The Current Status of the ScanMed Corridor

Transcription

1 The Current Status of the ScanMed Corridor Activity 2 Swiftly Green Mid-Term Conference 4th November 2014 Stefan Breitenbach Hafen Hamburg Marketing e.v. breitenbach@hafen-hamburg.de

2 Agenda 1. European Corridor Development - Examples for its Need 2. What is Activity 2 about? 3. Activity 2.1 (A) SCAN-MED Corridor Study by Grontmij Activity 2.1 (B) Update of the SCAN-MED Corridor Study with (Intermediate) Results of the TEN-T Transport Market Study 4. Summing up & Input to the Swiftly Green Toolbox 5. Activity 2.2 Mapping of Projects/Measures having a Greening Potential

3 Increasing Challenges for Logistics Chain and Infrastructure Handling of 8,000 TEU at the Ocean-Going Vessel (13,000 TEU Class) One Ocean-Going Vessel ca. 48 h Feeder & Transhipment Assumptions Share of the modes of transport according to Port of Hamburg s modal split (containerized cargo). Average capacity/mode: 90 TEU per Barge 75 TEU per Train 1.6 TEU per Truck TEU Prompt handling of hinterland traffic up to 5,050 TEU: 3,120 TEU via Truck à 2,000 Trucks 1,830 TEU via Rail à 25 Trains 100 TEU via IWT à 2 Barges Handling peaks are currently the main challenge for ports hinterland infrastructure! Port of Hamburg Marketing

4 Sulphur Emission Control Area (SECA) Sulphur limits for fuel in SECA before 1 July % m/m between 1 July 2010 & 1 January % m/m after 1 January % m/m SECA: North- & Baltic Sea General sulphur limits in other sea areas before 1 July 2012 between 1 July 2012 & 1 January 2020 after 1 January 2020 * * May be postponed to 1 January % m/m 3.50% m/m 0.50% m/m Map:

5 Sulphur Emission Control Area (SECA) Status March 2014: o LNG Terminals under construction in seaports o 49 ships powered by LNG o 62 ships ordered à Transport/logistics chains do not stop at boarders: o Corridor-wide Thinking o Harmonized EU-wide approach.

7 What is Activity 2 about? Activity 2.1 (A) Activity 2.1 (B) Activity 2.2 à Mapping à Comparing à Projects & Measures

8 Aim of our ScanMed Corridor Study Activity 2.1 (A) Comprehensive, simple & clear mapping of the current ScanMED corridor situation. ü Focus on freight transport flows & bottlenecks ü No forecast (à RFC3 & CNC) ü No technical details of rail lines (à RFC 3) ü ScanMed Corridor definition by EC mainly followed, exceptions: à Bremerhaven- & Wilhelmshaven port included à Inland Waterway Transportation scribed

9 The Mapping Methodology Activity 2.1 (A) Traffic Flows o Avarage Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) methodology to visualise traffic flows. o Number of heavy goods vehicles/ freight trains Bottlenecks o Offcial studies/reports/definitions by countries respective authorities used

10 First results: ScanMED Corridor Study Activity 2.1 (A) Extract of its Content: 1. Aim of the study 2. The mapping o o o o o o Infrastructure Traffic flows Bottlenecks & investments Fees & taxes along the corridor Stakholder consultation Harmonisation issues 3. Main conclusions Swiftly Green Corridor Study Activity 2.1 (A)

11 The Mapping - Overview Activity 2.1 (A) Swiftly Green Corridor Study Activity 2.1 (A)

12 The Mapping - Overview Activity 2.1 (A) Inland Waterway channels and rivers are not directly located on the ScanMED corridor. But connect ports as Hamburg, Bremen, Bremerhaven with nodes like Hannover and Berlin. River and canal system plays an important role for port s hinterland transportation: o Free capacity o Environmental friendly mode of transport Swiftly Green Corridor Study Activity 2.1 (A)

13 The Mapping Railways Activity 2.1 (A) Standard gauge (except. Fi) and electrification nearly on whole corridor. GER & AUS: Heavy used tracks! DK: today trains via Funen & S-Jutland. Expected to change with opening of the Fixed Link. GER: Triangle HB/ BRV/H/HH of strategic importance Rostock Berlin tracks closed in 2013 because of construction works.! Swiftly Green Corridor Study Activity 2.1 (A)

14 The Mapping Railways Activity 2.1 (A) Infrastructure bottlenecks (examples): o o o o o N/S: Cross border and N = single track S: Örebro =single track and near Cities DK: Padborg Funen & S-Jutland and Copenhagen Roskilde GER: Especially the whole triangle Hamburg-Bremen-Hanover & parts of the western corridor GER/AUS/IT: Brenner axis & cross border section up to Verona! Moreover: cross-border issues causing disruptions in transport, e.g. change of brake-settings at the border DE/DK Technical standards like power-supply & signaling systems; ERTMS (à RFC3). Swiftly Green Corridor Study Activity 2.1 (A)

