Report Baltic ro-ro & ferry traﬃ c A house on the ro-ck ...baltic-press.com/ftp/btj46_2-12.pdf ·...

Confronting future reality

Baltic TransportBaltic TransportBaltic TransportJournal€ 15/50 PLN (VAT +5%)

b i m o n t h l y - d a i l y c o m p a n i o n

№ 2/2012 (46), MARCH/APRIL

Baltic Transport Journal is an offi cial media partner of:Baltic Transport Journal is an offi cial media partner of:

Focus

Report

ISSN

173

3-67

32

A house on the ro-ck

Port strategy & investments

Baltic ro-ro & ferry traffi c

Confronting future realityMaritime

The East West TC project has an important task: to be a testing ground for innovations, new technology, business models and improved transport management systems which will facilitate more sustainable transport solutions than those of today.

www.ewtc2.eu

– a testing ground for Innovations

The East West Transport Corridor

Lead partner

Editorial

2/2012 | Baltic Transport Journal | 3

Baltic Transport Journal

President of the BoardBOGDAN OŁDAKOWSKI

offi [email protected]

Publishing DirectorPIOTR TRUSIEWICZ

[email protected]

Editor-in-ChiefLENA LORENC

[email protected]

Executive EditorMAREK BŁUŚ

[email protected]

Copy EditorPRZEMYSŁAW MYSZKA

[email protected]

Contributing writersEVELINA HANSSON MALM, JUKKA-PEKKA JALKANEN,

JUHA KALLI, PEKKA LEVIÄKANGAS,MARISA LUTTER, MACIEJ MATCZAK,

GÜNTHER H. OETTINGER, MAREK PERZYŃSKI, MATTIAS RUST, ANDERS SJÖBLOM, TAPANI STIPA,

ASLI TEPECIK DIŞ, HEIKKI TUOMENVIRTA, FRANCISZEK TYLMAN, KRZYSZTOF URBAŚ,

EDMUND WACH, STASYS ZURBA

English Language EditorALISON NISSEN

Art Director/DTPDANUTA SAWICKA

PublisherBALTIC PRESS SP. Z O.O.

Address: 8 Pułaskiego Street81-368 Gdynia, Poland

offi [email protected]

tel. +48 58 627 23 94tel. +48 58 627 23 95fax +48 58 621 69 66

www.baltictransportjournal.comwww.baltictransportmaps.com

Marketing & Sales (advertising, tradefairs, conferences)

PIOTR [email protected]

ANNA [email protected]

Circulation: 2,500

If you wish to share your feedback or have information for us,

do not hesitate to contact us at:[email protected].

Cover:Photo: DFDS

SubscriptionsGo to www.baltictransportjournal.com and click:

SUBSCRIPTION or contact us at [email protected]


€ 15/50 PLN VAT +5%

b i m o n t h l y - d a i l y c o m p a n i o n

№ 2/2012 (46), MARCH/APRIL

Baltic Transport Journal is an o�cial media partner of:Baltic Transport Journal is an o�cial media partner of:

Focus

Report

ISSN

173

3-67

32



Baltic ro-ro & ferry traffic

Confronting future realityMaritime

Dear Readers,

AAA Intermodal 11; Actia Consulting 20, 21; Actia Forum Ltd. 21, 37; Älvsborg Ro/Ro AB 11; Ånedin Line 24; Anship 24; APL 58; Åre Östersund Airport 52; Arla 42; Baltic Container Terminal (BCT) 20, 40; Baltic General Cargo Terminal Gdynia (BTDG) 11, 21; Baltic Scandinavian Lines 24; BBC Chartering 11; Big Port of St. Petersburg 8, 10, 11, 33, 34, 39, 58; Birka Line 24; British Petroleum 13; C.Ro Ports 11; Christiansøfarten ApS 24; CldN 24; CMA CGM 10, 12; Color Line 24, 25, 30, 58; Containerships 11; Copenhagen Malmö Port (CMP) 8; DB Port Szczecin 20; DB Schenker Logistics 58; Deepwater Container Terminal (DCT) 11, 12, 20, 34; Destination Gotland 24, 31; Det Norske Veritas (DNV) 58; Det Norske Veritas Maritime and Oil & Gas 58; DFDS Group 11, 26; DFDS Seaways 24, 25, 26, 30, 54; DFDS Tor Line 58; Eckerö Line 24, 26; Ecofys 18, 19; Eurogate Container Terminal Hamburg 11; European Severe Storms Laboratory 49; Euroterminal Sławków 11; Færgen 24; Finnlines 24, 25, 26, 27, 30, 55; First Container Terminal 58; Fjord Line 24, 26; Foreca Consulting Ltd 49; Freight One Scandinavia 55; FRS Group, Inc. 24; G6 Alliance 11; Gdańsk Container Terminal (GTK) 20; Gdynia Container Terminal (GCT) 20; German Aerospace Center 49; Glosten Associates 17; Hamburger Hafen und Logistik AG (HHLA) 9, 10; Hamworthy 10; Hangö Stevedoring 25; HelOx Line 24; Höglandster-minalen 43; Holmen 24; Hupac 38; JadeWeserPort 41; JSC Lithuanian Railways 41; Kährs 42; Katoen Natie 10; Kazakhstan State Railway Company 41; Kuehne + Nagel 50, 51; Kværner AS 58; LD Lines 26; Lillgaard 24; Linda Line 24; MacAndrews 11; Maersk Line 10, 11, 34; Maersk Poland 11; MAN B&W Diesel 18; Mann Lines 24, 28; Mantsinen Group Ltd Oy 10; MCT Petersburg 58; MCT PORT 58; MDS Transmodal 54; Mediterranean Shipping Company S.A. (MSC) 12, 40; Metrans 10; Moby Dik 58; Mols-Linien 24, 26; M-Real 24; Naval Shipyard Gdynia 40; Neptune Orient Lines Limited (NOL) 58; Neste Oil 15; Nordregio 53; North Sea Ro-Ro 24, 28; P.F. Bassøe AS 58; P+S Werften 26; Plaske 38; Polen Line 11; Polferries 11, 20, 24; Pomeranian Logistic Center (PLC) 21; Port of Aarhus 24, 34, 36; Port of Batam 11; Port of Bilbao 11; Port of Bremerhaven 11, 55; Port of Bronka 10, 39, 40; Port of Busan 11; Port of Copenhagen 8, 36; Port of Gävle 8, 10, 25, 28; Port of Gdansk Cargo Logistics 21; Port of Gdańsk 11, 12, 20, 21, 34; Port of Gdynia 20, 21,33, 40, 54; Port of Genoa 11; Port of Ghent 11; Port of Gothenburg 8, 10, 11, 24, 28, 34, 42, 43, 54; Port of Hai Phong 11; Port of Hamburg 9, 11, 32, 34, 41, 55; Port of HaminaKotka 8, 55; Port of Hanko 25, 30; Port of Helsingborg 8, 10, 23, 28, 31, 32, 36; Port of Helsingør 23, 28, 31, 32; Port of Helsinki 8, 24, 25, 26, 28, 31, 36, 40, 54 ,55; Port of Hirtshals 26, 28; Port of Ho Chi Minh 11; Port of Hong Kong 11; Port of Jeddah 11; Port of Karlshamn 8, 32; Port of Karlskrona 8, 9, 21, 32; Port of Kemi 8; Port of Kiel 25, 54; Port of Klaipėda 11, 28, 39; Port of Klang 11; Port of Kobe 11; Port of Kristiansand 11; Port of Kunda 9; Port of Liepāja 8; Port of Lübeck 28; Port of Luleå 8; Port of Malmö 8, 36; Port of Mariehamn 28; Port of Mariupol 11; Port of Masan 11; Port of Narvik 32; Port of Ningbo 11; Port of Norrköping 8, 10; Port of Norrtälje 8; Port of Nynäshamn 11, 28; Port of Odessa 32; Port of Oskarshamn 31, 42, 43; Port of Oxelösund 8, 24, 28; Port of Pietarsaari 8; Port of Pori 11; Port of Primorsk 33; Port of Puttgarden 28; Port of Raahe 8, 41; Port of Rauma 8, 11, 25; Port of Riga 8, 36; Port of Rødby 28; Port of Rotterdam 11, 41; Port of Sassnitz 25, 29; Port of Shanghai 11; Port of Sheerness 11, 28; Port of Shekou 11; Port of Singapore 11; Port of Södertälje 10, 11; Port of Sölvesborg 8; Port of Tallinn 10, 24, 26, 28, 31, 36; Port of Teesport 11; Port of Tilbury 11; Port of Tornio 8; Port of Trelleborg 8, 28, 40; Port of Turku 10, 28, 36, 54, 55; Port of Ust-Luga 8, 21, 25, 33, 34, 39; Port of Ventspils 8, 42, 43; Port of Wilmington 11; Port of Yokohama 11; Port of Ystad 11, 27; Ports of Stockholm 25, 28, 36; Power Line 24, 25; RG Line 24, 31; Rickmers Holding 58; Rickmers-Linie 58; Rohde Nielsen A/S 39; Russian Railways 58; SAFT 42; SAPA 42; SCA Transforest 24, 28; Scandlines 24, 25, 30, 31, 54; Scandlines Deutschland 54; Scania 42; Schavemaker Logistics and Transport 11; Sea Cargo 24; Sea Port of St. Petersburg 58; Smurfi t Kappa 42; Smyril Line 24; Södra 42; Spliethoff 11; St. Peter Line 24, 25; Stena Line 9, 20, 21, 24, 25, 26, 30, 31, 58; Stena RoRo 54; Swedish House 11; Swedish Orient Line 24; Swedwood 42; Szczecin-Świnoujście port complex 20, 21, 36, 54; Tallink Silja Line 24, 25, 26, 30, 31, 54; Team Line 11; Teboil 15; TransAtlantic 24, 25; Transfennica 24, 25; Transmashholding 58; Transport Economics Institute 49; Trondheim Airport Værnes 52; TT-Line 24, 30, 54; TTS Groups ASA 54; UECC 24, 28; Unieveem Estonia 10; Unity Line 9 20, 24; UPM 10; UPM Seaways 24; Ust-Luga Container Terminal 39, 58; Van Oord and Marine Contractors BV 39; Viking Line 24, 25, 26, 30; Vostochnaya Stevedoring Company 58; VPA Logistics 38; VTT Technical Research Centre 48, 49; Wallenius Wilhelmsen 54; Wärtsilä 10, 18.

C o m p a n y i n d e x

Ro-ro stands for ‘uniqueness’. Today, quite on the verge of changes, we can still be sure that the most essential ships in the Baltic are passenger-car ferries and their closest relatives – ro-ro, con-ro and ro-lo cargo vessels. BSR ferry and roll-on roll-off business is a matter of great numbers as well: about 150 mln tn of turnover in ports, 85 mln

passengers passing gangways, 500 single ferry trips per day and 500,000 lane metres for cargo and private cars off ered daily – we can read in this issue’s report “A house on the ro-ck”, authored by Marek Błuś. Our editorial staff is pleased to present this text, supplemented by the BTJ ro-ro and ferry map poster and based on a larger publication, Ro-ro/Ferry Yearbook 2012, that will have its premiere in late May (more information on p. 54). Get involved in the story about the ro-ck solid sector, but to have a larger perspective of what might happen to it aft er 2015, see also the text entitled “Confronting future reality” written by Jukka-Pekka Jalkanen, Juha Kalli and Tapani Stipa, who show how the increase in fuel costs will impact on ro-ro, ro-pax and container carriers (together consuming almost half of the fuel used by Baltic and North Sea shipping). Th e theme of the unsure outlook for the shipping sector in the BSR is referred to in many places in this issue. As for the alternatives to HFO, fi nd out about the limits and possibilities of biofuels, which could become a solution in lowering carbon intensity in the propulsion of ships and, having no sulphur content, reduce the eff ect of ship emissions on local air quality (Maritime section, “Potential of biofuels for shipping”). On the other hand in an interview entitled “LNG for the Baltic ports” Bogdan Ołdakowski, Secretary General of the BPO, tell us about a new project regarding development of a network of Liquefi ed Natural Gas infrastructure in the BSR – the seaports’ response to the 2008 revision of IMO rules.

In this issue we’re starting a new column, devoted to the energy matters vital for our region. Take a closer look at the Energy section (pp. 44-47) to fi nd out more about, inter alia, the European policy aimed at reducing GHG emissions by at least 80% by 2050. Can we do it while maintaining our competitiveness? Günther H. Oettinger, European Commissioner for Energy presents for us his voice in this debate.

With all possible scenarios for the Baltic it is best to be well-informed to make proper decisions. Aft er all, those crystallizing the shape of the market in 2020+ are already being made today.

I wish you all a very pleasant read.

