Under the Guidance CASE of Prof. (Dr.) STUDY: Sanjay Gupta, KOCHI, School of Planning KERALA and Architecture New Delhi
INTRODUCTION Freight plays a vital role in the national economy. - 2.6 million trucks provide employment to 20 million people - Goods vehicle & operating costs contribute 5% to 8% to total metropolitan city s tax revenue. India spends around 13-14% of its GDP on logistics; the freight transport accounts35% share - USA (10%), Europe (11%) and Japan (10%), Goods traffic intensities generally tends to decrease with decrease in city size. Source: Freight Transport for development, A policy toolkit.
METHODOLGY Literature Review of Past Studies on Urban Freight Data identification and Collection Data Assessment Freight Traffic Impact Assessment Scenario Building Conclusion
NEED FOR THE STUDY Not much research on sustainable urban freight is reported for Indian cities. The existing practise of urban freight planning do not account for sustainability factors. The data base for urban freight distribution is very weak leading to unscientific planning. Very little research reported on efficiencies of different urban freight modes in India cities.
AIM The aim of the study is to plan for a sustainable freight distribution strategy for the metropolitan city of Kochi.
LITERATURE REVIEW SUFT system:- Improve accessibility Reduce air pollution, green house gas emissions, waste and noise Improve resource & energy-efficiency and cost-effectiveness Enhancement of the attractiveness and quality of the urban environment. (Source:The Impact of Urban Freight Transport: A Definition of Sustainability from an Actor's Perspective, 05 Aug 2008)
A1 FACTORS AFFECTING URBAN FREIGHT PATTERN Location and type of industries present The supply chain structures Existing transport infrastructure Warehousing facilities The sizes and weights of goods vehicle permitted to operate in the urban area Access and loading regulations applied in the urban area The existing road traffic conditions
Slide 7 A1 including whether the urban area contains a major port or airport or rail freight terminal Adminis, 25-11-2015
BEST PRACTICES INLAND WATERWAY TRANSPORT OF HOUSEHOLD WASTES, LIEGE, BELGIUM(1990) Household wastes collected by 28 municipalities, are transported from central transfer station to incinerator by barges on the river Meuse Objective: Reduce transport of wastes by lorries in the agglomeration of Liege through use of inland waterway transport. Fluvial transport of waste - dependent on river flow. In case of high river level and floods, navigation is impossible and/or forbidden. RESULTS Economic impact: Reduction of local congestion Environmental impacts: Reduced transportation through lorries; With 5 litres of fuel, a ship can transport a tonne over a distance of 500 km. (Source: Inland Navigation Europe) Polluting emissions by barge transport are lower than by lorries. Social impacts: Reduced lorry traffic implies a reduction of the risk of road accidents.
DATA BASE P R I M A R Y S E C O N D A R Y Establishment Survey (Wholesale, W/R, Retail) Size of establishments Capacity stored & Holding Capacity Modes used for transportation qty, Frequency, distance & Costing Tonnage handled / day Distribution Mode, and locations (dist) Operators Survey Vehicle type Quantity handled Distance covered/ day Empty running, Waiting time Secondary data Trade & Commerce in Kochi No: of establishments Temporal data of commodity and market
CASE STUDY AREA PROFILE Commercial institutions and professional use is 2.99% Ie, 1.59% of Kochi city area. Broadway - 0.8 sq. km area. - Distribution of goods to city area and outside. - No loading / unloading facility. ESTABLISHMENTS IN KOCHI The Broadway MG road area and Mattanchery.
CASE STUDY AREA PROFILE RICE CONSUMPTION Hand cart pulled for intra market movement Congested Market road
COMMODITY DISTRIBUTION Multiple source (923 T) (78 %) 721 T (22%) 202 T Railway Terminal (721T) (636 T) Wholesale Outside KC (709 T) 53T Retailers (93 T) Retailers (67 T) 85T 61 T Consumers (146 T) 85 T Wholesale Inside KCR (287 T) Broadway (213 T) Mattanchery (74T) Majority (60%) of the rice is being transported through railways and only 40% through road. Year Mode Qty (Tonnes) Total Tonnes 2012-2013 Rail 184059 Road 99109 283168 2013-2014 Rail 175749 Road 127817 319544 Rail 185878 2014-2015 Road 135184 Source: Indian railway and transport operators association 337960
DATA BASE Tonnage handeled by different modes
HANDLING CHARACTERISTICS Size (sq.ft) No. surveyed In Broadway % Surveyed Holding capacity Available (tonne) Used Daily tonnage handled/ Est. Daily tonnage handled (Broadway) small <400 10 27 37.04 16.1 5 0.02 0.60 medium 400-800 18 20 90.00 1365 1153 4.8 96.00 large >800 12 18 66.67 1450 1410 6.5 117.00 Total 40 65 2831 2563 213.60 EMPLOYMENT CHARACTERISTICS Size (sq.ft) Size (sq.m) No. of employees/ est. Employee/ Sq.M Tonnage/ employee/ day small <400 14 4 0.28 0.01 medium 400-800 50 5 0.1 0.96 large >800 110 7 0.063 0.93 INFERENCE Tonnage handled by Broadway Market per day = 213 ton / day Requirement for consumption of City =146 Ton / day The Commodity is distributed by various modes like hand cart used for intra market distribution and goods auto and LCV for city distribution.
