THE CHOICES IN THE EARLY STAGES OF CRISIS how to define the priority network of intermodal hubs? A. Cappelli, A. Libardo. IUAV Venice University

Transcription

1 THE CHOICES IN THE EARLY STAGES OF CRISIS how to define the priority network of intermodal hubs? A. Cappelli, A. Libardo IUAV Venice University 1

2 BACKGROUND Intermodal centers, railway stations, ports and freight terminal should connect to an infrastructure system linking the medium and long distances by establishing an efficient network for international connections. Currently only a small part of the "intermodal hubs system looks really competitive despite the investments made over the past 20 years. These investments have been done without a strategy that was able to obtain a real added value to the overall system efficiency and effectiveness. 2

3 BACKGROUND In the past, FS and RFI have already done simulation studies only on railway freight terminals network effectiveness, without taking into account other freight terminals. In addition the organization of the freight system is again subject to constraints due to institutional and local goals of regional planning. At European level a new planning methodology of the TEN-T planning network has been developed. 3

4 OBJECTIVE OF THE RESEARCH This research describes the results of an assessment methodology which takes into account the principles of logistics efficiency, of the sustainability and of the economic choice of investments in the phases of structural crisis. The goal is to redefine: the national strategic network and, as a result, the proper quantity and geographical location of freight intermodal hubs that are able to improve investments on the railway network (done or planned). This network have to be connected with the Core Network currently under definition by UE 4

5 METHODOLOGY The proposed methodology examines the entire system of intermodal hubs in order to build a Decision Support System capable to take into account: the current size and predictable flows of goods on the medium and long distances, the relationship between current flows by rail and specific market centers; the area of influence of each node in terms of: transport efficiency, energy efficiency and environmental impact; potential demand verification, based on the size of the economic production in this area; overall efficiency of the system by means of MCA analysis. 5

6 MULTICRITERIA EVALUATION MODEL During previous researches a multi-criteria evaluation model has been formalized and a software has been implemented in APL The model was successfully applied in several important studies including the study of technical feasibility and economicenvironmental upgrading of the railway Salerno - Reggio Calabria with standard AV / AC (client RFI SpA) The results were presented at international conferences and published in A. Cappelli, A. Libardo (2010): Decision Making Support System: The Multicriteria Analysis and Application to New Model in Feasibility Decisions in Transportation Engineering, McGraw-Hill, Milan. 6

7 DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM Goals Verification of the potential role of each node from the size of the productive economic system in this area (number, size, characteristics of the businesses operating in the basin of influence of each node and their economic basin reference); Assesment Assesment of the overall system efficiency through the multi-criteria analysis with calibrated weights on some opinion leaders and large facilities managers Expected results Identification of the number and location of the national strategic logistic system (ports, freight, rail freight facilities) 7

8 ì INDICATORS Indicator Intensity of activity Import/export per NUTS 3 Capacity of railway network Impedance territorial Distance among intermodal nodes of similar size Distance among intermodal nodes of different size Connection with the EU core network Energy and environmental efficiency Employees per productive sector vocation to railway Productive sectors selected based on the flows on the Alpine passes Presence of Multimodal Transport Operators Services (MTO services) Monetary value (source: ISTAT-EUROSTAT) Available capacity, gabarit and gradient constraints (for freight paths) orographic/settlement/overlay passenger flows within 150 km spatial overlapping of economic reference area (index) intermodal within 100 km (integration index) belonging or not belonging to the network distance from network access point measuring consumption and emissions on the road + railroad paths 8

9 CURRENT INTERMODAL SYSTEMS 9

10 ITALIAN FREIGHT TERMINALS IN OPERATION 10

11 MEDITERRANEAN PORT SYSTEM 11

12 There are too many terminals despite the railway freight flow is decreasing 12

13 UE REFERENCES 13

14 ESPON _2006 According with ESPON study: accessibility is not the main factor that determines economic strength and competitiveness ; good accessibility contributes to the potential advantages but does not guarantee by itself that this potential is realized 14

15 THE CORE NETWORK _

16 EU-WIDE FREIGHT-ORIENTED CORRIDORS EU-wide freight-oriented corridors e.g.: 16

17 IDENTIFICATION OF PRIMARY NODES 17

18 lines existing in the region. TRANS MEDITERRANEAN RAILWAY NETWORK editerranean Railway Network TEN-T POLICY REVIEW - EXPERT GROUP 4 METHODOLOGY FOR TEN-T PLANNING Ten-T Extension outside the EU 18

19 Corridors. INTERNATIONAL Map 11 Euro Asian transport TRANSPORT corridors CORRIDORS TEN-T POLICY REVIEW - EXPERT GROUP 4 METHODOLOGY FOR TEN-T PLANNING Ten-T Extension outside the EU 19

20 CO2 multimodal equivalence classes emissions (sea+railway) from Port Said to main European destinations comparison among Costanta Venezia Valencia Le Havre Antwerpen Rotterdam -Bremerhaven - Hamburg TTL per SONORA Project

21 DRAFT: TEN-T Core Ports_2010 TEN-T POLICY REVIEW - EXPERT GROUP 4 METHODOLOGY FOR TEN-T PLANNING Ten-T Extension outside the EU 21

22 Applying multi-criteria analysis SUMMARY OF THE RESULTS 22

23 STRATEGIC FREIGHT AND RAILWAY TERMINAL Milano nuovo impianto Verona Torino S.I.TO + Orbassano Venezia/Padova Bologna Livorno/La Spezia Roma Brindisi Nola 23

24 COMMENTS AND CLARIFICATIONS Lombardia: needs a public intermodal hub to serve as a relation with Genova, Venice/Trieste and Nola Marcianise (currently there is no intermodal hub that serve national destination) Veneto: integration of Padua and Venice; Verona is strategic for Germany and UE relationship; no other hubs are efficient. FS on Venice, Padua and Verona La Spezia-Livorno: it is to be regarded as the intermodal node connected to the port system of Genoa Lazio: Need for a intermodal hub to serve not only the metropolitan area but also the entire central Italy No Terminals are in the strategic southern Tyrrhenian (Calabria) and Sicily and Sardinia, where the role should be played by intermodal ports (Sicily) 24

25 STRATEGIC PORT SYSTEM Venezia/Trieste/Ravenna Genova/Savona/La Spezia Brindisi/Taranto Napoli/Salerno Gioia Tauro Palermo 25

26 COMMENTS AND CLARIFICATIONS National port network focussed on 6 core systems: Genova/Savona/La Spezia Napoli/Salerno Gioia Tauro Palermo Taranto/Brindisi Ravenna/Venezia/Trieste Traffic generated in 2030 = 20 milion of TEU of which about 40 % with final destination in middle/est Europe 26