Russian grain loadings from Baltic and continental ports jumped to 1.16m tonnes in September — more than five times the 216,000 tonnes handled in August — as Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania formally asked Brussels to ban Russian grain transit across EU territory.

Research from IFCHOR Galbraiths shows Ust-Luga alone loaded 545,000 tonnes and Vysotsk another 374,000 tonnes over the month. Over the same period, monitored Russian Black Sea and Azov loadings collapsed from 1.39m tonnes to 201,000 tonnes, lifting the Baltic's share of combined shipments from 12.6% in August to 80.7% a month later.

What are the Baltic states proposing?

Estonian prime minister Kristen Michal, Latvian prime minister Andris Kulbergs and Lithuanian president Gitanas Nausėda signed a joint letter to European Council president António Costa and European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen. The letter calls for EU-wide restrictions covering Russian grain moving through EU territory to international markets.

The leaders argue Russia is targeting Ukrainian ports, merchant vessels and transport infrastructure while simultaneously seeking alternative routes for its own agricultural exports — including through the Baltic.

An EU transit ban would not stop grain moving directly through Russian ports such as Ust-Luga and Vysotsk, but it would close off European ports and transport corridors as alternative gateways as Moscow searches for extra capacity.

Estonia has already acted nationally. Its government earlier this month approved sanctions prohibiting transit of Russian and Belarusian grain through Estonian ports, covering products under the CN 10 commodity group. Latvia tightened checks on grain origins at its ports in September and is preparing measures targeting cargo suspected of originating in occupied Ukrainian territory.

The joint appeal also calls for stronger EU-Ukraine Solidarity Lanes and measures to stop grain from occupied Ukrainian territory entering international markets through European infrastructure. Michal is expected to raise the proposal at the next European Council meeting. No EU-wide ban has yet been adopted.

How is Russia funding the route shift?

IFCHOR Galbraiths said Moscow is supporting the pivot with subsidised rail transport and the conversion of fertiliser and other bulk-handling terminals for grain. Murmansk is preparing to handle its first grain cargoes this month, though the broker flagged open questions over infrastructure and the economics of the northern port.

The rerouting carries a real cost premium. IFCHOR Galbraiths estimates that moving grain from Baltic Russia to Egypt costs around 30% to 35% more per tonne than shipping from traditional Black Sea loading ports, based on freight levels before the latest escalation. Russia has tried to offset the disadvantage through rail subsidies, temporary export-duty relief and priority access for grain on congested northern rail routes.

Longer Baltic voyages toward North African and Mediterranean buyers could support tonne-mile demand and employment for geared bulkers, but the shift has not compensated for the loss of Black Sea volumes. Total monitored Russian grain loadings across the Black Sea and Azov, Baltic and continental ports and the Far East fell 16% month on month in September. The broker said logistical bottlenecks and higher costs mean alternative export routes are still struggling to replace the volumes lost through the Black Sea.

Baltic wheat exports could nevertheless rise again this month. IKAR estimates cited by the research point to as much as 1.8m tonnes moving through the region in October, up from around 1.4m tonnes in September, subject to weather and infrastructure capacity.

Why does war risk matter now?

The route shift follows a sharp deterioration in security across the Black Sea. Several merchant vessels were hit in Romanian and Bulgarian exclusive economic zones in early October, extending attacks beyond areas traditionally viewed as carrying the highest war risk. The Joint War Committee widened its Black Sea Listed Area in September, and reported war-risk premiums have climbed from around 0.1% to 0.5% of vessel value over the past two weeks. Some market participants warn rates could move towards 1% if conditions deteriorate further.

That matters most for Ukrainian grain. Romanian and Bulgarian ports including Constanta, Varna and Burgas, together with the Danube, have become key gateways for Ukrainian agricultural cargoes. A further extension of war-risk requirements into currently excluded territorial waters would raise freight and insurance costs and could make owners more reluctant to accept regional business — an added pressure point for shippers already re-routing around the Black Sea, and one Brussels will weigh as Michal takes the transit-ban proposal to the European Council.