Lena Lorenc

4 | Baltic Transport Journal | 2/2012

Contents

23Report

Baltic ro-ro/ferry traffi c23 Themes from the Baltic Ro-ro/Ferry Yearbook 2012 – A house on the ro-ck

13Maritime

13 A gift or a bribe? – Doing business in the BSR, the question of corruption

14 Confronting future reality – The price of sulphur reductions in Baltic Sea and North Sea shipping

18 Potential of biofuels for shipping – Limits and possibilities

20 Polish seaports in 2011 – Summary and prospects for the future

22 Safety and spatial planning in the Baltic Sea – The burden of pollution is growing

3Regular columns

3 Editorial6 BTJ Calendar of events8 Market SMS Extended10 What’s new?12 On the roads:

Limitless sky54 Events56 Collector’s corner57 Transport miscellany58 Who’s who

TransBaltic32 To forestall the future course of

events34 It’s only the beginning – Hub-and-

hinterland development in the Baltic Sea region

35 TransBaltic’s Final Conference – Crossing macroregional horizons

Baltic Ports Organization36 LNG in the Baltic ports – Interview with

Bogdan Ołdakowski, Secretary General of the Baltic Ports Organization

37 BPO Lunch Debate 2012

EWTC II38 Divine connection – Shuttling East

and West

32Newsletters

Contents


39Focus

Port strategy & investments39 Going deeper42 Management of medium-sized ports

– When partnership is the best choice

48Logistics

48 To meet the needs of mobility – European atlas on adverse weather for transport

50 Driving at new chances – Interview with Joerg Herwig and Egidijus Kazukauskas from Kuehne + Nagel

52 Green Highway: a fossil-free transpor-tation corridor – Eco is for economy

I n t h i s i s s u e

”IMO regulations on sulphur in ship fuels will cause remarkable additional costs for sea transport – USD 4.6 bln annually for commercial shipping

in the European SECA from 2015 onwards”.Dr. Jukka-Pekka Jalkanen, Juha Kalli and Dr. Tapani Stipa

Read more in the article Confronting future reality – The price of sulphur reductions in Baltic Sea and North Sea shipping, p. 14

44Energy

44 The Energy Roadmap 2050 – Is Europe ready to take up the challenge?

46 Is nuclear energy necessary? – Nuclear vs. renewable energy


BTJ calendar of events

BTJ 2/2012 (March-Apr. edition) Report: Baltic ro-ro/ferry market | Focus: Port strategy & investment

Issue distributed at:

PENTA Workshop, 18 April, EE/Tallinn, www.pentaproject.info/enPENTA is a cooperation and development project of fi ve Baltic ports: Stockholm, Helsinki, Tallinn, Turku and Naantali. The project is arranging a workshop on the implications of the sulphur regulation for maritime transport in the Baltic Sea. The speakers will address questions such as: where we are with the sulphur emission regulation right now? What changes can be anticipated? How the transport fl ows will change as a result of the stricter sulphur levels in fuel?

TransRussia 2012, 24-27 April 2012, RU/Moscow, www.transrussia.ruBeing focused primarily on cargo transportation services, the TransRussia Exhibition & Conference demonstrates a full range of industry solutions – from transport and forwarding services to software and equipment for cargo handling. The exhibition attracts leading professionals from Russia, the CIS and the Baltic Sea countries, among others. The event will discuss the most important issues in the development of the Russian transport system and new information systems, which are developed for interaction between diff erent modes of transport.

LNG Fuelled Shipping 2012, 25-26 April 2012, DE/Hamburg, www.Ing-fuelledshipping.comThe conference’s main themes will be accelerating infrastructure development and mainstream adoption of LNG. The LNG Fuelled Shipping Forum will bring together senior-level representatives from across the LNG supply chain. Thanks to numerous panel sessions and workshops, the conference will provide critical intelligence for the shipping industry on how LNG can be used as a commercially viable and long-term solution to increasing emissions targets.

2nd Scandinavian Shipping & Ship Finance Conference 2012, 25-26 April 2012, DK/Copenhagen, www.informaglobalev-ents.com/event/scandinavian-ship-fi nanceThe conference will be focused on the latest insights and opinions for some of the most important issues in Scandinavian shipping such as the world economic outlook and prospects for seaborne trade, prospects & challenges for the dry bulk, tanker and container sectors as well as charter party management in bad shipping markets and many others topics. China will be the special theme of the conference and an economic & political insight into China’s market infl uence on global shipping will be delivered.

Logistics Transport Exhibition, 9-12 May 2012, FI/Helsinki, http://mark.logexpo.fi /etusivuThe 19th Logistics Transport tradeshow will be a customer event for service providers in the manufacturing, commerce and logistics sectors, smoothing contacts between decision-makers, users and solution providers, as future delivery chains will extend the international markets right to the front door.

Baltic-Adriatic Event, 10 May 2012, HU/Budapest, www.baltic-link.seThe Baltic-Adriatic Event will be a transport and business seminar devoted to a new, green and alternative transport corridor between Scandinavia and the Adriatic Sea. Additionally, Business-to-Business meetings are planned after the seminar’s lectures and speeches.

ESPO Conference 2012, 10-11 May, PL/Sopot, www.espo-conference.comThe conference addresses two main issues: port fi nancing and investment, the most important enabling factors behind port development as well as the recently announced future EU ‘ports package’. The event will conclude with a discussion on the development of established and new port gateways in Europe. Siim Kallas, European Commission Vice-President, will give the closing keynote speech.

NOVOTRANS 2012, 14-18 May 2012, RU/Novorossiysk, www.novotrans.info/index-eng.phpIn reply to nowadays’ fi erce competition, Russia must make eff orts to provide a higher quality of services in the country’s ports and consequently develop overland infrastructure to meet the increasing throughput of freight. Participants of NOVOTRANS 2012 will discuss, i.e. how stakeholders should use Russian transport facilities in a common international network and what steps should be taken to improve Russia’s marketability.

European Maritime Day 2012, 21-22 May 2012, SE/Gothenburg, www.ec.europa.eu/maritimeaff airs/maritimedayThis year’s European Maritime Day will be dedicated to sustainable growth from the oceans, seas and coasts. The fi rst day will deliver diverse plenary sessions, while the second day will off er three sets of workshops. European Maritime Day is meant to show the importance of the sea for everyday life as well as for the economy and job creation.

RORO 2012, 22-24 May 2012, SE/Gothenburg, www.roroex.comThe only dedicated exhibition to the roll on-roll off industry is returning to Gothenburg. The meeting will gather professionals from over 50 countries, who will analyze the newest threats and opportunities accompanying the ro-ro industry, i.e. the upcoming regulations such as the Emission Control Areas (ECA) and Marpol Annex VI.

TransBaltica 2012, 22-24 May 2012, LT/ Vilnius, www.litexpo.lt/en/main/fairsThe main aim of the TransBaltica 2012 exhibition is to present Lithuania as an attractive market not only for domestic but also for foreign companies and investors. The exhibition will be divided into four main thematic groups – transport services, means of transport, transport infrastructure and intelligent transport systems and services.

BTJ 3/2012 (May-June edition) Special: Streamlining terminal operations | Report: Passenger transport | Focus: The human factor


Posidonia 2012, 4-8 June 2012, GR/Athens, www.posidonia-events.comIn 2012 Posidonia relocates to the Metropolitan Expo Centre situated within the Athens International Airport complex. It is expected to attract more than 1,800 exhibiting companies from over 80 countries, highlighting the position of Greek shipping and its commitment to renewing and upgrading its fl eet. The exhibition will host conferences and shipping association gatherings, chaired by industry leaders, debating and shaping the challenges facing the industry. Apart from business meetings, the event will also hold the Posidonia Cup yacht race and the Posidonia Shipsoccer Tournament.

Oversize Baltic, 5-6 June 2012, LV/Riga, www.ibforum.ru/conf021-eng.phpThe two-day conference will be devoted to project cargo transportation in the Baltic Sea region. The main topic will be: transit opportunities of Baltic countries, ro-ro and line services of the region and international experience in OOG transportation in the Baltic. Day One will off er plenary sessions, while Day Two will feature an excursion program ‘Meeting Riga’ as well as informal networking.

SIL2012, 5-7 June, ES/Barcelona, www.silbcn.com/enSIL2012, combining the 14th International Logistics and Material Handling Exhibition, celebration of the 10th Mediterranean Logistics and Transport Forum, 15th SIL Logistics Directors Symposium as well as the 5th Mediterranean Ports Summit, is a leading logistics exhibition in Spain and Southern Europe. The key feature of the event will be the Círculo Logístico – an exclusive space within SIL where logistics managers and directors can network and undergo business contacts with exhibiting companies.

BTJ calendar of events


TransBaltica 2012, 7-8 June, LV/Riga, www.rmsforum.lvThe main topics of the 15th International Conference “TransBaltica2012” will be dedicated to development trends and prospects of the international market of transport and transit services, forecasts of the Baltic transit sphere and transit infrastructure projects in the united Europe as well as development of stable and mutually advantageous cooperation with partners from European and Asian countries.

Transfairlog, 12-14 June 2012, DE/Hamburg, www.transfairlog.com/enThe event will concentrate on optimization of local and global international freight transport and logistics. At the Trade Fair Centre Hamburg decision-makers, experts and companies from the logistics and transport industries will participate in the showcase of products, services and solutions for day-to-day operations of present and future logistics.

TOC Container Supply Chain: Europe 2012, 12-14 June 2012, BE/Antwerp, www.tocevents-europe.comAfter a huge success last year TOC Container Supply Chain Europe will return to Antwerp Expo on 12-14 June 2012. Every visitor of TOC 2012 will have the opportunity to discover new products and suppliers, network with hundreds of industry peers, attend four high-quality conference streams set over three days and 25 unique sessions as well as attend free seminars designed to provide insight into some of the newest innovations in the industry.

2nd German-Russian Logistics Congress, June 18-19 2012, RU/Moscow, www.bvl.de/en/eventcalender/event-calendarThe 2nd German-Russian Logistics Congress intends to deepen the economic development and promote logistics in Russia through the presentation of current developments. The conference’s main topics will be – transportation networks and infrastructure supply of industries in the Russian market, integration of Russian companies in international supply chains, market development in Russia. Also best practice examples in industry, trade and logistics services will be shown.

BDF Summit and EUSBSR Annual Forum 2012, 18-19 June 2012, DK/Copenhagen, www.bdforum.org/event-callendar/bdf-summit-and-eusbsr-annual-forum-2012Under the auspices of the Danish Presidency the 14th Baltic Development Forum Summit will be arranged jointly with the 3rd Annual Forum of the EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region. The headline for this year’s event is ‘Public-private co-operation for a smart and green infrastructure in the Baltic Sea Region’. The annual BDF meeting provides a platform for leaders from governments, political parties, business, universities and civil societies to discuss cooperation possibilities and growth initiatives in the Baltic Sea region.

13th World Conference Cities and Ports, 18-21 June 2012, FR/Nantes St. Nazaire, www.citiesandports2012.com/enFrom Hamburg to Brisbane, from Los Angeles to Istanbul, stakeholders from the port cities will gather in the Nantes St. Nazaire metropolis to debate as well as confront ideas and projects so as to build together a creative and sustainable port city capable of meeting the huge economic, social, energy and environmental challenges of the 21st century.

Shortsea-Euro 2012, 19-20 June 2012, BE/Antwerp, www.navigateevents.com/events/shortsea-euro.htmlNavigate Events have been running the annual shortsea conference for five years. Shortsea-Euro is the definitive and prime gathering for the shortsea industry that regularly attracts around 200 delegates. The 2012 event will be held in the shortsea hub of Antwerp and includes a full, two-day conference programme, including bulk and unitised cargo streams, alongside with ample opportunities for networking.

BTJ 4/2012 (July-Aug. edition) Report: Baltic maritime ranking | Focus: Rail & road transport


TransBaltic Final Conference 2012, 4-5 September, CY/Paphos, www.transbaltic.euThe final conference will focus on the theme of the Macroregional Transport Action Plan, giving the opportunity to discuss about transport policy incentives for a sustainable and integrated transport network. The conference will also present a unique outlook of future transcontinental transport flows till 2030 and sum up TransBaltic’s achievements.

BPO Annual Conference 2012, 6-7 September 2012, FI/Turku, www.bpoports.comBaltic Ports Organization invites all executives interested in improving the competitiveness of maritime transport in the region, increasing the efficiency of ports/terminals, developing infrastructure and value added services, as well as extending both ashore and hinterland connections to its annual conference, this year held at and co-organized by Port of Turku.

InnoTrans 2012, 18-21 September 2012, DE/Berlin, www.innotrans.comInnoTrans, organized by Messe Berlin, is the world’s leading business meeting place for rail transport technology. A total of 2,243 exhibitors from 45 countries presented their innovative products and services to 103,295 trade visitors from more than 100 countries at InnoTrans 2010. InnoTrans 2012 will focus on railway technology, railway infrastructure, tunnel construction, interiors and public transport.