15 The Mapping Road Activity 2.1 (A) 95 % of total distance equipped at least with two lines. Major traffic is concentrated around cities/nodes. GER: on the west stretch traffic is highly concentrated AUS: Brenner Pass has the highest road trafik of all passes Swiftly Green Corridor Study Activity 2.1 (A)

16 The Mapping Road Activity 2.1 (A) o Bottlenecks can be found most in and around centres of economic activity (cities/nodes): o Oslo, o Gothenburg, Stockholm, o Copenhagen area, o Hamburg, Berlin, Nuremberg, Munich o Bologna o Brenner axis o Last mile between ports and motorways in Italy o Fehmarn Belt Fixed Link might create future bottleneck on eastern part of the corridor Swiftly Green Corridor Study Activity 2.1 (A)

17 The Mapping Fees & Regulations Activity 2.1 (A) Road (example): o Toll is different in each MS, system- and chareges level wise. Difficult to compare o Fees, taxes charges differ from Country to Country for road transport o Diesel price among countries spread between +/- 10 % Generally low level of harmonisation! Swiftly Green Corridor Study Activity 2.1 (A)

18 The Mapping Fees & Regulations Activity 2.1 (A) Rail (example): o Substantial difference between fees in the different countries (Source: 4 th report on monitoring development in the rail market, EC) o No public common prices published by most inland terminals (handling costs etc.) Generally low level of harmonisation! Track access charge calculated for a 1,000 ton freight train (EUR/km) in 2014 Does not include the costs of electricity, use of electric equipment or special fees for crossing bridges etc. Swiftly Green Corridor Study Activity 2.1 (A)

19 Supplementary Analyses in our Study Activity 2.1 (A) o Sea ports (entry/exit points along the corridor) o Biggest European sea ports connected to the corridor o The window to European and international markets o Transshipment points (hinterland transportatn by all modes) o Analysis of selected intermodal terminals o Ownership and operator o Investments and subsidies o Investment plans o Activities within TEN-T and on national level o Possible bottlenecks in 2050/2030 ScanMED Corridor Study Activity 2.1 (A)

21 RFC3 Transport Market Study Activity 2.1 (B) A study focusing on rail freight only RFC3 report is not officially approved by the management board and not public yet. The results will be used to update our ScanMed Corridor Study Activity 2.1 (A) on the themes: o Infrastructure Network-bottlenecks o Traffic Flows/Hubs o Current and planned activities within TEN-T and/or national investments à Updating of our study just in progress! Source: Rail Net Europe - RFC3

22 ScanMED Core-Network-Corridor Study The Study was Commission initiated in 2013 and is governed by EC. Scope: o Multimodal freight & passenger o Infrastructure analysed as defined in EU Regulation (TEN-T corridors) o Forecast: Target year 2030 o Study is not public yet Source: ScanMed Corridor, 3rd Progress Report (EC)

23 RFC3 = Rail Freight Corridor 3 Market Study CNC = Core Network Corridor Study Source: ScanMed Corridor - 3rd Progress Report

25 Summing up Statistical Challenges o Different levels data quality and precision in member states: E.g. counting of heavy vehicles traffic à Avarage Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) o Port specific data in tons: Eurostat vs. Port Authorities o Eurostat: à exclusive tare weight and excl. container weights (loaded/empty) o Port Authorities: à inclusive tare weight and incl. container weights (loaded/empty) à Packing and empty containers have to be transported as well on the corridor!

26 Summing up Swiftly Green ScanMED Corridor Study o Bremerhaven should be considered being part of the corridor o Most dense freight flows only on parts of the corridor o More focus on bottlenecks o in/around the nodes (hubs/cities), o sea ports hinterland connections & cross-border links o Rail/Road infrastructure partly heavily stressed o Free capacity on inland waterways, however limited scope on the ScanMED corridor o Fehmarn Belt Fixed Link might have an influence on future transport flows and (new) bottlenecks o Harmonisation and interoperability issues Swiftly Green Corridor Study Activity 2.1 (A)

27 Input to the Swiftly Green Toolbox Derived findings and recommendations resulting of a comparison of the studies (Activity 2.1) Activity 2.2 is the basis for the identification of measures having a greening potential on transport

29 Mapping of Projects/Measures having a Greening Potential Activity 2.2 o. o Other EU projects and non-eu funded projects with a focus on transport and considered important o Besides above programmes scanned, projects funded by other sources including private initiatives have been mapped by the partners

30 Followed Process of Projects Identification Detection of national and European initiatives between Selection of projects in the field of transport and logistics as well as sustainable and green transport Identification of projects / measures to be detailed analysed in Activity 3 Input to the toolbox via Activity 3.

31 Followed Process of Projects Identification o Projects were matched against the SWIFTLY Green horizontal project themes. o Strongly supported by Thematic Leaders.

32 Thank you for your attention! Swiftly Green Mid-Term Conference 4th November 2014 Stefan Breitenbach Hafen Hamburg Marketing e.v.