由 lltx1822 Surge in Arctic Route Freight Volume: An “Ice Revolution” in Global Shipping Patterns
In the first half of 2025, freight volume on Arctic routes (also known as “Northern Sea Routes”) reached 18 million tons, a year-on-year increase of 45%, hitting a record high. Chinese merchant ships accounted for 35% of this volume, mainly transporting liquefied natural gas, iron ore, and machinery. This data signifies that Arctic routes are gradually emerging as strong competitors to “global shipping main corridors” from “seasonal alternative routes,” triggering profound changes in global logistics patterns.
I. Arctic Routes: A Thawed Golden Passage
Arctic routes refer to maritime corridors traversing the Arctic Ocean, connecting the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans, mainly divided into two:
- Northeast Passage: West from Iceland, via the Barents Sea, Kara Sea, Laptev Sea, East Siberian Sea, Chukchi Sea, east to the Bering Strait, linking Europe and Asia.
- Northwest Passage: East from Baffin Island, Canada, via the Arctic Archipelago to the Bering Strait, connecting North America and Asia.
Currently, the Northeast Passage is primarily used for commercial operations due to relatively stable ice conditions and Russia’s well-developed port and icebreaker support systems along the route. As global warming progresses, the Arctic’s summer ice-free period has extended from 2 months in 2000 to 4 months in 2025 (June-September), creating conditions for merchant ship navigation.
Compared to traditional routes, Arctic routes offer significant advantages: From Shanghai, China, to Rotterdam, the Netherlands, the Arctic route is approximately 2,800 nautical miles (5,186 km) shorter than via the Suez Canal, reducing voyage time by 15 days and fuel costs by 30%. For an 18,000-TEU container ship, a single trip can save approximately $800,000 in fuel costs.
Data from Russia’s Arctic Development Institute shows that Arctic route freight volume was only 1.3 million tons in 2015, rising to 10 million tons in 2020, and reaching 18 million tons in the first half of 2025—growing 13-fold in a decade, far outpacing other international routes.
II. Chinese Merchant Ships’ “Ice Breakthrough”
China is an active participant in Arctic routes. In the first half of 2025, enterprises such as COSCO Shipping and China Merchants Energy Shipping dispatched 32 merchant ships to Arctic shipping, transporting 6.3 million tons of goods, mainly including:
- Energy products: Liquefied natural gas from Russia’s Yamal LNG project to Jiangsu and Zhejiang, China, accounting for 15% of China’s LNG imports from Russia.
- Mineral resources: Iron ore from Narvik Port, Norway, to Qingdao, China, supplying Baowu Steel and other enterprises.
- Mechanical equipment: Wind power equipment from Dalian, China, to Murmansk, Russia, for Arctic wind power projects.
To adapt to Arctic navigation, Chinese enterprises have specially modified merchant ships:
- Hull 采用 “ice-strengthened” design, resisting impacts from 0.8-meter-thick ice layers;
- Equipped with “Arctic navigation systems,” integrating satellite ice monitoring and icebreaker position sharing;
- Crew must undergo Arctic navigation training, mastering ice navigation skills and emergency response capabilities.
A responsible person from COSCO Shipping’s Arctic Route Project stated: “In 2025, we launched a regular ‘Shanghai-Murmansk-Rotterdam’ route, with 1 trip per week, enabling normalized operations during summer ice-free periods. This route not only saves costs for customers but also avoids risks such as Red Sea instability and Suez Canal congestion, serving as an important backup for supply chains.”
III. Disruptive Impact on Global Shipping
The rise of Arctic routes is reshaping the “power structure” of global shipping, profoundly affecting traditional routes and ports.
For the Suez Canal and Strait of Malacca, the diversion effect of Arctic routes is already evident. In the first half of 2025, Suez Canal traffic decreased by 5% year-on-year, with Chinese container ships down by 8%. The Egyptian government plans to invest $20 billion in canal expansion, increasing capacity and reducing tolls to cope with competition.
For ports, Arctic route 沿线 ports such as Russia’s Murmansk and Norway’s Tromsø are rapidly emerging. Murmansk Port, through container terminal expansion and increased refrigeration facilities, saw throughput grow 60% year-on-year in the first half of 2025, becoming a core Arctic route hub. In contrast, some traditional ports face transformation pressures—Singapore Port is strengthening cooperation with Arctic ports to build an “Arctic route + Strait of Malacca” intermodal network.
From a global trade perspective, Arctic routes have significantly shortened distances between Nordic countries and China, boosting bilateral trade growth. In the first half of 2025, China-Norway trade grew 22% year-on-year, with salmon, fish oil, and other products transported via Arctic routes seeing a 3-day extension in freshness and 35% export growth.
DNV (Det Norske Veritas) predicts that by 2030, annual Arctic route freight volume will exceed 100 million tons, accounting for 10% of Asia-Europe maritime traffic; by 2050, with further Arctic ice cap melting enabling year-round navigation, freight volume is expected to reach 30% of Asia-Europe maritime traffic.
IV. Challenges of Ice and Fire: Practical Bottlenecks in Arctic Routes
Despite promising prospects, Arctic route development faces multiple challenges, navigating between “ice and fire.”
Natural environment risks are paramount. Even in summer, Arctic waters may still have drift ice and icebergs. In June 2025, a cargo ship deviated from its route to avoid an iceberg, causing a 3-day delay. Additionally, polar nights (winter) and blizzards limit navigation time, with the current effective annual navigation period still under 6 months.
Weak infrastructure constrains efficiency. Arctic routes have few ports with simple facilities—Murmansk Port’s container handling efficiency is only 1/3 that of Rotterdam; icebreaker 数量不足，with Russia’s 40-strong icebreaker fleet still in short supply during peak seasons, renting at up to $500,000 per day.
Geopolitical complexities increase uncertainty. Arctic routes primarily pass through Russia’s exclusive economic zone, with strict Russian control requiring merchant ships to use Russian icebreaker pilots and pay fees (approximately $10 per ton of cargo), sparking dissatisfaction in some countries. Furthermore, the U.S., Canada, and other countries are strengthening military presence in the Arctic, potentially affecting route stability.
Ecological protection pressures are mounting. Shipping may cause oil spills and noise pollution in Arctic waters, threatening polar bears, Arctic foxes, and other rare species. The International Maritime Organization (IMO) has introduced “Arctic Shipping Environmental Protection Rules,” requiring low-sulfur fuel and oil spill recovery equipment, but enforcement needs strengthening.
To address these challenges, China is actively participating in Arctic governance: joining as an Arctic Council Observer, cooperating with Russia to build an “Arctic Logistics Center,” and developing next-generation ice-breaking container ships. It is also promoting alignment between the “Polar Silk Road” and Russia’s “Arctic Corridor” strategy to jointly enhance route safety and economy.
The rise of Arctic routes is a result of global climate change and technological progress. The maturity of this “ice passage” will not only change cargo flow directions but also reshape economic ties between nations. In this “ice revolution,” balancing development and protection, competition and cooperation, is a common challenge for all participants.