BTJ 5/2012 (Sep.-Oct. edition) Special: Future of LNG | Report: BSR container market | Focus: Contract logistics


GreenPort Congress 2012, 3-5 October 2012, FR/Marseille, www.greenport.com/congressThe 7th GreenPort Congress will provide environmental decision makers from ports and terminals with a meeting place to discuss the latest trends in sustainable environmental practice that will enable them to effectively implement the changes needed to go green and to reduce their carbon footprint. The emphasis of the Congress will be on highlighting innovation in equipment and technology whilst illustrating practical solutions through case studies. The event will comprise of a welcome reception, two-day conference (3-4 Oct.), gala dinner (3 Oct.) and a tour of Marseille and Marseille Fos Ports.

BTJ 6/2012 (Nov.-Dec. edition) Report: Break-bulk & project cargo market | Focus: Transport and ecologyIssue distributed at:

TRANSLOG Connect Congress, 28-29 November 2012, HU/Budapest, www.translogconnect.euOver two days TRANSLOG Connect Congress, the annual Logistics and Supply Chain Management event, will present itself as a platform for service providers to meet and interact with industry experts and business decision-makers from CEE through a number of pre-scheduled one-to-one meetings and networking activities. Several weeks before TRANSLOG the Meeting Scheduler Website will be available to all participants, enabling vendors and delegates to create their own personalized itinerary prior to the congress.


Market SMS extended

Port of Ust-Luga: 4.51 mln tn in I-II 2012 (+170% yoy)

Swedish ports: 141.1 mln tn handled in 2011 (-2% yoy)

Market SMS extended

Last year was very successful for the ports in Karlskrona, Sölves-borg and Norrtälje, which saw the highest yearly increases in their cargo turnover. Karlskrona rose by 78.3% to 1.78 mln tn, Sölvesborg grew by 69.8% to 1.24 mln tn and the tiny Port of Norrtälje gained 44.7% to 68 thou. tn. Moreover, in 2011, the Danish-Swedish Copenhagen Malmö port complex handled 32.2% more new cars than a year before (419,000 units), nearly reaching the pre-crisis 2008 level (427,000 units).Top 10 Swedish ports in 2011

No. Port Total turnover (mln tn) Yoy

1 Gothenburg 41.30 -6.8%

2 Trelleborg 10.88 -0.5%

3 Luleå 8.98 -3.3%

4 Helsingborg 8.14 +9.6%

5 Malmö 8.04 -16.7%

6 Karlshamn 5.67 -5.3%

7 Oxelösund 5.66 -22.8%

8 Stockholm 4.54 +2.4%

9 Gävle 4.32 +8.3%

10 Norrköping 3.64 -3.2%

Finnish ports’ container traffic: 1.4 mln TEU handled in 2011 (+12% yoy)In 2011 the biggest increase in container handlings was achieved by Port of Kok-kola, which grew by 49.2% to 18,259 TEU, then by Rauma (increase of 35.2% to 223,005 TEU) and the bronze medal went to Tornio (rise of 20.3% to 17,250 TEU). The largest downgrades took place in Port of Pietarsaari (down by 31.7% to 746 TEU), Kemi (decrease by 29.8% to 5,074 TEU) and in Raahe (a drop by 21.3% to 4,038 TEU). The biggest player on the Finnish box market, HaminaKotka, reached a level of 612,598 TEU (+19.5% in comparison with Hamina and Kotka’s results from 2010). Port of Helsinki, as the second in line, dropped by 1.9% to 392,342 TEU.

Latvian ports: 12.8 mln tn handled in I-II 2012 (+29.4% yoy)During this year’s first two months Riga’s cargo turnover reached 6.2 mln tn (+28.8% year-on-year), Ventspils handled 5.4 mln tn (+31.2%), while Port of Liepāja’s volumes totalled 1.02 mln tn (+35.4%). Also, in the January-Febru-ary time period Latvian ports achieved a rise in every major cargo category.

Container traffic Europe-Asia: 19.97 mln TEU in 2011 (+4.5% yoy)

Last year containerised exports from Europe to Asia totalled 6,052,500 TEU (+7.48% year-on-year), while imports to Europe amounted to 13,920,700 TEU (+3.3% yoy). European container trade volumes in 2011 (TEU)

Traffic with Exports from Europe Yoy Imports to Europe Yoy Total Yoy

Asia 6,052,500 +7.5% 13,920,700 +3.3% 19,973,200 +4.5%

Indian Subcontinent and Middle East 2,941,700 +8.1% 1,988,300 +9.4% 4,930,00 +8.6%

North America 3,369,100 +8.4% 2,865,600 +3.4% 6,234,700 +6.1%

South and Central America 1,489,700 +9.1% 1,653,100 +9.7% 3,142,800 +9.4%

Australia and Oceania 468,200 +5.9% 196,500 +3% 664,700 +5%

Sub-Saharan Africa 1,631,100 +21% 794,000 +7% 2,425,100 +16.4%

Intra-European container trade volumes (TEU)

Exports from Northern Europe Yoy Imports to Northern Europe Yoy Total Yoy

Intra-Europe 1,364,900 +2.5% 1,010,400 +9.1% 2,375,300 +5.2%

From January to February Ust-Luga port handled 27,184 import cars (+64% year-on-year). In the same period, the port’s dry bulk handlings totalled 2.13 mln tn (+68%), liquid cargo amounted to 1.9 mln tn (+10.7%), while general cargo turnover increased by 76.4% to 0.48 mln tn.

Big Port of St. Petersburg: 370 thou. TEU handled in I-II 2012 (+12.8% yoy)

During the first two months of 2012, Big Port of St. Petersburg handled 8.18 mln tn of cargo, raising its throughput by 2.6% year-on-year.St. Petersburg’s volumes

I-II 2012 Yoy

Dry bulk 0.73 mln tn -25%

General cargo 5.98 mln tn +14%

Liquid cargo 1.47 mln tn -16.1%

Total 8.18 mln tn +2.6%

Containers 370,337 TEU +12.8%

Major Danish seaports:83.7 mln tn handled in 2011 (+6.2% yoy)

During last year the major Danish sea-ports (all those having an annual turno-ver of about 1 mln tn or more) marked an increase of 6.2% compared to 2010 in both their total cargo throughput (83.7 mln tn) as well as in ro-ro cargo turno-ver, whose handlings reached 154 thou. cargo units. Also, container traffic in the major Danish ports rose and came to 783,000 TEU (+6.5%).

Phot

o: Po

rt of

Got

henb

urg

Latvian ports’ volumes (mln tn)

I-II 2012 Yoy

Dry bulk 6.1 +46.1%

Liquid cargo 4.7 +21%

General cargo 2.0 +9.3%

Total 12.8 +29.4%

Phot

o: A

DP

Phot

o: B

PSP

Market SMS extended


Port of Hamburg: 238 thou. TEU in feeder traffic with Poland in 2011 (+33.3% yoy)

Last year Hamburg port saw an increase of 33.3% year-on-year in feeder traffic with Poland as well as growth by 38.7% (1.07 mln TEU) in trade with Eastern Europe.

HHLA: 7.1 mln TEU handled in 2011 (+21.3% yoy)At the same time Hamburger Hafen und Logistik’s intermodal volumes amounted to 1.9 mln TEU (+11.3% year-on-year).

Stena Line (Gdynia-Karlskrona): 80,922 cargo units carried in 2011 (+6.1% yoy)

During 2011 Stena Line carried 434,927 passengers on the Gdynia-Karlskrona route (+15.4% yoy) as well as 78,893 pax cars (+9.4% yoy). Last year the whole ferry traffic be-tween Poland and Sweden amounted to over 380 thou. cargo units (+10.1% yoy), over 1 mln passengers (+10%) and more than 300 thou. pax cars (+11.6% yoy).

Port of Kunda: 1.83 mln tn handled in 2011 (+10.3% yoy)

Last year the Estonian Port of Kunda marked an overall year-on-year rise of 10.3%, mainly due to a 23.9% in-crease in handlings of its dominant product – round timber, which totalled 846,959 tn.

Unity Line: 63.6 thou. trucks carried in Q1 2012 (+6.5% yoy)

After the first three months of 2012, Unity Line has carried more lorries, passen-gers and pax cars than in the same period last year. Only the transportation of busses is still on a downward trend (-34% yoy to 101 coaches), chiefly due to fact that passengers increasingly prefer to use their own cars.Unity Line’s trucks, pax, cars and busses volumes

2012 Trucks Yoy Passengers Yoy Cars Yoy Busses Yoy

January 20,019 +8.6% 21,895 +2.2% 9,324 +5.6% 34 -26.1%

February 20,719 +9.3% 16,400 -0.1% 6,647 +6.9% 24 -40%

March 22,845 +2.5% 21,806 +20.9% 8,992 +22.6% 43 -35.8%

Total 63,583 +6.5% 60,101 +7.6% 24,963 +11.5% 101 -34.0%

A d v e r t i s e m e n t

Phot

o: H

HM

Phot

o: U

nity

Line


What’s new?

Construction works at Port of Bronka, a multifunctional marine cargo complex located in the new freight dedicated area within Big Port of St. Petersburg, have been resumed. Pile foundations for berths 5 and 6 are currently being constructed and should be placed in May. Earlier a 1 km long dike of the perimeter was raised, so that workers can proceed with the renourishment of 85 ha of artificial land along with dumping 2 mln m3 of sand and silt, which will enable construction of the main buildings and facilities. Ulti-mately Port of Bronka will offer three specialized facilities – a con-tainer terminal covering 107 ha, 57 ha ro-ro terminal and a 42 ha

logistics centre. The container terminal will have 1.45 mln TEU of annual capacity and a 1,175 m long waterfront with five berths for panamax container ships, while the ro-ro terminal will have a 630 m long waterfront with three berths and will be ready to handle 260 thou. of cargo units per year. The first ship calls are expected in 2014.

Transforming waste into bioenergy

Hamworthy’s acquisition by Wärtsilä has become effective. Hamworthy specializes in providing high-tech equipment and systems to the shipping industry as well as systems that improve process efficiency and environmental compliance in the oil and gas industry. Most recently, Hamworthy furnished the first com-mercial operated ro-ro vessels with scrubbers, so that the ship meets the impending in 2015 ECA regulations.

Unieveem Estonia (a subsidiary of Katoen Natie) is going to build a ware-house and distribution complex in Muu-ga Harbour (Port of Tallinn) at a cost of EUR 16 mln, by the first quarter of 2013. In the first stage the company plans to construct a 25,000 m2 complex, mainly for cocoa beans and other cocoa-based semi-finished goods.

Maersk Line cuts capacity on its Asia-Europe link

UPM, running business in the areas of e.g. energy, pulp, forest and timber, is going to build a new biorefinery in Lap-peenranta (Finland). The plant is going to use crude tall oil and produce approx. 100 thou. tn of advanced second gen-eration biodiesel (UPM BioVerno). The investment will total about EUR 150 mln and should be completed in 2014. Since UPM runs its own pulp mills in Finland, the new biorefin-ery will utilise raw materials from them. The EU target is to increase the share of biofuels in transport to 10% by 2020, while at the same time Finland wants to achieve a level of 20%. The yearly production of UPM’s biorefinery will cover approx. ¼ of the country’s target.

Metrans (rail subsidiary of HHLA) is going to build a new container rail ter-minal in Česká Třebová (180 km east of Prague). In the first phase the rail port will have the capacity to serve about 150 trains per week as well as to store 4,500 TEU. The terminal, to kick-off in sum-mer 2012, will be able to handle block trains with the possibility of direct cargo transhipment from one train to another. The estimated cost of the investment is EUR 20 mln and is co-funded by the EU. Metrans links Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary and other states of Eastern Eu-rope with ports in Germany.

As a result of oversupply of container ships plying on the Asia-Europe trade lane, beating container freight rates to an unsustainably low level, the company is removing 9% of its vessel capacity from this route. To proceed with the reduction, Maersk Line has signed a sharing agreement with CMA CGM. Maersk Line and CMA CGM will merge their respective AE11 and MEX services into one new AE11/MEX (operating 12,500 TEU per week from the first week of April) covering trade from the Far East to and from Spain, France and Italy. To cover the Mediterranean hubs, Maersk Line and CMA CGM will also merge their AE20 and FAL9 services into a new AE20/MEX3 service, starting from the last week of March with a weekly capacity of 9,500 TEU.

Port of Gothenburg has expanded its RailPort Scandinavia shuttle system by add-ing three new destinations – Oslo, Sundsvall and Jönköping. The system offers 3-5 di-rect departures each week. By extending its rail service, Gothenburg port has connec-tions with Stockholm/Södertälje, Norrköping, Gävle, Borlänge, Helsingborg, Västerås, Vaggeryd, Sundsvall, Nässjö/Torsvik, Karlstad, Åmål, Kristinehamn, Avesta, Hällefors, Insjön, Örebro, Eskilstuna, Jönköping, Åhus and Oslo. Last year 374,000 TEU out of the overall 887,000 TEU was transported to Gothenburg’s container terminal (+1.4% year-on-year) via the RailPort Scandinavia rail shuttle system. Moreover, the Swedish Trans-port Administration is going to invest EUR 390 mln into new tracks and a new railway bridge across the Göta Älv river. Construction works are scheduled to begin in 2014, four years earlier than the previous plan assumed.

