk about the Amazon Fund as well because Brazil "wants more", Saboia said. Japan was the first Asian country to donate to the fund with $14mn, which Saboia said was "too little." Where's the beef? Lula is also targeting opening Japan's beef market to Brazilian exports, as the Asian country imports over 70pc of all its beef. Lula met with members of the beef exporters association Abiec in his first day in Japan to discuss the matter. The bulk of Japan's beef imports — 80pc — come from the US, the Brazilian government said. Brazil does not currently export beef to Japan. "Brazil has the logistic capacity to increase exports and double beef exports every four years," transport ministry Renan Filho said. Brazil has been trying to enter Japan's beef market for over two decades. This time, Lula expects to achieve a technical visit from Japan to inspect Brazil's beef producing conditions as a first step toward accessing the Japanese market. Lula will depart to Vietnam on 28 March to debate a plan to turn the country into one of Brazil's strategic partners. Only Indonesia is considered a Brazil strategic partner in southeast Asia. By Maria Frazatto Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Find out more
News

Dangote to hit full operating capacity in Apr: Source


25/03/25
News
25/03/25

Dangote to hit full operating capacity in Apr: Source

London, 25 March (Argus) — Nigeria's independently-owned 650,000 b/d Dangote refinery is commissioning its alkylation unit, which will enable it to run its crude distillation unit (CDU) at operating capacity "some time next month", according to a source with knowledge of the matter. The source said CDU capacity is 550,000 b/d currently, although vessel tracking data suggest it is running some way below that. Crude arrivals at the refinery to date in March have fallen to between 175,000-235,000 b/d, according to preliminary data from vessel trackers Kpler and Vortexa, from 405,000 b/d in February . Throughput hit a high of 433,000 b/d in December, according to Kpler. The alkylation line, which produces high octane alkylate for gasoline blending, is the last of Dangote's secondary units to come online. Argus Consulting puts it at a nameplate capacity of 27,000 b/d. Other secondary units could be utilised at their maximum capacity once the alkylation unit is up and running, which would give a boost to gasoline blending component production. Recent lower runs at Dangote could suggest decreased output of gasoline — a key product in the local refined product market. Nigerian gasoline and blending component imports are around 345,000t to date this month, up from 245,000t in all of February. Gasoline imports in the wider west African market will be around 450,000t in April, a European gasoline trader told Argus this week. Nigeria accounts for around three quarters of the region's imports. By George Maher-Bonnett Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

US venue case crucial for future clean air fights


24/03/25
News
24/03/25

US venue case crucial for future clean air fights

New York, 24 March (Argus) — The US Supreme Court on Tuesday will hear arguments about the proper court venue for Clean Air Act lawsuits, which could be pivotal for future enforcement of federal air pollution rules. The court is considering both a case involving the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) rejections of small refiners' requests for hardship exemptions from a biofuel blend mandate and the agency's separate denials of state plans for addressing ozone-forming NOx emissions. Judges are not expected to decide the legality of EPA's decisions, just the proper courts for settling the disputes. But the cases are still significant: legal uncertainty to date has affected both EPA programs implicated by the Supreme Court's review and could upend enforcement of future rules if the court does not provide sufficient clarity. Federal ozone season NOx allowance prices essentially flatlined last year as participants were hesitant to trade due to risks from so many court cases. And small refinery exemptions are crucial for biofuel demand, so biofuel producers are wary of empowering more lower courts to reconsider denied exemption requests. The Clean Air Act says that EPA actions that are "nationally applicable" or otherwise based on "nationwide scope or effect" should proceed before the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, while "locally or regionally applicable" actions head to regional circuit courts instead. But judges have disagreed about how to apply those criteria, since many EPA rules have far-reaching effects but on their face target individual states or facilities. Regulated industry fears that EPA could say a broad set of regulations have nationwide scope, centralizing review in the DC Circuit, which is seen as friendlier to federal regulators and where a majority of judges are Democratic appointees. Local conditions — such as a small refinery in Indiana serving local farmers that cannot handle higher biodiesel blends — get short-changed when various companies' concerns are assembled together, they argue. But EPA under the prior administration and Democratic-led states argue that sending these cases to the DC Circuit, which is more experienced with the complexities of federal rulemaking, makes more sense than letting industry seek out favorable jurisdictions. And they highlight the possibility of courts leaving emitters in one part of the country with laxer rules. "The fundamental risk is that you'll end up with decisions on the same point of law coming out differently in different places — and not an expedient way to resolve that," said Brian Bunger, a Holland & Knight partner and the former chief counsel at the Bay Area Air Quality Management District. For instance, both the DC Circuit and the conservative-leaning 5th Circuit agreed that EPA erred when it denied some refiners exemptions from biofuel blend mandates — but they said so for slightly distinct reasons. The 5th Circuit, for instance, went further by saying refiners reasonably relied on past EPA practice and thus the agency incorporating new analysis into its review of waiver requests was unfair. As a result, EPA recently used different criteria when weighing a waiver request from one refiner in the 5th Circuit's jurisdiction than it used for another refiner, according to partially redacted decisions obtained by Argus through a Freedom of Information Act request. The agency said it could not consider at all whether CVR Energy's 75,000 b/d refinery in Wynnewood, Oklahoma, is able to pass on the costs of program compliance to consumers because of the 5th Circuit decision but could weigh such information when deciding a similar petition from Calumet's 15,000 b/d refinery in Great Falls, Montana. The agency issued those decisions in the waning days of former-president Joe Biden's term. While President Donald Trump has pledged a vastly different approach to environmental regulation, his administration for now has not signaled a different stance than the Biden administration on whether these types of disputes should proceed before the DC Circuit. Schrodinger's case It is still unclear whether the judges view the cases as a tricky technical dispute or part of a broader trend of federal agencies overstepping their authority. Tuesday's hearing could provide clues. Of the court's nine justices, four previously served on the DC Circuit and could see value in sending more complex regulatory cases to the expert court, Bunger said. But the court's conservative majority could also be wary of giving EPA too much authority to set venue. Refiners argue that the agency repackaged dozens of individual exemption denials into two larger regulatory actions as a strategy to get the cases before a friendlier court. The Supreme Court has looked skeptically at other EPA rulings and last year overturned a decades-old legal principle that gave agencies leeway when interpreting ambiguous laws. Final Supreme Court decisions usually arrive by late June. However the court rules, businesses say that it should provide a clear enough explanation to prevent similar venue disputes from reemerging. The US Chamber of Commerce told the court it takes no position beyond urging the court to "adopt an interpretation that provides clarity and predictability to all stakeholders." By Cole Martin Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

