15APR

First LNG tanker crossed Hormuz since February

3 min read

13:33UTC

A Japanese-owned LNG carrier and a French-flagged container ship transited on 4 April under a CENTCOM operational carve-out, the first non-China-linked passages since 28 February.

← Back to TTF EUR 42 as Russian LNG ban enters range Jump to analysis ↓

EconomicDeveloping

Key takeaway

Selective Hormuz transits resumed without restoring bulk LNG flows.

On 4 April 2026, a Japanese-owned LNG tanker and a French-flagged container ship made the first Strait of Hormuz transits under a CENTCOM operational carve-out since 28 February, per EnergyConnects' tracker ¹. The seven-day rolling average for Hormuz transits reached its highest level since the war began on the same reporting window, with 13 ships crossing between 4 April and the print date.

The selectivity matters. Traffic through the strait remains dominated by China- and Iran-linked vessels, and every transit remains subject to Iran's new tolling system and mandatory northern-passage routing, which are creating bottlenecks rather than easing throughput. The carve-out permits named vessels to cross under CENTCOM protection; it does not restart bulk LNG flows from Qatar, and it does not change the Ras Laffan force majeure .

The TTF print may be partially discounting the reopening ahead of physical confirmation, in line with the broader ceasefire-optimism pattern pricing the screen rather than the tape. The confirmation signal would be a sustained uplift in LNG-specific transits rather than the aggregate ship count, because the bulk of the 13 crossings in the window were not LNG cargoes and the LNG transits themselves were exceptions rather than routine.

For procurement desks the take-away is that the Qatari cargo bridge to Europe remains impaired, the Atlantic basin is still funding the marginal molecule into ALSI , and the ceasefire decision on 21 April will determine whether the selective carve-out expands or closes. A collapse takes the Japanese and French precedents off the board before they scale.

Deep Analysis

In plain English

The Strait of Hormuz is a narrow waterway between Iran and Oman. Before the 2026 conflict, roughly a fifth of the world's oil and LNG shipments passed through it every day. Since February, Iran has effectively closed the strait to Western shipping. On 4 April, for the first time since 28 February, a Japanese-owned LNG tanker and a French-flagged container ship crossed the strait. They were able to do so because the US military had negotiated a special exemption for certain vessels. But they had to accept Iran's new tolling system, which charges fees based on where the ship is from and who owns the cargo. This is not a full reopening. Most shipping companies are still avoiding the strait because normal insurance cannot cover vessels transiting without a proper ceasefire agreement. The handful of crossings so far are exceptions, not a return to normal.

What could happen next?

Consequence
Japanese and French operators' willingness to transit under the carve-out while paying the Iranian tolling fee effectively endorses the tolling system's legitimacy in commercial practice, regardless of Western governments' formal rejection of it.
Risk
If LNG cargo restart via Hormuz requires paying Iran's yuan-denominated toll, EU member states importing QatarEnergy or Abu Dhabi LNG may face a legal conflict between EU sanctions policy (which restricts yuan payments to sanctioned parties) and supply security requirements.

Source Landscape

This story draws on neutral-leaning sources

Primary parallel: The 1987-88 Tanker War during the Iran-Iraq conflict saw the US Navy establish Operation Earnest Will to escort Kuwaiti tankers reflagged as American vessels through the strait. That operation produced the same structural outcome: Western vessels transited under military protection while non-protected vessels paid Iranian-imposed fees or faced risk. The parallel ended when Iran accepted UN Security Council Resolution 598 and agreed a ceasefire with Iraq.

Counter-parallel: The 2023-24 Red Sea attacks by Houthi forces produced a different outcome: no military carve-out was established, Western shipping largely rerouted around the Cape of Good Hope, and the maritime insurance market adjusted to a permanently higher Red Sea risk premium. Hormuz cannot sustain the Cape of Good Hope bypass because there is no alternative route for Gulf LNG exports; this structural difference forces a different resolution than the Red Sea precedent.

Consensus view: Lloyd's of London marine risk analysts and the Joint War Committee assess that the CENTCOM operational carve-out does not constitute a cleared shipping lane in insurance terms.

Vessels transiting under a military carve-out cannot obtain normal war risk cover because the insurance contract requires a declared open strait, not a negotiated exemption. Japanese and French operators are therefore self-insuring or using specialist P&I clubs, which accept the risk at a substantial premium.

Counter-view: Iranian transport economist Reza Taghizadeh-Hesary, writing in the Journal of the Persian Gulf, argues Iran's tolling system has a commercial logic that the West is misreading as hostility: Tehran is converting the strait from a free transit zone into a managed commercial route with origin-based pricing. China and Iran-linked vessels paying in yuan are establishing a parallel maritime order that Western operators will eventually join on Iran's terms.

Key tension: Whether the CENTCOM carve-out represents a temporary humanitarian arrangement pending diplomatic resolution, or the de facto beginning of a two-tier Hormuz transit system where Western vessels pay a risk and tolling premium indefinitely.

First Reported In

Update #2 · TTF EUR 42 as Russian LNG ban enters range

EnergyConnects· 15 Apr 2026

Read original →

Different Perspectives

Amsterdam-Rotterdam gas trading desks

TTF failing to sustain EUR 47+ with 51 mcm/day of Norwegian capacity offline confirms EUR 50 as a diplomatic ceiling; the curve is a Troll-restart long, and EBN's EUR 233 million mandate budget cap is a known limit on price-insensitive prompt buying.

ARERA

Italy's energy regulator is running mandatory storage injection that carries the EU aggregate trajectory alongside CRE and EBN, while Italian industrial consumers at Panigaglia face a simultaneously low-utilisation terminal and a EUR 2/MWh delivered-cost basis above TTF. The mandate funds security of supply at the expense of Italian competitiveness.

Shell

As a long-term Russian LNG contract holder, Shell faces a replacement procurement problem concentrated in Q3-Q4 2026 ahead of the 1 January 2027 double cliff; with terminal booking lead times running weeks, the real deadline is late November 2026 and no replacement supply has been publicly named.

CRE

France's 100% mandatory booking order funds injection regardless of the inverted strip, providing the EU aggregate cover that Germany's abolished levy cannot; the CRE order is renewed annually, making it a political risk rather than a structural guarantee. That dependency exposes the EU injection trajectory to French electoral cycles.

Bundesnetzagentur

Germany's regulator holds the early-warning gas stage active with no statutory instrument to compel commercial injection, and Berlin confirmed on 20 May it will introduce no summer incentive scheme; Germany is the EU's only major unincentivised storage market after the levy lapsed on 1 January 2026. The mandate gap is carried by three other member states.

European Commission

The Commission relaxed the mandatory fill target from 90% to 80% and published an ETS benchmark revision saving industry EUR 4 billion, choosing industrial competitiveness over both climate and storage ambition at the moment physical margins are tightest. Both decisions reduce policy pressure at the exact week the trajectory margin narrowed to 45 GWh/day.