Maersk added $500-750 USD "season surplus" which is related to this for every shipment from North/South America and Europe to start with [1].

The shipping cost for items that have to go around is about double $1600 to $4000 ish as seen [2].

So the cost is quite a bit extra.

[1] - https://www.maersk.com/news/articles/2024/01/05/peak-season-...

[2] - https://www.drewry.co.uk/supply-chain-advisors/supply-chain-...

If the purpose of keeping emissions low is humanitarian, then there is a much bigger humanitarian concern at the center of all this.

> there is a much bigger humanitarian concern at the center of all this

If you’re talking about Yemen, sure. If you’re talking about Gaza, it’s naïve to think anything there will restore confidence in the Bab al-Mandab.

The Houthi leadership have repeatedly said that they will stop the attacks if the Israeli assault & ethnic cleansing of Palestine ends.

The real naivete is presuming that the "lalala can't hear you, I will do whatever I want" playbook of US/Israeli foreign policy is sustainable in any way.

Lots of people say lots of things. When it comes to geopolitics, actions and capability are what matter. Until someone is willing to underwrite shipping insurance on the Houthis’ word, their leadership’s promises are worthless.

So the Houthi are admitting that they control the pirates in the Red Sea so strongly that they can order them to stop and they will obey?

Negotiating with terrorists is stupid. Giving in to their demands only empowers them to do it again.

Both go up.

I understand going around Africa adds 20% to the route for a ship coming from Asia.

Shopping less is always a good idea, but it's unrelated to the situation discussed here.

Why not both?

I am all for consuming less, for more than one reason, but i am not keen on people taking the side of pirates. That might make me want to consume harder to be honest.

this is nonsensical.

In hindsight it is.

That's been happening, but is that a surprise?