EU readies tweak for CO2 car standards


24/03/25
News
24/03/25

EU readies tweak for CO2 car standards

Brussels, 24 March (Argus) — The European Commission is expected to approve this week a legal proposal which would increase flexibility for compliance with CO2 standards for cars and vans. The commission is expected to adopt, by written procedure, a legal proposal on 25 March, targeting additional flexibilities around penalties for cars and vans to meet CO2 emissions performance standards. The proposal is expected to enable compliance with CO2 targets to be calculated over a three-year period , rather than for single years. EU leaders last week called for the legal proposal to be put forward "without delay". EU leaders have also called on the commission to "take forward the review" foreseen in the CO2 for cars regulation. Industry has urged the EU to allow for low carbon and zero emission fuels to be accounted for under the CO2 standards. Separately, further delay to the EU's official emissions reduction goal for 2040 appears likely. The commission does not currently have a "concrete date" to give on the GHG proposal for 2040 but it "does not seem" to be scheduled for presentation this week. The official work program for the commission had listed the 2040 GHG target, an update to the European Climate Law, in the first quarter of 2025. The delay to the EU's 2040 GHG proposal further impacts presentation of an updated EU climate plan — known as a nationally determined contribution (NDC) — which will cover the timeframe up to 2035. The commission said several parties have already missed the 10 February deadline for submission of updated NDCs to UN climate body the UNFCCC. By Dafydd ab Iago Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

Estonian climate ministry to push for EU ETS 2 repeal


24/03/25
News
24/03/25

Estonian climate ministry to push for EU ETS 2 repeal

London, 24 March (Argus) — Estonia's parliament has granted the country's climate ministry a mandate to push for the repeal or postponement of the EU's second emissions trading system (ETS 2) covering road transport and buildings, scheduled to launch in 2027. The Estonian parliament's EU affairs committee granted the ministry a mandate to begin consultations with the European Commission and EU member states on repealing the EU ETS 2 directive, because of the administrative burden and uncertainty posed by transposing the measure. If Estonia fails to garner sufficient support, it will join existing proposals by the Czech Republic and Poland to postpone the introduction of the new system for two years. This additional time could be used to find a way to limit the burden of imposing the measure, the committee said. These proposals would require a qualified majority of EU member states to pass. If not adopted, Estonia's climate ministry would instead start negotiations to postpone the launch of the system to 2028 or exclude road transport from its scope. The committee approved the mandate — which followed positions submitted by the government and subsequent amendments and opinions by the parliament's environment and economic affairs committees — "after a long and heated political debate", its chairman Peeter Tali said. The commission last year adopted a supply cap of 1.036bn carbon allowances in 2027 for the new system, which will cover upstream emissions from fuel combustion in buildings, road transport and small industry not covered by the existing EU ETS. For the first three years of operation, the system will have a price cap of €45/t of CO2 equivalent, adjusted for inflation, which if surpassed for a period of two months would trigger the release of 20mn allowances from its market stability reserve. By Victoria Hatherick Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Generic Hero Banner

Business intelligence reports

Get concise, trustworthy and unbiased analysis of the latest trends and developments in oil and energy markets. These reports are specially created for decision makers who don’t have time to track markets day-by-day, minute-by-minute.

Learn more