Expansion of the Gothenburg’s rail shuttle system

Ongoing development of Bronka port

The state of Lower Saxony has assented the adjustment of the navigation channel on the Lower and Outer Elbe. Now as the three involved states – Ham-burg, Schleswig-Holstein and Lower Saxony – have agreed to deepen the navi-gation channel, the Waterways and Shipping Directorate North and the Free and Hanseatic City of Hamburg will prepare the final planning approval docu-ment. The draft of the approval must be displayed by the end of June. After completion, vessels with a draft up to 13.8 m will be able to visit Port of Ham-burg independent of the tides and up to 14.8 m dependent on the tides.

Elbe’s navigation channel to be deepened

The Finnish government has inked EUR 20 mln for the development of the Suik-kilantie road, leading to and from Port of Turku. The construction works, aimed at increasing the road’s capacity by widening it to four lanes, are to commence during this spring and the whole stretch from the port to Highway 8 is estimated to be completed in 2014. Meanwhile, Turku port is going to modernize its operations by buying a precision crane and demolishing three old stationery cranes. Mantsinen’s precision crane, worth EUR 1 mln, will arrive in the port in mid-June. The new Hy-briLift crane moves on tracks and will be located in the inner harbour where it can handle bulk material and other goods in a large area.

Port of Turku develops

The European Commission has granted EUR 161.3 mln to 26 projects within the Trans-European Network of Trans-port (TEN-T). The grants went to 15 European Rail Traffic Management System (ERTMS) projects (altogether EUR 103.3 mln), seven Motorways of the Sea (MoS) proposals (EUR 47.8 mln) and to four projects within the framework of the River Information Services (RIS) with a total budget of EUR 10.2 mln. Among BSR countries 13 projects are to receive funds, i.e. LNG in Baltic Sea Ports, On Shore Power Supply, Green Bridge on Nordic Corridor along with Facilitating and speed-ing up ERTMS deployment.

TEN-T funding granted

Phot

o: Po

rt of

Bro

nka

What’s new?


The company has es-tablished a new and weekly container service between ports of Gothenburg and Tilbury. Small 500 TEU ves-sels operate on the new link, transporting mainly wine and other alcoholic beverages, along with food, ceramics and tiles from the Iberian Peninsula, since in the UK the cargo can be transhipped to and from Bilbao port.

Port of Pori was added to Contain-erships’ shortsea network on March 1st. The new weekly service connects Pori with the ports of Södertälje, Klaipėda, Teesport, Sheerness and Gh-ent. Further connec-tions to Rotterdam, St. Petersburg and Ireland are possible via transhipment.

The European Commission has approved the acquisition of the ro-ro terminal situated in Port of Gothenburg. Älvsborg Ro/Ro AB is going to be transferred to DFDS and C.Ro Ports at the beginning of May. In October 2010 both companies signed a 25-year agreement with the port to operate the ter-minal, but the deal was investigated by the Swedish Competition Authority, which then referred it to European Competition Authorities. Since the institu-tion raised no objections, the path to take over the terminal has been cleared.

Polen Line has signed a social package with the workers union of Pol-ferries, opening the way to privatize the company. Polen Line is a new en-tity on the Baltic ferry market; the company is a consortium led by Swedish House. Currently, Polferries operates three ro-paxes sailing on two routes between Poland and Sweden: Gdańsk-Nynäshamn and Świnoujście-Ystad.

Maersk Line has added Port of Hamburg to its AE-6 string. Mathilde Maersk (9,700 TEU capacity) inaugurated the extension of the company’s link, berthing at Eurogate Container Terminal Hamburg on 24th of March. The AE-6 Asia-Europe Service is operated in combination with the TP-6 Transpacific Service, with a total of 14 vessels that have a container capacity of 9,500-9,700 TEU.

Maersk Poland has set up two dedicated rail services in the country between Deepwater Container Terminal Gdańsk (DCT). The first links the termi-nal with Schavemaker’s termi-nal in Kąty Wrocławskie (Maersk Amber Express) and the other with Euroterminal Sławków in Southern Poland (Maersk Baltic Express). Both services run two times a week in both directions, carrying boxes from Maersk’s AE10 service as well as from feeder links. Their timetables are synchronized with the arrivals of Maersk’s container ships in Gdańsk.

Maersk expresses rail

The new rotation of the Asia Europe Loop 3 service will be: Shanghai-Ningbo-Shekou-Singapore-Rotterdam-Bremerhaven-Gothenburg-Rotterdam-Jeddah-Hong Kong. Earlier on Gdańsk was enclosed as well in the Alliance’s network as the second Baltic port.

Changes in G6 Alliance’s port rotation

AAA Intermodal has launched a 114 TEU train between Klaipėda and Moscow. The distance between Klaipėda and Russia’s capital will be covered in two days. Containers will be loaded on railway platforms in Port of Klaipėda’s terminals, while the train will be stacked in Draugystė railway station. In Russia the train will be served in the Ecodor container terminal as well as in the Silikatnaja railway station.

Klaipėda-Moscow new rail service

The company has ex-tended its Swedish market coverage by setting off a new string – SWB 1. The new weekly rotation links ports of Bremerhaven, Hamburg, Södertälje and Klaipėda.

At the beginning of April Spliethoff launched a new and direct service from Port of Wilming-ton (North Carolina, USA) to Baltic General Cargo Terminal Gdynia (BTDG) situated within Gdy-nia port. The company plies on the route once a month, using S-type vessels. The ships have 21,000 DWT and feature five sideloaders with 16 tn of working load as well as three cranes with 120 tn of lifting capacity each (240 tn when working in tandems). The new service accommodates break bulk, dry bulk as well as project cargo.

From USA to Poland

MacAndrews links Gothenburg and TilburyBBC Chartering has kicked off a new heavy lift cargo service between Europe and Asia. The new string offers bi-weekly sailings to Asia and de-parts every three weeks to Europe. In Europe BBC’s vessels call loading ports in Rauma, Kristiansand, Hamburg, Antwerp, Bilbao and Porto Mar-ghera, while in Asia the ships discharge at the ports of Klang/Singapore/Batam, Ho Chi Minh/Hai Phong, Hong Kong, Shanghai, Masan/Busan and Kobe/Yokohama. On the way from Asia to Europe, BBC Chartering loads cargo in Masan, Yokohama, Shanghai and Singapore and discharges at the European ports of Mariupol, Genoa, Bilbao, Antwerp and Hamburg.

‘BBC Euro-Asia Express Line’

Team Lines’ new service


On the roadsOn the roads

Limitless sky

P aul Ehrlich, a biologist from Stanford Uni-versity, claims

that when somebody tries to convince us that the economy is able to grow ad infinitum, that person must be an idiot or an economist. I agree with him to a certain extent, as I graduated from the Transport Economics faculty some years ago. Looking at different forecasts, future market analyses as well as visions of the world after 2050 and beyond, seem to indicate that our destiny is probably safe, but it depends on many different and sometimes mutually exclusive circumstances. I am not going to dive into multiplied discussions whether ‘to predict or not to predict’; people will make prognoses based either on pure speculations or scientific calculations no matter if we like it or not. I don’t want to isolate myself in a space capsule either, set off on a far-away journey or follow Dante’s travels through Hell and Purgatory to reach Heaven from the other side. I am not that brave and do not have that much time; I am no Sir Richard Branson.

Having that in my mind I started to consider the real limits of the Box-vessels F1 Race we may be witnessing in the 21st cen-tury. The direct stimulus to such reflections was the relatively short but significant case of G6 calling at DCT Gdańsk, which was performed with no single call. The whole story took place in Q1 2012 – the set-up, the hook and the sting, like in the fa-mous movie directed by George Roy Hill with an unforgettable cast featuring Redford, Newman, Shaw and Durning. Most of you know the movie and most of you know this case.

I would like to focus on a more broad-minded perspective, which was, according to my opinion, the very reason for the G6 to come into being; that is, the ‘one vessel capacity’ rate. We may now be witnessing a never-ending beauty contest between The Big Three: Maersk, MSC, CMA CGM and the rest of the world. The scope of this race is to reach the biggest unit size of a ship, excellent in all her possible dimensions, compatible with all the limits, which are having more and more popular acronyms, like COx, SOx, etc., and most probably various others in the near future. One variable is constant – she must bring profit.

We all know that the twenty ships in the 18,000 TEU fleet are going to be ready in the next

couple of years. There have been announcements in the serious shipping press that 21,000 TEU

projects are already on the designers’ drawing boards. These floating jumbo CFS have to be loaded and discharged somewhere in the shortest possible time, which leads us to a

crucial point.Port terminals are the gates to the

hinterlands – in a time when cargo is still King, the consignee is the party marking out the Kingdom’s boundaries. Bearing in mind container ships’ dimensions, port operators have an open dilemma – how far should they go with the terminal capacity in particular locations. Should they go hand-in-hand with the shipown-ers or just leave the problem to the ship-ping society – let them find a solution how to get the cargo to its final destina-

tion. This case is more complex and there isn’t enough space here to discuss it. Looking from the portside, the question may be: do the shipowners demand too much from the ports?

Looking at what happens in the major locations I would say: not yet; terminals in the biggest and busiest port cities are ready to do a lot to accept even the biggest vessels. The answer is more difficult in regions like the Baltic Sea – the gate is limit-ed by the Danish Straits and the 15.0 m draught is the ultimate figure ports should be ready for. And, some of them are already in top form. Those that are not are making all efforts in order to be ready in the shortest possible time. The target is not only ocean-going vessels but also the cascade of feeder-class units big enough to make the terminals ready to spend comparatively huge amounts of money.

We are living in a time of crisis and the market has become more complex than ever. The players are more diverse and their motives are more varied. The upshot of it all is that the balance between risk and reward has shifted against investors with an indication to the sea ports. It is simply not possible to move a terminal from its place of construction with the same ease in order for a vessel to start a new journey.

I reckon that the next ten years in the Baltic Sea region will answer whether the seventh sky will be enough to stabilize the market and have an influence on the selection of major play-ers on both sides. Today it is still too early to determine all winners and losers. One thing for me is sure: the landmark and very tough decisions that will crystallize the shape of the market in 2020+ are already being made today. And, the most important law of an old’ marketing code, Philip Kot-ler’s, is more valid than ever: the first is the best. �

Krzysztof Urbaś

The landmark and tough decisions that will crystallize

the shape of the market in 2020+ are already being made today.

Maritime


Doing business in the Baltic Sea region – the question of corruption

A gift or a bribe?The differences in the social acceptance of bribery are deeply rooted in history and religion, even for con-siderably small parts of Europe. Reducing the discrepancies among countries of the Baltic region still needs

decades of education before these legal regulations can be unified.

During your travels through Egypt, Turkey or any Middle Eastern country you can be sure to come across the word baksheesh, usually

whispered to you in a hushed tone by hotel staff, taxi drivers, clerks with a forced smile, eager toilet attendants, restaurant waiters and even policemen. A baksheesh can mean a tip, a bribe, or a charitable gift; however, it usually refers to a combination of all three. It is not simply a method to take advantage of wealthy tourists or businessmen, but is actually a part of Middle Eastern tradition. In European cul-ture there are great legal and ethical differenc-es between them, but a bribe is always a crime committed by both the taker and the giver. One can be imprisoned for up to 10 years if prosecuted, subject to the amount, form and intention. However, the difference between a gift and a bribe is as liquid as cognac, which can easily be one of these.

Since 1995 Transparency International (TI) has been publishing an annual ranking of countries “by their perceived levels of corrup-tion, as determined by experts’ assessments and opinion surveys” called the Corruption Perception Index (CPI). It defines corruption as “the misuse of public power for private ben-efit.” The CPI ranks 182 countries worldwide “on a scale from 10 (very clean) to 0 (highly corrupt)”. The index was produced by Johann Graf Lambsdorff of the University of Passau, but the details of methodology have changed over time. The 2010 CPI draws on 13 differ-ent surveys from 10 independent institutions, such as the World Economic Forum, the World Bank, the African Development Bank, the Asian Development Bank, the Economist Intelligence Unit and others. To appear on the list each country must be assessed by at least three sources.

Corruption in the BSRBetween 2002-2011 the first five (with the

highest indices) countries on the TI ranking have not changed. New Zealand opens the list with 9.5 points. The next are: Denmark (9.4), Finland (9.4), Sweden (9.3) and Sin-gapore (9.2). For the first decade of the 21st century the highest indices were given by ex-perts to Finland (9.9 in 2002, and 9.7 in 2003

and 2004, the highest ever, but since the sources of ranking change, comparing cor-ruption over time using CPI is very hard). The next group of countries, marked on the list in green (indexes over 8.5), consists of: Norway, the Netherlands, Austria, Switzer-land and Canada. When we look at the Bal-tic region countries we will notice that the whole region has one of the lowest levels of corruption in the world. The CPI of Ger-many (listed as 14th) figures 8.0, Estonia (29th on the list) – 6.4, Poland (41st) – 5.5, Lithua-nia (50th) – 4.8, Latvia (61st) – 4.2, and Rus-sia (143th) – 2.4. The average for all Baltic countries (6.6) is one of the highest among the regions in the world, comparing to index 6.1 for Australia and surrounding islands, 4.1 for North America, 3.8 for Mediterra-nean countries, and about 2.0 for the Middle East, South America, the Far East, and less than 2.0 for Africa. However, the CPI for the Baltic area is still lower than for the North Sea region (8.8 in 2011).

