"NAIADES II: Boosting and greening inland waterway transport". Peter Wolters, Secretary General European Intermodal Association

Transcription

1 "NAIADES II: Boosting and greening inland waterway transport". Peter Wolters, Secretary General European Intermodal Association 1

2 SWOT analysis IWT transport Strenghts; Weakness, Opportunities; Threats A. Sustainability B. Available capacity (relative to load factor) C. Fuel efficiency D. High safety record E. Not perceived as expensive F. Shift maritime barge A. Road & railway reached capacity limits / road congestion B. Increasing efficiency IWT C. Producers developing alternative supply chains (IWT has to be understood!) Source: B. Wiegmans; adapted by EIA A. Perceived as not fast B. Not flexible C. Difficult penetration new markets D. Small role in forwarders community E. High investments new floating stock F. High dependency fuel costs G. Conservative culture (+ Berührungsangst ) H. Limited opening times bridges etc. I. Tentency over-capacity A. Increase sustainable road transport B. Lack public policies (implementations) C. Infrastructural bottlenecks (delays) D. Increasing congestion IWT E. Climate change F. Declining image G. Lack qualified staff H. Over-aged fleet I. Eroding profit margins J. Change of freight flows 2

3 Matching EESC topics (Infra conditions; better connection other modes; multimodal logistic chains)... with measures World Economic Forum (2009) 3

4 billion euro Customers prefer chose any mode able optimal use own infrastructure / vehicles - 1 out of 4 vehicles in EU empty; average load factor 57%; overall (in-) efficiency 43%. - Costs: 160 BLN - Collaboration in parallel supply chains is needed, all modes + shippers 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% % Load factor % Load factor (estimated) % Road efficieny % empty running (km) Cost of inefficiency 0% Eurostat EU Environment Agency data 2010.

5 Shippers priorities: Procter & Gamble searches also IWT partnerships 1. Efficient use of all modes of transport 2. Intermodal significantly higher 3. New entrant vs. old stagnant 4. Parallel supply chains 5. Cost 6. Speed 7. Information P&G, Member EIA 5

6 Customers think in supply chains, not IWT (only) E.g.: Greece supplied from 14 supply points by road, sea, rail Netherlands GERMANY BELGIUM dry conex p.a. 110 reefer conex (sea) p.a refrigerated trucks p.a. 400 reefer conex (train) p.a. Member EIA Thessalonica HELLAS Patra Attica 6

7 IWT should share bed with customers; EIA as association opened doors users of intermodal transport e.g. Procter & Gamble; Hewlett Packard; FrieslandCampina... We fight for the same (sustainable) interests!

8 Nodal Points (infrastructure) affecting supply chains Environmental impact transshipment between modes rather unknown New outcome: processes may cost 5%* of intermodal chain GHG emissions Concerns road/rail terminals. What about IWT/navigation using inland ports? Increase efficiency node infrastructures: be open to users (quality data) Research is ongoing (Swiftly Green; Green Logistics; Eco/Smart Hubs) * Latest results Green Logistics initiative 8

9 Various innovative IWT projects, however... (...) These projects are technical feasible, they could be of great importance individually or in combination with each other to build new logistic chains. But: within existing EU infrastructure these are not easily to implement, because they are perceived as threat for current players in logistics chains, despite fact there is added value and improved price/quality ratio 9

10 Example EU innovative NEWS concept integrating most relevent challenges: 10

11 Better connection IWT with other modes start with sharing Best Practices! Inventory of freight best practices (Green logistics & Co- modality; Urban freight ; E-freight) Describing success factors, limitations Identified, analysed, desribed, pooled by academic partners and associations (e.g. PANTEIA, Lithuanian Intermodal Transport Technology Platform, EIA etc) 11

12 Many thanks Turning sustainability into profitability! 12