On the Usage and Efficiency of the Shipping Container, and new global trade challenges

At London Gateway, the UK’s largest container port, they are expanding capacity. Currently, it takes cranes about 40 hours to empty and reload a large container crate, which will contain around 20,000 steel boxes lifted by 146-metre-high digitalised cranes which handle two containers every three to four minutes. Empty containers waiting to be shipped back…

At London Gateway, the UK’s largest container port, they are expanding capacity. Currently, it takes cranes about 40 hours to empty and reload a large container crate, which will contain around 20,000 steel boxes lifted by 146-metre-high digitalised cranes which handle two containers every three to four minutes.

Empty containers waiting to be shipped back to their port of origin take up valuable docking space and waste time when other cargo could have been processed.

A shipping executive told The Week magazine (‘Box clever: how the shipping container build globalisation’, reporting by Alice Hancock and Peter Foster) that

“On the Asia-US route, it used to be that for every ten containers coming from Asia about six were going back with US exports. Today that is more like three or four… we are generally trying to find any containerised goods.” These might include scrap paper for recycling, wine in plastic bags, or even grains previously shipped loose in dry-cargo ships.”

Maritime analysts estimate that 1.8mn 20-foot containers go “missing” from worldwide shipping networks at any one time. Ports need to increase processing capacity to address the growing demand.

CEO of the World Shipping Council Joe Kramek said, “There’s never been a larger order book [for container ships] and there’s never been more capacity that’s going to be coming online.”

Although geopolitical factors means that bottle-necks have emerged in for example the Bab al-Mandab strait in Yemen, via which ships traversing the Suez Canal and the Gulf of Aden must pass; and the Strait of Hormuz between the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman.

“… there are natural limitations that the industry will confront as it goes forward.”

The UN Trade and Development department estimates that containers were used for 60% of total world trade in 2025. It is known that containers made 280mn journeys in the same year; with over 7,000 currently operational. The average size of ships has increased twofold since 2000, according to the WSC.

Global container demand increased 5.2% yoy in H1 2026, with Chinese exports rising 12.4%, reported maritime analytics company Xeneta. Companies keen to get ahead of US tariffs made more forward orders and tried to hedge against supply shortages by diversifying across different regions.

The global demand for goods has translated into a need for ever-increasing size of ships. The largest on record is 24,346-foot equivalent containers (TEUs). Reportedly the number of new ships on order is equivalent to 40% of the current sailing fleet.

Ports often need to be expanded which can impact the infrastructure of the city they are located in. For example, in 2019 the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey shelled out $1.7bn in public funding to raise the Bayonne Bridge roadway to facilitate new megaships.

Another trend is for shipping companies to purchase stakes in ports, that they might act to streamline operations. In 2024, French shipping line CMA CGM bought a significant tranche of Brazil’s principal port operator.

In 2025, a consortium including the Mediterranean Shipping Company (MSC), the world’s largest shipping container group, signed a $22.8bn agreement to buy 43 port terminals from Hong Kong’s CD Hutchison. The funding round was led by US investment firm BlackRock and Terminal Investment Limited Holding (TiL) – the terminal operating arm of MSC.

However “tensions” over the beneficial owner of the Panama Canal have meant the deal faltered and has not yet resulted in a full change of ownership. The deal initially included a 90% share in the Panama Ports Company (operating Balboa and Cristobal).

But after Panama’s Supreme Court judged the operating contracts unconstitutional, domestic authorities requisitioned the terminals. The deal was altered to exclude the contested Panama assets, then comprising 41 ports.

Another setback occurred when China’s state-owned Cosco demanded a controlling stake in the buying consortium, reported Kathrin Wolf in Sea News.

“Originally, Cosco was expected to take a minority position, but its push for majority control has prompted BlackRock and MSC to reconsider their involvement.”

Separately, the EU Commission launched an antitrust investigation into the proposed buyout of the Barcelona port terminal owned and operated by CK Hutchison, prompting BlackRock and MSC to withdraw their bid, “a regulatory filing showed” (Reuters, 10/08/26)

Leave a comment