There are two main reasons for this low level of corruption in the Baltic region. The study published in 2002 shows a very strong correlation between the CPI and black mar-ket activity, as well as an overabundance of legal regulations. There is also a highly sig-nificant correlation between the Corruption Perceptions Index and real domestic product per capita. The poorest countries are at the end of TI’s list, in red.

Global problemIn a broader context the most corrupt

business is international shipping, mostly because of its worldwide scale. For centuries bribes have been so common here that they have become a regular part of transactions in some regions of the world. It is confirmed by the latest corruption scandal at the Brit-ish Petroleum Tanker Chartering Division in March 2012, when serious allegations were made towards BP Chief Executive, Bob Dudley. It appeared that the line between a fee and a bribe was often very thin. The same holds true when we talk about gifts.

What to do then? Differentiating be-tween accepting gifts and improper bribes can be done in several ways, as by a general

rule prohibiting any gifts, invitations or courtesies or by establishing situational guidelines on the acceptance of gifts, which may be justified on policy grounds, such as to fund or pursue training or development programmes. The differentiating can also be based on the nature of the gift. According to this, meals or invitations to a ribbon-cutting ceremony may be acceptable, while a leisure resort weekend would be forbidden. Similar to the above, one way is by imposing a ceil-ing on the market value of gifts. In the United States of America exceptions to the accept-ance of gifts under the Ethical Conduct for Employees of the Executive Branch include gifts with a market value of USD 20 or less, provided that the total value of gifts received from the same person does not exceed USD 50 in one year.

Bribery is an international problem and, according to the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (1977) and the UK Bribery Act (2011), commercial organizations may be vulnerable to prosecution if they carry on doing business or part of it in the USA or the UK, irrespective where the bribery takes place. Despite the gen-eral rules each country has specific regulations and institutions of control. In Scandinavia, where a zero-tolerance policy is standard, pre-venting corruption is assigned to commercial organizations and companies like trade coun-cils and development agencies. In other Baltic countries combating bribery is the domain of government divisions, as federal ministries (of justice, economics and technology) in Ger-many, or the Central Anticorruption Bureau established in 2006 in Poland. The differences in social acceptance of bribery run so deep and are based on old traditions and religion, that it is impossible to reach one international standard, even for parts of Europe. Reducing the differences between Baltic countries (with Catholic, Lutheran and Orthodox churches, and traditional democratic and post-commu-nist societies mixed) needs decades of educa-tion before trying to unify legal regulations. It has been proven that increasing anticorruption standards is possible, but it depends on social acceptance of a zero-tolerance policy. �

Marek Perzyński


Maritime

The price of sulphur reductions in Baltic Sea and North Sea shipping


There is no doubt that the requirements set for SOx Emission Control Areas in the MARPOL Annex VI of the Interna-tional Maritime Organization will increase the cost of maritime transport. How much and who will be hit depends on many factors, such as fuel consumption, feasibility of scrubber retrofitting and the adoption of alternative fuels.

In an attempt to decrease the harmful effects of sulphur emis-sions, sulphur limits for maritime fuels were agreed upon at the 58th meeting of the Marine Environment Protection Commit-tee of the IMO in October 2008. The largest benefit from the

sulphur reduction in the Baltic Sea area comes from the decrease in detrimental human health effects. Elevated atmospheric concentra-tions of particulate matter (PM) contribute, e.g. to cardiopulmo-nary and lung cancers and may lead to premature death. According to a 2009 AEA study “Cost Benefit Analysis to Support the Impact Assessment accompanying the revision of Directive 1999/32/EC on the Sulphur Content of certain Liquid Fuels”, each disease case and death carries a very high price tag for Europe outweighing the increased cost of the low sulphur fuel by a factor of 3.6-11 on a Eu-ropean level, depending on the geographical area applied and the chosen method of sulphur reduction. Generally, the high cost sce-nario involves switching the whole fleet to low sulphur fuel and the low cost scenario(s) involves the installation of emission abatement techniques. In the case of SOx reduction, sulphur scrubbers seem to be the most viable option.

Emissions from shipping inside the European SECAs (Baltic Sea and the North Sea including the English Channel) in 2009 are illustrated in Table 1. These emissions were obtained from real vessel movements reported by the Automatic Identification System (AIS) and using the Ship Traffic Emission Assessment Model , (STEAM) of Jalkanen et al.

Tab. 1. Emissions of Baltic Sea and North Sea shipping in 2009

Component Baltic Sea, kilotons (ktn)

North Sea/English Channel, ktn

European SECA, ktn

SOx 100 194 294

NOx 382 652 1,034

CO2

19,500 29,700 49,200

CO 64 87 151

PM 28 52 80

Fuel consumption 5,734 9,693 15,427

In July 2010, the maximum allowable sulphur content in marine fuels was reduced from 1.5% to 1.0% (weight to weight) in SECA countries that have ratified the revised IMO Annex VI. Further, from Jan. 1st, 2010 a requirement for the use of 0.1% of sulphur (0.1%S) fuel in SECA port areas became effective. Together these actions decreased SOx and PM emissions by 20% and 9% in the Baltic Sea area, respectively. Removing all sulphur from marine fu-els will not eradicate PM emissions completely, because there exists components of PM which are not linked to fuel sulphur content. The overall trend of sulphur emissions from shipping is gradually decreasing and sulphur emissions have been practically eliminated from fuels of other modes of transport (Directive 2009/30/EC). Stringent limits for marine fuel sulphur content (0.1%S, w/w) will be introduced in the SECA areas as of Jan. 1st, 2015. The Mediter-ranean Sea will not be included, but passenger vessels in all EU wa-ters are already now required to use 1.5%S fuel outside port areas. It is expected that this limit will be decreased further to maintain consistency with the MARPOL Annex VI limits by revising the EU sulphur directive accordingly.

Mitigating the costs of SECAThe increase in fuel costs will have the largest impact on vessels

with high fuel consumption. These include ro-ro, ro-pax and con-tainer carriers, which together consume almost half of the fuel used by Baltic Sea and North Sea shipping. The role of these vessels be-comes even more distinctive if the total fuel consumption is divided by the number of ships in each ship class. For ro-ro/ro-pax vessels the additional costs of the low sulphur fuels per vessel will be the highest. In the North Sea SECA the majority of the cost will fall on container vessels, though the cost per vessel will still be the highest among ro-paxes. Equipping these vessels with sulphur scrubbers, if technically feasible, will be the most cost-effective way of minimiz-ing the cost of sulphur reductions. The cheapest and quickest way to reduce fuel consumption is to travel at a lower speed, which several ship owners were already doing during the recession. In the Baltic

Phot

o: Lo

tos

Maritime


Sea there exist less than 400 ro-ro/ro-pax vessels and about 350 con-tainer vessels. In the North Sea the corresponding numbers are 900 and 1,400, respectively.

The use of high sulphur heavy fuel oil (HFO, up to 3.5% sulphur by mass) in vessels which use the sulphur abatement technique to meet the SECA requirements should be allowed in the revised sulphur directive.

Economic impact of fuel switching in 2015According to our results, fuel consumption of all shipping in the

European SECA is about 15.4 mln tn (Tab. 1). Ships generally use heavy fuel oil (HFO). However, due to the 0.1%S limit in ship fuels at berth in EU ports, has increased the usage of middle distillate oils (mainly marine gas oil <0.1%S, MGO) in auxiliary engines. There are no detailed statistics on what the share of distillates could be but we estimate it as 10-20% (based on personal communication with Niklas Hagström, Teboil and Varpu Markkanen, Neste Oil) from the total fuel consumption. On the basis of this, in the beginning of 2015, demand for MGO will increase more than 13 mln tn (which represents close to 7% of the total EU gas oil demand in 2008, Euro-stat) if sulphur scrubbers are not used.

Additional costs will arise when ships have to change from the HFO to MGO in 2015. MGO is considerably more expensive and practically the only conventional marine fuel which fulfils the stringent criteria. Note that the application of the 2020 global limit of 0.5%S instead of the 0.1%S requirement on SECAs is not going to be a viable solution either. Some heavy fuel oil is available with a sulphur content of less than 0.5% but not nearly enough to operate the whole European SECA fleet (per-sonal communication with Niklas Hagström, Teboil). Thus, the 0.5%S limit in the SECA would have led to the similar additional costs that we are facing now with the 0.1%S limit.

The additional costs of fuel switch can be estimated by multiplying the current HFO consumption with the price difference of HFO and MGO. The price difference was about USD 300 per tonne in January 2012. Thus the additional costs of the new regulations will be close to USD 3.3 bln in 2015 in the Northern SECA, if the traffic and fuel price difference remain constant. The fuel price projections described later on show a price difference of USD 417 in 2015. This price development would lead to an additional cost of USD 4.6 bln in 2015 in this area.

Ship fuel prices in the futureForecasting ship fuel prices is challenging but it is estimated that

the price difference between HFO and MGO will increase in the fu-ture. This is mainly due to assumptions that the crude oil price will continue to increase, and the demand for middle distillates continues to grow mainly due to shipping. It can also be assumed that the refin-ery industry is not likely to invest in the production of middle distil-lates in Europe in the near future even if demand is growing [Avis and Birch (2009)]. At the same time the demand for HFO will decrease, hindering its relative price increase in comparison to middle distil-lates. One of the biggest open questions is the market penetration of exhaust gas scrubbing that would continue the demand for high sul-phur HFO and would diminish the investment need of refineries.

These assumptions lead to forecasts where the price difference be-tween marine fuels generally used today and the middle distillates used after 1.1.2015 will grow. Avis and Birch (2009) estimated that an MGO under 0.1%S would cost USD 250-300 more than HFO under 1.5%S in 2015. We have created price projections (Fig. 1) for ship fuels to estimate the additional costs of fuel switch and the potential of scrubbers to de-crease the additional costs. According to the scenario, the price difference between the MGO and HFO1.5 would be USD 450 per tonne in 2020.

Travemünde

Hamburg

Bremen

Göteborg

Kalmar

Rostock

Berlin

Trelleborg

Helsingborg

GERMANY

SWEDEN

BALTIC SEA

The directway for yourfreight

Faster to Scandinavia with TT-Line: Drive-through system ¬ 6 RoPax ships ¬ up to 14 departures daily ¬ up to 33,800 lane metres

TT-Line Cargo, Zum Hafenplatz 1, 23570 Lübeck-Travemünde, Germany, Phone +49 (0)4502 801-149, Fax -174, [email protected], www.ttline.com

10342 TT Cargo AZ engl. 184x118 4c.indd 1 24.04.12 10:32


Maritime

Fig. 1. Price scenarios of marine fuels (all values in USD per metric tn)

Exhaust gas scrubbingThere are several different types of sulphur scrubbers designed for

maritime use today. Due to the low salinity of the Baltic Sea, seawater scrubbers might face technical problems when used in this area. A closed loop scrubber is not dependent upon the sulphur absorbing character-istics of seawater and is thus suitable for use in the BSR. However, it is slightly more expensive than a seawater scrubber. Furthermore, many shipowners would prefer to leave the scrubber sludge at port, and there-fore require port reception facilities for the scrubber sludge.

We have estimated the potential of the closed loop scrubbers to decrease the additional costs of fuel switch after 1.1.2015. The equipment cost of the scrubber is estimated based on the installed engine power of a ship (Fig. 2.). However, the total investment costs are higher due to installing costs which are assumed to be 50% of the equipment costs. There are also other capital and operational costs which have been taken into account similarly as in Reynolds (2011) . Capital costs are assumed to be 5%.

Fig. 2. Engine power vs. equipment cost

Two calculations are presented, both based on the fuel consump-tion of individual ships in the European SECA areas from the 2009 results of the STEAM model. First, the maximum additional costs are calculated assuming that the MARPOL Annex VI compliance is achieved by fuel switch only. Second, the potential of scrubbers to decrease the additional costs is estimated (Fig. 3.). In the second case it has been assumed that a scrubber is installed if a ship has a fuel consumption of more than 2,300 tn per year (an iterated value representing the minimum consumption after which the additional costs increase again) inside the SECA area.

