Even though the bunker price has dropped to around $450 - $460 per tonne in Fuijarah and Singapore per slow steaming looks set to remain the norm.

In the container sector slow steaming has fulfilled the multiple functions of bringing down very high fuel costs, helping to manage capacity and reduce emissions.

Lars Mikael Jensen, chief executive Asia Pacific region for Maersk, explained: “We designed the network on [the basis of] slow steaming, if we were to make any change it needs to be a low bunker price for some consistent period of time.

“But slow steaming is also an important part for the industry and our customers for delivering on the CO2 agenda,” he said. Added to this modern vessels in container shipping are designed with slow steaming in mind.

Looking to the dry bulk sector, Nicholas Fisher, ceo of Masterbulk, said, “In terms of bunker prices, for an owner like Masterbulk - not a lot – this is a charterer’s cost not an Opex cost. But of course any drop in the price of petroleum-based products has an impact on costs. For owners like us, lube oil is the most obvious area of savings.”

As to whether slow steaming would be reduced he said that while there was a case for it to do so it was unlikely to happen.

“If this price level continues it may well reduce the need for slow steaming, but that in turn increases the other Opex consumables (lube oil) and also may increase available vessel capacity in the market and depress rates even more,” Fisher explained.

“So there may be a business case to continue slow steaming to keep rates up, enjoy lower fuel and lube costs. Besides, cargo won’t pay for shorter transit times. I don't think we will see a decrease in slow steaming.”

Meanwhile in the large tanker sector brokers Poten made the comparison of a 2007-built VLCC against a 2013 eco-type vessel and found that with the market moving upwards as it is at the moment there could be a reason to reduce slow steaming.

“Earlier in the year, when the rates were lower, slow steaming made more sense as the additional revenue that could be earned during the additional 3.9 ballasting days was lower than the fuel savings,” its weekly report said.

“At current market rates and lower bunker prices, this situation has shifted. At least for the vessel and voyage combination in our example, increasing the ballast speed could prove to be beneficial.”