TRIP CHARACTERISTICS Modes No. of Trips/Day No. of Modes surveyed Time Taken/ Trip (min) Tonnage Carried/ Trip Distance Covered/ Trip (km) Fare/ Trip (Rs) Handcart 4 2 10 0.8 0.4 110 Goods Auto 4 5 77 0.6 6 400 LCV 3 3 95 3.0 9 1875 Train to truck transfer at railway station TRIP CHARACTERISTICS Modes Total no: of trips Distance Covered/ Day (km) Tonnage Carried per Mode/Day Tonne- Km/trip/ Mode Total Tonne- Km/Day Total veh- Km/Day Handcart 20 1.6 15.8 0.316 6 8 Goods Auto 40 32 23.6 4.72 142 240 LCV 18 37.5 54 37.5 486 162 Total 78 94 634 410 Unloading in front of shops Market road Hand cart for internal transfer in markets Distance (km)
EXISTING SYSTEM: WHOLESALER 1 WHOLESALER 2 What is the existing scenario for distribution of goods and the cost for distribution (economic) and emissions (environmental) due these are analysed. RETAILER 1 RETAILER 1 RETAILER 2 RETAILER 3 RETAILER 4 CLUSTER BASED DISTRIBUTION FROM WHOLESALE MARKETS Two markets will be destined to cater specific retailer markets and the cost and emissions are analysed. 1. Distribution using existing modes. 2. Goods auto and LCV replaced by LEV 3. Motorised vehicles replaced by LEV and handcart by Cargo bicycles. MARKET BASED DISTRIBUTION USING INLAND WATER TRANSPORT IWT as a distribution method and further by road Analysed difference in cost and emissions WHOLESALER 1 WHOLESALER 2 RETAILER 2 RETAILER 3 RETAILER 4 Wholesale Market Direct distribution via road to areas near by and not in proximity to other jetties & Distribution via LEVs from jetty to other zones. LEV hand cart Market Jetty iwt Other Jetty Other Jetty Retailers Retailers Retailers Retailers RETAILER 5
SCENARIO I EXISTING DISTRIBUTION Economic and Environmental parameters are studied When both the markets are catering to the whole of the city. From the survey distribution inside city from : Broadway market = 94 Tonnes Mattanchery = 67 Tonnes The modes for distribution - goods Autorickshaw and LCVs. Qty distributed is 155 T Mode Modal distribution characteristics Trip length Tonnes carried per trip trips / day Cost / tonne km Goods Auto 6 0.6 4 83 LCV 9 3 3 50
Distribution characteristics from Broadway Modes Total no: of trips Distance Covered/ Day (km) Tonnage Carried per Mode/Day Tonne- Km/trip/ Mode Total Tonne- Km/Day Total veh- Km/Day Total Transport Cost (Rs) Emission factor (gm/km) CO2 emission (gm) Handcart 20 1.6 15.8 0.316 6 8 2200 0 0 Goods auto 40 24 23.6 3.54 142 240 11752.8 401.25 96300 LCV 18 27 54 27 486 162 24300 762.39 123507 Total 78 93 634 410 38252.8 219807.2 Modes Total no: of trips Distribution characteristics from Mattanchery Distance Covered/ Day (km) Tonnage Carried per Mode/Day Tonne- Km/trip/ Mode Total Tonne- Km/Day Total veh- Km/Day Total Transport Cost (Rs) Emission factor (gm/km) Handcart 8 1.6 6.32 0.316 3 3.2 880 0 0 CO2 emission (gm) Goods auto 28 24 16.52 3.54 99 168 8226.96 401.25 67410 LCV 15 27 45 27 405 135 20250 762.39 102923 Total 51 67 507 306 29356.96 170332.7 INFERENCE Tonnage distributed : 155 T Vehicle- km : 716 Tonne- km : 1141 CO2 Emissions : 390 kg