Fig. 3. Predicted annual additional costs of the SECA fleet (Baltic + North Sea) due to MARPOL Annex VI sulphur reduction requirements

Results show that 1,162 ships pass the criteria of the 2,300 tn consumption limit in SECA traffic on which the scrubbers are assumed to be installed. Additional costs in 2015 would be USD 2.8 bln. The decrease in additional costs is about 40% (which represents the maximum potential of scrubbers) compared to the fuel switch scenario (USD 4.6 bln). It can also be seen that additional costs become negative after 2025 (assuming that the global limit will drop to 0.5%S leading to worldwide use of middle distillates). Reynolds (2011) recommends that ships having more than 4,000 tn consumption inside SECA areas per year should consider scrubber installation. With this assump-tion there are 517 ships passing the criteria still decreasing the additional costs by 35% compared to fuel switch. These cal-culations do not take the possible traffic growth or efficiency increase into account.

MaritimePh

oto:

Wall

eniu

s Wilh

elmse

n

Maritime


Bookyour place

now!

12-14 June 2012Antwerp Expo, Belgium

The port-centric container supply chain event

Meet the people who own, move & handle large volumes of containers

www.tocevents-europe.com

� High-level Conference� Free Trade Exhibition� Free Seminars � Port Tour � Networking

Industry Supporters:

Internet Zone Sponsor: Premier Association Partner:

Market Intelligence Partner:

Badge Sponsor: Conference sponsors:

Global Sponsor: Official Sponsoring Publication:

Registration Desk Sponsor:

Associate Sponsor: Coffee Break Sponsor:

Discussion and conclusions

M A R P O L Annex VI regula-tions on sulphur in ship fuels will cause remarkable additional costs for sea transport. These costs can be estimated to be about USD 4.6 bln annually for com-mercial shipping in the European SECA (the Baltic, North Sea and English Channel)

from 2015 onwards, with the projected fuel price difference. Costs would be mainly borne by ships with large annual fuel consump-tion inside the SECA.

Exhaust gas cleaning with scrubbers can be a cost-efficient solu-tion for hundreds of ships in SECA traffic to decrease their opera-tional costs. Installing scrubbers in 500 ships with the largest fuel consumption in the area can decrease the overall additional costs by about 35%. However, this solution can only aid the industries which are mainly using the same ships for their import and export actions. The fuel switch is more of an economical solution for ships that rarely visit the SECA area. Installing the scrubber in these vessels will become more attractive when we are closer to the global limit

of 0.5%S which is planned to realize in 2020 or 2025.The internalization of scrubbers will affect the fuel price in the

future. The refinery industry needs a consumer for the high sulphur heavy fuel oil and so far this has been found in the marine sector. Changing procedures in the refinery sector to lower the amount of produced HFO and to produce new marine fuels will require heavy investments. Thus, marine fuel prices are very difficult to forecast. Both the marine sector and the refinery sector are monitoring each other’s developments in order to evaluate the need for investments to prosper in the changing operational environment. �

Jukka-Pekka Jalkanen, Juha Kalli, Tapani Stipa

Jukka-Pekka Jalkanen, Ph.D ([email protected]) is a senior scientist at the Finnish Meteorological Institute and the main developer for the maritime emission model STEAM. Juha Kalli ([email protected]) is a researcher at the Centre for Maritime Studies at the University of Turku. Tapani Stipa, Ph.D. ([email protected]) is initiator and leader of the BSR InnoShip project and a number of other maritime transport development projects. This work is a contribution to the BSR InnoShip project partly funded by the EU (Baltic Sea Region Programme).

1 J.-P. Jalkanen, A. Brink, J. Kalli, H. Pettersson, J. Kukkonen and T. Stipa, A modelling system for the exhaust emissions of marine traffic and its application in the Baltic Sea area, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 9 (2009) 9209-9223; J.-P. Jalkanen, L. Johansson, J. Kuk-konen, A. Brink, J. Kalli and T. Stipa, Extension of an assessment model of ship traffic exhaust emissions for particulate matter and carbon monoxide, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12 (2012) 2641-2659.

2 Avis M.J., Birch C.H. (2009), Impacts on the EU refining industry & markets of IMO specification changes & other measures to reduce the sulphur content of certain fuels. Purvin&Gertz Inc. Prepared for: Directorate General Environment.

3 Reynolds, K.J. (2011). Exhaust gas cleaning systems selection guide. Ship operations co-operative program. The Glosten Associates. Feb. 2011. USA.

Phot

o: N

orde

n


Maritime

Potential of biofuels for shipping

Limits and possibilities

Biofuels are globally available; they can be produced from many abun-dant types of biomass, and they can be optimized to match existing

distribution channels and applications of fuels in all forms of transport. To determine the potential of biofuels for ships, Ecofys has prepared a report, based on an analysis of collected data through literature review, its own expertise and experiences, direct communication with EMSA, research pub-lications, market developments and con-sultations with relevant stakeholders in the shipping market.

The world of biofuelsThe most commonly used and produced

biofuels are biodiesel (from oil containing ag-ricultural crops) and bio-ethanol (from sugar or starch containing agricultural crops). The market for biofuels for transport was created mostly through national and European poli-cies, setting targets for renewable fuels and energy within the Renewable Energy Direc-tive (RED). There is an obligation within the RED to stimulate and convince the market to switch to biofuel (blends); almost all of them are currently consumed within the road transport sector. On the other hand, the avia-tion sector recently finished its orientation within the biofuel market and is now focusing on new production facilities for higher qual-ity fuel from new biomass resources (algae for biofuels) in order to reach their market set ambitions. The shipping sector is still in its early stage of orientation towards biofuels. Several applied R&D projects and tests are known, although the shipping market is also looking at other alternatives to replace fossil marine fuels which are increasing in price.

Marine fuel marketThere are different types of marine fuel; a

distinction is made between residual (heavy) and higher quality distillate fuels. Current practices in bunkering show that ships are usually fuelled for a longer period of time (up to 70 days with on-board storage in multiple tanks), making it a time-consuming process

Biofuels could become a solution in lowering carbon intensity in the propulsion of ships and, having no sulphur content, reduce the effect of ship emissions on local air quality. Therefore, the European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA) is currently evaluating if and how biofuels can be used in the shipping sector.

Maritime

and an expensive transaction for ship own-ers. Currently, up to 50% of all operational costs can be attributed to fuel.

The construction and operation of mer-chant ships is controlled by a wide range of leg-islation. The primary international regulatory mechanism for controlling ship emissions to air is IMO’s MARPOL Annex VI, Regulations for the Prevention of Air Pollution from Ships. Also, the Energy Efficiency Design Index is in-stalled to stimulate ship design towards higher power efficiency and overall lower carbon emissions. The industry has a generic fuel standard (ISO 8217) but all responsibilities for the fuel quality and quantity lie with the ship owners (little to no liability towards the fuel suppliers or bunker parties). Use of biofuels in ships is generally not taken into account in legislation or it is limited to a very small extent (in the case of the ISO standard).

Engine manufacturers play an important role in the introduction of biofuels, as they must provide a guarantee that the engines they produce will run on fuels with specific properties. MAN B&W Diesel along with Wärtsilä, both significant engine suppliers, are manufacturers with a lot of experience in bio-fuels for stationary power generation. Marine engines have a typical proven lifespan, ranging from 10 years (for high speed) to over 20 years for low speed engines. The robust technology even allows them to stay operational up to 50 years, if maintained properly.

Biofuel case analysisFrom the long list of different biofuels

currently on the market, six biofuels have been selected for further review and analysis:• Biodiesel to replace Marine Diesel Oil

(MDO)/Marine Gas Oil (MGO) in low-to-medium speed engines (used in tug boats, small cargo ships);

• Dimethyl ether (DME) used to replaceMDO/MGO in all types of engines (all sizes of cargo ships);

• StraightVegetableOil(SVO)usedtoreplaceIntermediate Fuel Oil (IFO) or Heavy Fuel Oil (HFO) in low speed engines (all sizes of cargo ships);

• Bio-LNGorbio-methaneingasenginesus-ing Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG);

• Bio-ethanolusedinhighspeedmainoraux-iliary engines (short distance ships, ethanol tankers, or for electricity production on-board such ships as cruise and passenger ships);

• Pyrolysis bio-oil in low speed engines (allsizes of cargo ships).Biofuels in general have a lower energy

density than marine fuels; they also have a different overall density depending on the type, meaning on average that a higher quan-tity of biofuels is needed to meet the same final energy content as with conventional fossil marine fuels. Depending on the type they can be easily (drop-in fuels) or with huge modifications (newbuild, long-term) used in the shipping sector. Although not many practical experiences of using biofuels in ships have taken place, technical compat-ibility of biofuels with marine engines seems high and integration manageable.

From a technical integration point of view, the small percentage of biodiesel blends with MDO/MGO seems to be the most promising fuel for shipping, along with 100% replacement of HFO by Straight Vegetable Oils, due to their excellent compatibility with current engines and supply chains. Aside from the limited application of bio-ethanol in diesel engines, the investments needed in the supply chain seem manageable, although less favourable than for biodiesel and SVO. DME and bio-LNG are still upcoming tech-nologies, which at this point have limited biomass feedstock availability. Also, more investments are needed in the fuel supply chain in order to introduce these fuels. For newbuild ships these fuels seem more prom-ising. Presently, pyrolysis oil is not seen as a viable alternative to fuel ships.

The position of biofuel blending (with bunker parties or on-board ships) is still be-ing debated. From an organizational point of view, it would be best at this point to blend the biofuels at bunker level, in order to have one Bunker Delivery Note per fuel supply with all specifications. Ship owners are not in favour of on-board blending, seeing it as an extra activity that needs their attention. Blended (low sulphur) bio/fossil marine fuels bought at a bunker station can easily follow the current sampling practice and little to no alteration (depending on the type of biofuel) is needed to the supply chain. Also, within the RED it will be the bunker parties that would have an obligation to deliver biofuels to the market. Furthermore, the technical integration at the bunker station would be easier and would benefit an economy of scale if on bunker level.

Maritime


Turku

www.portofturku.fi

Choose the expressway between east and west.

Meet us at RORO 2012

21-24 May in Gothenburg,

stand number 713.

Biofuels are in most cases more expensive than fossil fuels, due to higher production costs and lower economies of scale. Th e obligation within the RED forces the fuels market to buy and introduce biofuels anyway. Th e higher costs are integrated within the overall fuel price in a transport market segment. If Member States allow, in their national translations of the RED, biofuels to be introduced into the ship-ping sector to meet their obligations, biodiesel in ships may become equally or even more cost-eff ective than what’s currently available for the road sector, based on the perspective of the obligation owner. It could also be the case that biofuels are cost-eff ective and benefi cial if sulphur restrictions increase for marine fuels, especially in case of cheaper and widely avail-able biofuels, such as straight vegetable oils and biodiesel. Several niche market options have been identifi ed and could lead to a faster intro-duction of biofuels in ships, if additional policy is implemented. Th ese include passenger and cruise ships, intra-EU ships and off shore sup-porting vessels within the EU.

ConclusionsTh ere is a market for biofuels to be intro-

duced in ships based on current policy and support schemes, high operational costs and environmental benefi ts. Th e most relevant

parameters limiting the potential of biofuels today are: availability, technological develop-ment, technical integration, and operational consequences. According to Ecofys, the main barrier that should be addressed is the fact that the market incentives in place (obligation within the Renewable Energy Directive, and the sulphur restrictions within the MARPOL legislation) are aff ecting diff erent market par-ties in the marine fuel supply chain. Bunker parties could be aff ected in the fuel obligation, where ship owners are responsible for meeting the lower sulphur content in their used fuels and for other environmental impacts of their shipping (such as spills, waste, etc.) and will also have the exposure benefi ts of green imaging or profi ling. Additionally, ship owners producing biofuels themselves or cooperating with new biofuel entries in the marine market could be a threat to the larger players in the conventional market which are involved in both fossil fuel supply as well as shipping.

To accelerate the introduction of biofuels in the shipping sector, it is recommended to intro-duce a separate fuel standard for biofuels to use in ship engines. Experiences in road transport

and aviation show that such a dedicated fuel standard accelerates market acceptance. Th is way a clear signal to the market is given on how to make the industry more climate neu-tral and with a better environmental perform-ance in terms of air pollution and spills. Also, guidelines for the blending of biofuels, either on bunker level or on-board ships, could help the shipping sector to switch to biofuels in order to comply with lower sulphur restrictions.

Ship owners and bunker parties in their turn should defi ne a strategic pathway to tackle the coming changes in the bunker fuel market. A long term vision and strategy is of utmost importance. An important role in this re-po-sitioning and setting up of new supply chains is given to the port authorities as clusters of the diff erent fuel industries. EMSA could play a mediating role in this multi stakeholder de-bate and encourage the market towards a sus-tainable transition. It is recommended to start with the larger market groups where introduc-tion of biofuels could also have green profi l-ing benefi ts, such as the cruise and passenger ships and large container carriers. �

Lena Lorenc

This article is based on the report “Potential of biofuels for shipping” written by Anouk Florentinus, Carlo Hamelinck, Arno van den Bos, Rob Winkel and Maarten Cuijpers of Ecofys, by order of the European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA).


Maritime

Polish seaports in 2011

Summary

In 2011, despite the economic growth (+4.3%) and the increasing commer-cial exchange (approx. +15%) in Po-land, no signifi cant changes were observed in the total trade volumes of the largest seaports. Handling a total of 62.57 mln tonnes, they re-corded a drop of 0.3% year-on-year.

Signifi cant changes in the handling structure were, however, observed. Th e port that gained the most last year was Gdynia, which served ap-

prox. 1.1 mln tn more cargo than in the year before (+8.0% yoy). Th e Szczecin and Świnoujście port complex has also increased its turnover (by +2.5% yoy). On the other hand, Gdańsk recorded nearly a 7% drop in cargo handlings (-1.9 mln tn); nonetheless it still remains the largest seaport in Poland.

ContainersIn 2011, total container trade volumes

in the seaports increased by nearly 30%, reaching a level of 1,357,182 TEU. Th e larg-est share of this growth was observed by the Port of Gdańsk, where the Deepwater Container Terminal (DCT) is in the leading position (629.3 thou. TEU handled). Sec-ond-placed BCT Baltic Container Terminal in Gdynia fell behind, with handlings at a level of 361.9 thou. TEU. Gdynia Container Terminal (GCT) ranked third (246.7 thou. TEU). Smaller terminals – Gdańsk Contain-er Terminal (GTK) as well as DB Szczecin – recorded drops in handlings (-29.3% and -2.5% yoy, respectively).

Ro-ro cargoTransport of passenger cars increased in

2011 by 6%, whereas the operation of freight units by ferry lines rose by 9.2%. Th e highest growth was observed in the main Polish ferry port – Świnoujście, operated by carriers such as Polferries and Unity Line.

Tab. 1. Handlings in the largest Polish seaports, 2007-2011 (thou. tn)

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011/2010 change

Gdańsk 19,826 17,781 18,863 27,182 25,305 -6.90%

Szczecin-Świnoujście 18,652 19,216 16,498 20,843 21,354 +2.45%

Gdynia 17,025 15,467 13,257 14,735 15,911 +7.98%

Total 55,504 52,464 48,618 62,760 62,571 -0.30%

Annual change -0.57% -5.48% -7.33% +29.09% -0.30%

Tab. 2. Container handlings in the largest Polish seaports, 2008-2011 (TEU)

2008 2009 2010 2011 2011/2010change

Gdańsk 185,651 240,623 508,587 685,643 +34.8%

Gdynia 610,767 378,340 485,255 616,441 +27.0%

Szczecin-Świnoujście 62,913 52,589 56,503 55,098 -2.5%

Total 859,331 671,552 1,050,345 1,357,182 +29.2%

Tab. 3. Spatial structure of the Polish container seaport service market, 2008-2011 (TEU)*

2008 2009 2010 2011**

Transshipment 7,275 1,343 284,582 383,621

Domestic market 852,056 670,209 765,763 973,561

Total 859,331 671,552 1,050,345 1,357,182

* Source: Actia Consulting and “Transport – activity results, 2008-2010”, GUS (Central Statistical Offi ce), Warsaw.** Calculation based on shares recorded for year 2010.

Tab. 4. Ro-ro ferry transport in the largest Polish ports, 2010-2011

Passenger cars Freight units

2010 2011 2011/2010change 2010 2011 2011/2010

change

Świnoujście 183,488 194,340 +5.9% 252,846 282,953 +11.9%

Gdynia* 72,096 78,893 +9.4% 76,271 80,922 +6.1%

Gdańsk 41,644 41,802 +0.4% 25,387 23,343 -8.1%

Total 297,228 315,035 +6.0% 354,504 387,218 +9.2%

* Only Stena Line

Tab. 5. Regular passenger traffi c in the main Polish seaports, 2009-2011 (persons)

2009 2010 2011 2011/2010change

Świnoujście 515,516 523,224 499,920 -4.5%

Gdynia 389,227 412,912 467,965 +13.3%

Gdańsk 147,877 155,953 147,965 -5.1%

Total 1,052,620 1,092,089 1,115,850 +2.2%

Tab. 6. Cruise traffi c in the Polish ports, 2010-2011

Tourists Callings at port

2010 2011 2011/2010change 2010 2011 2011/2010

change

Gdynia 125,928 78,418 -37.7% 85 56 -29%

Szczecin-Świnoujście 12,000 7,860 -34.5% 114 99 -15%

Gdańsk 8,378 6,787 -19.0% 26 21 -5%

Total 146,306 93,065 -36.4% 225 176 -49%

Moreover, in 2011 Gdańsk operated 42,712 new cars, the majority of which (87%) were imported. New cars were also operated in Gdynia, BCT, which handled 14,927 cars.

MaritimePh

oto:

DB

Port

Szcz

ecin

and prospects for the future

Maritime


This article is extracted from Actia Consulting’s report “Polish Sea Ports in 2011”. Actia Consult-ing specialises in market research within the area of transport, infrastructure, energy, Euro-pean projects and business consultancy. The company is a part of Actia Forum Ltd.

Ferry line passengersLast year’s results indicate an insignifi-

cant growth in passenger traffic (+2.2%), along with some major changes referring to the spatial structure of its distribution.

Growth in passenger traffic in Gdynia followed mainly from transport carried out by the operator Stena Line (Gdynia-Karl-skrona route), whereas Port of Świnoujście recorded a drop by -4.5% year-on-year (-23.3 thou. passengers).

Cruise ship operation2011 proved to be much worse than the

previous years. Tourist traffic dropped by 1/3, reaching a level of 93 thou. passengers. The leading Polish tourist port, i.e. Gdynia, suffered the greatest loss.

Prospects for 2012The situation of the Polish seaports will

depend, to a great extent, on the global con-ditions. The pace and manner of solving the problems within the eurozone, the standing of the biggest world economies, and geogra-phy of trade flows will establish the leading tendency. Development of trade between Poland and the Far East countries (the aver-age for the last five years was +35%) and de-velopment of ocean container connections enhancing the role of Port of Gdańsk, as a

Baltic hub, will directly influence future changes. The basic threat is the competition from North Sea ports which, owing to the intermodal transport development, are increasingly better connected with the southern areas of Poland.

Despite the continuing high price of coal on the global markets (approx. USD 116-124 per tonne), domestic export of this fuel recorded a significant drop last year and its import also proved lower. Therefore, there are no clear grounds for the future changes on the markets.

After the promising beginning of 2011, a strong collapse was faced following the practical dis-appearance of Russian crude oil in the external port in Gdańsk. It is hard to expect a significant improvement in 2012, as the second largest Russian fuel terminal in Port of Ust-Luga, which is intended to operate up to 25 mln tn of liquid cargo per year, is at the stage of start-up.

Port investmentsInvestment projects implemented in 2011 were mainly the continuation of works carried out

with support from European funds. To the greatest extent, it refers to the infrastructure of access to ports from the land side (i.e. South Bypass of Gdańsk, A1 Motorway, modernisation of CE-65 railway line), as well as internal infrastructure in the seaports. Construction of an external port and the LNG terminal in Świnoujście are also being continued.

Plans for 2012 cover commencement of works related to construction of the Pomeranian Lo-gistic Center in Gdańsk and construction of the grain quay in Port of Szczecin and ferry position No. 1 in Świnoujście. Works are currently being carried out in Port of Gdynia under a new devel-opment strategy aimed mainly at obtaining a greater port depth (15.5 m).

2012 will also be the year that two port companies are up for sale: Port of Gdynia Authority plans to sell Baltic General Cargo Terminal Gdynia (BTDG), whereas the Port of Gdańsk Authority is putting Port of Gdansk Cargo Logistics (PGE) up for sale. �

Dr. Maciej Matczak, Bogdan OłdakowskiActia Consulting


Maritime

Safety and spatial planning in the Baltic Sea

The burden of pollution is growingIn the Baltic we have about 2,000 ships at any given moment, and the trends are pointing at an increase in traffic by as much as 100% in the coming 20 years. Several other maritime-related industries will also grow substantially by 2030. Will the Baltic Sea collapse?

Let’s take a closer look at the present situation. There are a little more than 100 reported shipping accidents every year in the Baltic Sea of which

some 10% lead to spills. In the Baltic proper, we have so far been lucky with the fact that those annual and recurring spills have been fairly small and have not been located close to extra sensitive areas, even though leak-age and small accidental or illegal discharges cause tens of thousands of casualties among birds every year. As these sensitive areas have no extra protection, by routing or surveil-lance, it is all about luck – and luck tends to run out at some point. In the Skagerrak and Kattegat on the other hand, we have had ac-cidents with larger spills and deaths every year. We clearly remember Langeland, Full City, Goðafoss and most recently a collision in Danish waters, which several days later led to an almost 1,000-tonne spill on the coast of Sweden – with the Swedish coast guard seemingly taken by surprise.

A healthy marine ecosystem is quite ca-pable of coping with a medium oil spill as the majority of oil will decompose in one way or another within a couple of months or half a year, depending on weather and temperature. Animal and plant populations affected may recover once the oil is gone – as long as new individuals of the same species can replace the lost ones. This is in a healthy eco-system, and assuming that all populations and species are balanced. However, the Baltic Sea is one of the most polluted seas in the world, the level of heavy metals in the sea floor is several times higher than that of the North Sea and eutrophica-tion is so high that the entire ecosystem is affected. Furthermore, the Baltic Sea is over-fished and is the end point of runoff from some 90 mln people. The resilience of this ocean is far from what it once was. With the present regime, the Baltic is swiftly heading to a point of no return.

Let us then take a look at other modes of transport. On wheels we have organized traffic with strict routes (roads), separation, speed limits, traffic lights and surveillance in the forms of cameras and police. On rail we have even more extreme routing and advanced

traffic management systems keeping track on precise timetables. On wings we have a routing scheme that has gone from fixed to dynamic routes and with advanced traffic management systems to provide maximum safety. On keel we have… “The Law of the Sea” which is based on a 17th century con-cept that everything outside gunshot dis-tance from land is free for all. Basically, any-body can sail anywhere carrying anything. Even though things have started to happen, like traffic separation schemes and report-ing systems like GOFREP with increased surveillance, the maritime safety doctrines are lagging behind other transport modes, and staying behind what is necessary to en-sure adequate protection and coexistence with the marine environment of the Baltic Sea. Finally, what the future shipping in-dustry must take into consideration is the fact that they will not be alone in the oceans anymore. This fact is especially apparent regarding coastal waters. Offshore wind en-ergy is expected to grow by several thousand percent over the next 20 years while, during the same time, tourism is expected to grow rapidly, resulting in coastal constructions, cruising, boating, leisure fishing, etc. Add-ing to that other kinds of physical exploita-tions and pressures on the environment, it all leads to even greater demands in envi-ronmental consideration and stronger pro-tection of areas. There are plenty of activities in which shipping and maritime authorities need to evolve.

The first is Freedom of the Sea. It is an obsolete term and shipping, just like any other industry and activity field, must take part in and adjust to spatial planning. Mar-itime Spatial Planning (MSP) is a necessary tool, which can be used to help facilitate the fair and sustainable use of limited re-sources. We have already learned the grave cost of failed spatial plans on land.

Heavy-trafficked areas, like the Baltic Sea, must be covered by an analogue to the advanced traffic management systems of air traffic. There are a number of existing strate-gies like anomaly detection, dynamic route planning and reporting schemes that need to be carefully merged together with dy-namic avoidance of protected and sensitive areas and the concept of maritime spatial planning. Increased VTS coverage has been defined (the BRISK project within the Hel-com framework) as one of the most effective ways to reduce the risk of accidents.

An area to be avoided does not neces-sarily need to be closed during the entire year to all vessels. Optimally, in order to minimize the impact on shipping and en-sure adequate protection of the environ-ment, only some kinds of vessels would have to keep clear from the area during some part of the year, depending on the character of the eco-systems that needs protection. Combined with an advanced traffic management system, this will lead to a decreased frequency in accidents due to higher traffic quality as well as a lower level of environmental damage in the case of a spill thanks to the less environmentally harmful location of the accident.

Risk assessment projects (like BRISK), should serve as a base for intensified re-gional shoreline oils spill response coop-eration, taking into account that the risk for a large-scale oil spill is possible wher-ever maritime transport is carried out and weather conditions may make it impossi-ble to respond to the spill offshore.

If industry can adapt to the needed changes outlined above, shipping will ben-efit and demonstrate that it has the poten-tial to be a superior mode of transport, also from an environmental prospective. �

Mattias Rust, WWF

WWF is one of the world’s largest and most experienced independent conser-vation organisations, with almost 5 mln members and supporters and a global network active in some 100 countries. WWF’s mission is to stop the degradation of the planet’s natural environment to build a future in which humans live in harmony with nature. For more information about the organizarion’s activity in our region please visit www.panda.org/baltic.