SCENARIO II CLUSTER BASED DISTRIBUTION OPTION I DISTRIBUTION EXISTING MODES -Developing cluster of markets based on proximity among each other -Supply by wholesale market is sufficient to meet the requirement of cluster markets Average distance b/n Broadway & Retail markets 4 Km Average distance b/n Mattanchery & Retail markets 4 km In this scenario the two wholesale markets are assigned to distribute goods to specific retail markets. From the survey distribution inside city from Broadway market = 94 Tonnes Mattanchery = 67 Tonnes
OPTION I DISTRIBUTION EXISTING MODES Distribution characteristics from Broadway Modes Total no: of trips Distance Covered/ Day (km) Tonnage Carried per Mode/Da y Tonne- Km/trip/ Mode Total Tonne- Km/Day Total veh- Km/Day Total Transport Cost (Rs) Emission factor (gm/km) CO2 emission (gm) Handcart 20 1.6 15.8 0.316 6 8 2200 0 0 Goods Auto 40 16.8 23.6 2.478 99 168 8227 401 67410 LCV 18 18.9 54 18.9 340 113.4 17010 762 86455 Total 78 37.3 93.4 446 289.4 27437 153865 Modes Total no: of trips Distance Covered/ Day (km) Distribution characteristics from Mattanchery Tonnage Carried per Mode/ Day Tonne- Km/trip/ Mode Total Tonne- Km/Day Total veh- Km/Day Total Transport Cost (Rs) Emission factor (gm/km) CO2 emission (gm) Handcart 8 1.6 6 0.316 3 3.2 880 0 0 Goods Auto 28 16.8 17 2.478 69 117.6 5759 401.25 47187 LCV 15 18.9 45 18.9 284 94.5 14175 762.39 72046 Total 51 67 355 215.3 20814 119233
SCENARIO II OPTION II - DISTRIBUTION USING LEV, LCV & HANDCART Modes Modal Characteristics No. of Trips/ Day No. of Modes Time Taken/ Trip (min) Tonnage Carried/ Trip Distance Covered / Trip (km) Handcart 4 4 10 0.8 0.4 Goods Auto 7 18 77 0.5 4.2 LCV 3 10 95 3.0 6.3 Total 14 32 4.2 10.9 OPTION III - DISTRIBUTION USING LEV & CARGO BIKES Modes Cargo bike Goods Auto No. of Trips/Day Modal Characteristics No. of Modes Time Taken/Tri p (min) Tonnage Carried/T rip Distance Covered/ Trip (km) 4 12 10 0.3 0.4 7 19 77 0.5 3.7 Total 11 31 4.1 INFERENCE Tonnage distributed : 155 T Vehicle- km : 724.60 Tonne- km : 810.19 CO2 Emissions : 144 kg INFERENCE Tonnage distributed : 155 T Vehicle- km : 1228.28 Tonne- km : 548.8 CO2 Emissions : 0 kg
SCENARIO III MARKET BASED DISTRIBUTION USING IWT & LEV CONCEPT Allocation of freight from warehouse to various retailers using IWT and then LEV 35 Zoning from jetty Market jetty zone: 27 26 Other zones Qty Total Location in ward Dist (km) by IWT from Market zone 3 9.25 2 Distributed wards 21 25.38 14, 24, 22 28 8.87 1 1.7 1 29 27.15 5 2.2 4, 5, 7 30 13.56 49.57 8 5 8, 9, 10 31 12.07 18 5.5 18,19 32 7.81 20 3 20, 25 33 2.49 6 2 6 34 13.82 17 13 15, 16, 17 35 30.59 66.97 11 8.5 11, 12, 13, 23 28 3 29 33 32 21 31 34 30 MAP OF PROPOSED IWT JETTIES AND ZONING Source: Project Metro Aqua, Kochi
Distribution by road from Wholesale Market directly using Electric bike Emisson CO2 QTY. dist factor per emission (tonnes) (km) DESTINAT Tonnage No: of Tonnekm km (gm) (gm) ORIGIN ION / trip trips Veh-km 3 2 9.25 1.98 0.45 20.6 40.70 18.32 0 0 21 Market zone 14 9.45 6.89 0.45 21 144.69 65.11 0 0 22 8.46 3.29 0.45 18.8 61.85 27.83 0 0 24 7.47 4.69 0.45 16.6 77.85 35.03 0 0 TOTAL 34.63 325.10 146.29 0 0 Market jetty Distribution from Wholesale Market to jetty using handcart Qty (Tonnes ) Dist from Market to Jetty (Km) Avg tonnes / trip No: of trips Veh-km Tonnekm Cost / Tkm (Rs) Total tonne km cost (Rs) Emisson factor per Tkm (gm) CO2 emissio n (gm) 155193 66.78 21 26 66.78 0.1 0.8 83.47 4460 348 0 0 0 3 27 49.58 0.5 0.8 61.97 49.58 2458 348 855445 0 0 240737 116.36 Total 116.36 6918 5 0 0
Distribution from Market Jetty to other jetties using IWT Market jetty zone: 27 26 Other zones Qty (Tonnes) Dist (km) by iwt from Market zone Avg tonnes / trip Cost / Tkm No: of trips Veh-Km Tkm total Tkm cost Emisson factor per Tkm (gm/ TKm) CO2 emission (gm) 28 8.87 1.7 1.2 2.63 7 12.6 15.08 39.7 55 691 29 27.15 2.2 1.2 2.63 23 49.8 59.73 157.1 55 2737 30 13.56 5 1.2 2.63 11 56.5 67.80 178.3 55 3428 31 12.07 5.5 1.2 2.63 10 55.3 66.39 174.6 55 6166 32 7.81 3 1.2 2.63 7 19.5 23.43 61.6 55 9595 33 2.49 2 1.2 2.63 2 4.2 4.98 13.1 55 15761 34 13.82 13 1.2 2.63 12 149.7 179.66 472.5 55 25356 35 30.59 8.5 1.2 2.63 25 216.7 260.02 683.8 55 41118 TOTAL 116.36 564.2 677.08 1780.7 104855 Emission factor Source : Report Energy efficient inland water transport in bangladesh, World Bank Distribution from Jetty to Retail markets using LEV Origin dist Tonnage distributed Tonnage / trip No: of trips Tonne-km Veh-km Emisson factor (gm/km) CO2 emission (gm) 28 1.34 8.87 0.45 20 11.89 26.41 0 0 29 2.1 27.15 0.45 60 57.02 126.70 0 0 30 5 13.56 0.45 30 67.80 150.67 0 0 31 4.08 12.07 0.45 27 49.25 109.43 0 0 32 3.5 7.81 0.45 17 27.34 60.74 0 0 33 1.92 2.49 0.45 6 4.78 10.62 0 0 34 5.2 13.82 0.45 31 71.86 159.70 0 0 35 4.8 30.59 0.45 68 146.83 326.29 0 0 Total 116.36 259 436.76 970.57 0 0 INFERENCE Tonnage distributed : 155 T Vehicle- km : 1976 Tonne- km : 1291 CO2 Emissions : 104 kg
CONCLUSION COMPARISON OF SCENARIOS SCENARIO I SCENARIO II SCENARIO III Tonnage OPTION I OPTION II OPTION III 155 155 155 155 155 Veh-km 716 504 724 1228 1976 Tonne-km 1141 801 810 548 1291 CO2 Emissions (kg) 390 273 144 0 104 SCENARIO II- OPTION III is an ideal scenario zero emission vehicles via road. Requires development of infrastructure and technology for charging of vehicles, parking etc. SCENARIO III distribution using IWT and further last mile by zero emission helps in reducing emission by 73% require infrastructure development like jetty areas with Freighting facilities.
RECOMMENDATIONS: It is proposed to develop alternate sustainable urban freight distribution strategies for rice. It is estimated by 2025 the requirement of rice will increase by 55% which could congest the narrow roads of Kochi further, but possibility for controlling it by developing infrastructure for IWT. AREA OF FUTURE RESEARCH This empirical findings to be extended to other commodities in urban distribution Cost parameters to be included for further benefit studies.
THANK YOU
Modes Distribution characteristics from Broadway Market Total no: of trips Distance Covered/ Day (km) Tonnage Carried per Mode/D ay Tonne- Km/trip/ Mode Total Tonne- Km/Day Total veh- Km/Day Emission factor (gm/km) CO2 emission (gm) Handcart 20 1.6 15.8 0.316 6 8 0 0 LEV 52 16.8 23.4 1.89 98 218.4 0 0 LCV 18 18.9 54 18.9 340 113.4 762.39 86455 Total 90 37.3 94 445 86455.03 Distribution characteristics from Mattanchery Market Modes Total no: of trips Distance Covered/ Day (km) Tonnage Carried per Mode/ Day Tonne- Km/trip/ Mode Total Tonne- Km/Day Total veh- Km/Day Emission factor (gm/km) CO2 emission (gm) Handcart 8 1.6 6 0.316 3 3.2 0 0 LEV 35 21 16 1.89 66 147 0 0 LCV 15 18.9 45 18.9 284 94.5 762.39 72046 Total 58 67 352 244.7 72046