Baltic ro-ro/ferry traffi c

Report



Half of the processed material which fl ows via Baltic ports passes quays on tyres and only one fi ft h is moved in con-tainers. If we take into account the intra-European mari-time trade only, the diff erence is more striking because even

break-bulk cargo is carried by ro-ro ships and boxes constitute less than 10% of general cargo in short-sea shipping. In the case of trade between countries which don’t exchange raw materials such coeffi cients can be even higher (see Tab. 1.).

When reading through states and ports’ statistics one should remember that cargo loaded using sto-ro technology usually is la-belled as lo-lo and oft en harbour rolling stock is counted together with containers. Th e latter is of Swedish practice, yet in 2011 in this country, all units other than road vehicles amounted to 24% of all unitised cargo. In such a way fi gures showing the importance of ro-ro technology for European maritime trade are cloaked.

Tab. 1. Main intra-Baltic ferry routes

Route Ro-ro cargo [mln tn] Part of total maritime trade1

Sweden-Germany 14.8 60%

Sweden-Denmark 8.8 55%

Finland-Germany 7.4 52%

Denmark-Germany 5.3 43%

Sweden-Finland 4.5 30%

Sweden-Poland 4.0 50%

Remarks:1 In relation to 2010 volumes

The modern world is fastened by container ships, but this rule does not apply to the inside world of both the Baltic and North Sea regions. Here the most important ships are passenger-car ferries, now abbreviated as ro-paxes, and their closest relatives – ro-ro, con-ro and ro-lo cargo vessels.

Themes from the Baltic Ro-ro/Ferry Yearbook 2012

Phot

o: Vi

king L

ine

Ferry shipping is also a social phenomenon, since most often it combines cargo and passenger traffic, which is not only a re-sult of necessity, but constitutes a part of the waterside society’s culture, especially in Scandinavia. Today in the Baltic most peo-ple travel by sea not for the sake of work, but for fun, so cruising and entertainment are crucial segments of the ferry business.

In such circumstances the ferry and ro-ro business is a mat-ter of great numbers. About 150 mln tn of cargo get through the ports and 85 mln passengers pass gangways annually. Five hundred single ferry trips are on their route every day (ships on the Helsingborg-Helsingør service alone cross the Øresund about 120 times in 24 hours) and 500,000 lane metres for cargo and private cars are at cargo holders’ hands daily! We are talking about direct services to/from/within the Baltic Sea (see the sup-plementary map poster), skipping southern parts of the North Sea and further western European areas.

Operators and shipsOur ranking lists 117 passenger-car ferries (113 in 2010)

and 74 ro-ro cargo vessels (77 in 2010; but please note the re-marks under the tables. Two cargo vessels are now included in Tab. 2. because of their integration in ro-pax services). The sec-ond group also includes ro-paxes which are formally passenger ships but carry only lorry drivers. On the other hand, ships tai-lored only for trucks and their motorists are rated along with cruise ferries if they are open for motorised passengers. The total gross tonnage of ro-paxes has grown since our last year ranking (BTJ 3/2011) by a mere 0.3% and ro-ro ships by 4%.


Report

Tab. 2. Ferry fl eets of Baltic operators

Operator Ferries GT[thou.]

Lanemetres [thou.]

Pax[thou.]

Finnlines 14 505.7 33.4 4.8

Tallink Silja 11 472.2 12.2 28.1

Scandlines1 19 349.3 24.3 16.7

Stena Line2 10 316.6 20.2 13.6

DFDS Seaways 10 262.6 20.0 7.0

Color Line 6 250.1 7.5 12.5

Viking Line3 6 195.7 5.4 13.9

TT-Line 6 179.4 14.5 2.9

Unity Line 7 139.8 10.4 3.4

Destination Gotland 4 71.7 3.5 4.5

St. Peter Line 2 71.7 2.1 4.3

Polferries 3 67.0 3.7 3.1

Færgen 7 53.9 2.9 5.9

Eckerö4 3 47.7 2.6 3.6

Smyril Line 1 36.0 1.8 1.5

Fjord Line 2 22.4 0.7 1.6

Kattegat-ruten5 2 20.6 1.2 1.5

Mols-Linien 3 13.6 0 1.7

RG Line 1 10.3 0.9 0.3

Total 117 3,086.3 167.3 130.9

Remarks:1 Including Stena Line’s ships under Scandlines’ brand2 Including a cargo vessel supporting Gothenburg-Frederikshavn service3 Excluding Cinderella (GT 46.389) operating as a cruise ship4 Including a cargo vessel supporting the Tallinn-Helsinki service5 Including HSC Dolphin Jet planned to start in May

Traditionally, our census as well as the supplementary Baltic ro-ro/ferry map poster exclude ships and services of purely a passen-ger character (i.e. Linda Line, Christiansøfarten) and short cruises (Birka Line, Ånedin Line), although they call at Åland Islands due to their tempting tax regulations. Th is rule also excludes one ves-sel of Viking Line – Cinderella. On the cargo side we have also ex-cluded specialized industrial ro-ro operators working exclusively for the Nordic paper industry (Holmen, M-Real). Th is year we have included the car-carrier UECC because some of its services have a regular character and are open for rolling cargo other than new cars (some of UECC’s ships are converted from conventional ro-ros).

Tab. 3. Ro-ro fl eets of Baltic operators

Operator Ships GT[thou.]

Lanemetres[thou.]

DFDS Seaways 12 335.9 42.9

Transfennica 11 232.8 26.1

Finnlines 11 223.3 28.7

UECC 5 112.5 2.6

TransAtlantic 4 88.0 9.5

CldN 4 86.4 9.2

UPM Seaways 7 74.3 10.6

SCA Transforest 3 60.5 6.3

North Sea Ro-Ro 2 46.5 5.2

Scandlines 2 41.0 4.3

Anship 2 40.8 3.5

Swedish Orient Line 2 40.5 4.3

Tallink Silja 2 30.9 3.0

Power Line 1 21.2 2.2

Mann Lines 1 18.2 2.3

Sea Cargo 2 16.7 2.7

Lillgaard 1 6.0 0.8

Total 72 1,475.5 164.2

A small change has also occurred in the limits of our census. Aft er numerous consultations we decided to clarify where exactly the Baltic region ends for ro-ro sector. We now include all Danish and Swedish ports (also the ones in the North Sea) to the Baltic statistics, as practi-cally all of their turnover is destined to their home markets (in the Baltic region). On the other hand, wo no longer count any ports in the German North Sea coast. Th is for example means exclusion of one DFDS Seaways ro-ro service between Cuxhaven and Immingham, as well as some mi-nor alterations in classifi cation. Yet, both last year and the beginning of 2012 did not bring signifi cant changes to the Baltic and North Seas ferry trade. Two small companies ceased to operate. Baltic Scandinavian Lines and its service between Paldiski and Kapellskär joined DFDS Group and HelOx’s pure ro-ro service (Helsinki-Oxelosund) was terminated. Th e company subsequently sold the route’s vessel.

But the list of operators is longer than one year before because – ex-cept for adding UECC – two new brands emerged. German FRS Group bought two of Mols-Linien’s ro-pax vessels and resumed the Aarhus-Ka-lundborg service with one of them. Th e old-new service is now branded Kattegat-ruten and in May will be strengthened by the fast catamaran Dolphin Jet. Another player, North Sea Ro-Ro, started a pure cargo link between Gothenburg and Killingholme, operating two sister ships of 2,600 lane metres each.Tab. 4. Top 6 operators – total gross tonnage

Operator GT [thou.]

1 Finnlines 729.0

2 DFDS Seaways 662.5

3 Tallink Silja 503.1

4 Scandlines 390.3

5 Stena Line 316.6

6 Color Line 250.1


Phot

o: D

FDS

Phot

o: Ec

kerö

Line

Report


Tab. 5. Top 6 operators – total lane metres

Operator Lane metres [thou.]

1 DFDS Seaways 62.9

2 Finnlines 62.1

3 Scandlines 28.6

4 Transfennica 26.1

5 Stena Line 20.2

6 TT-Lline 14.5

Tab. 6. Top 6 operators – passenger capacity

Operator Pax [thou.]

1 Tallink Silja 28.1

2 Scandlines 16.7

3 Viking Line 13.9

4 Stena Line 13.6

5 Color Line 12.3

6 DFDS Seaways 7.0

Some minor changes have taken place regarding the network. For example St. Peter Line has included Helsinki to its Stockholm service, DFDS Seaways has opened a new Kiel-Sassnitz-Ust-Luga ro-pax and rail service link, Power Line has ceased its Travemünde-Kotka service, while TransAtlantic did the same with its ‘Route 61’ (Rauma-Gävle). We should remind about one ending, too, included in our 2011 map, namely Tallink Silja halted its Helsinki-Rostock service and chartered 20090130_Advertisement Transfennica_landscape_3mmBleed.pdf 1/30/2009 3:55:49 PM


Esa TorstenssonCEO at Hangö Stevedoring

Has the idea of combining ro-ro and containerized cargo – for which i.e. Transfennica ordered special ships – passed the exam?Transfennica’s con-ro vessels have been call-ing at Port of Hanko for some 4-5 years and we can only say good things about their performance. These vessels are excellent for

the stevedores to operate – you can easily have four ro-ro gangs and two lo-lo gangs operating simultaneously. The height of the ro-ro decks are perfect also for forest industry products to be loaded as sto-ro, as this combination of cargo is common and absolutely vital for regular liner services here in Finland. Thanks to the ships’ features, a good level of the productivity of cargo operations is achieved, so that turnaround times can be kept according to schedule. Also, when the vessels are performing well at open sea and are 1A ice-classed these are extra advantages for the shippers as well.

In light of the impending IMO regulations in 2015, what future lies ahead for long distance ferry connections? Will both pax and cargo fl ows cascade to shorter routes?These regulations are forcing Baltic Sea shipping into a new era. Industries in Finland are expecting to get an extra bill which is estimated to be around EUR 500 mln per year. This is why they are now all looking very carefully for alterna-tives to do less shipping or possibilities to sail on shorter routes. These devel-opments are not benefi tting the port industry in Finland. As a result there will be less ports and more centralizing in fewer ports. If that will be the case, our opinion is that Hanko is the winner, because we have the shortest sea route to and from Finland.


Report

Phot

o: M

ols-

Linien

both Superfasts to Stena Line for its Irish Sea network.Among major investments are Finnlines’ vessels of the

Finnbreeze class – the largest pure ro-ros sailing in the Baltic (3,326 lane metres). In fact these ships belong to a new subcategory of cargo vessels because of their hoistable decks for better utilization of capacity in case new cars are to be carried. Four were delivered, the next two will be completed in the second half of 2012. Two new ro-paxes were introduced by DFDS Seaways (Scottish Viking and Watling Street) and other investments are in the pipeline – Scand-lines will shortly change both vessels on its Gedser-Rostock route (Berlin and Copenhagen from P+S Werften in Stralsund). In Sep-tember 2012 Fjord Line will receive the first of two cruise ferries built by Bergen/Gdańsk (Stavangerfjord) and is going to start a new service from Hirtshals to Langesund. In the northern Baltic Viking Line is waiting for Viking Grace (delivery planned for January 2013) and most recently in February Eckerö Group bought Moby Freedom which will replace Norlandia on its Tallinn-Helsinki service.

Interesting things also happened in the HSC niche. After last year’s delivery of Leonora Christina, the first catamaran in the Baltic whose GT is over 10,000 and can carry trucks (300 lane metres), Mols-Linien purchased the catamaran Norman Arrow from LD Lines and will employ it in May, probably selling two of its smaller units. Ex Norman Arrow is slightly bigger than Leonora (GT 10,503 versus 10,371) but its capacity for trucks is almost double – 560 lane metres, which equals 32 articulated lorries.

Peder Gellert PedersenExecutive Vice President Shipping Division of DFDS A/S

Intermodal services are smoothly developing across Eu-rope, i.e. Sweden is investing in rail connections between its ports. Isn’t it a threat to long distance (Bothnian Bay-western Europe) ro-ro links?If inland connections between ports are to improve and if the proper infrastructure is deployed, then yes – long distance ro-ro

links and their cargo are threatened to go from ships onto rail. But there is one more condition to be met, maybe the most vital, namely cooperation between rail companies. For now competi-tion between them has helped to run ro-ro businesses and we at DFDS Seaways have been able to offer competitive services, both in terms of speed and costs. Worth mentioning is also the case of capacity and its restrictions. The rail infrastructure is split between many parties, both serving pax and cargo traffic, which to some extent binds the railway companies and makes them inflexible.

In light of the impending IMO regulations in 2015, what future lies ahead for long distance ferry connections? Will both pax and cargo flows cascade to shorter routes?The IMO regulations are a major threat to the ro-ro and ferry in-dustry as well as another factor that can boost the modal shift, not only on roads but also on rail tracks, which in turn will speed up the possible process of vanishing long distance ro-ro services. Just im-agine fuel prices going sky high by 50%, increasing the whole ro-ro transport chain costs by 20-25%, too. The shipping industry will be no match for overland connections and, i.e., sea links going paral-lel to land will be hurt very much. It’s also very likely for cargo and pax flows to cascade to shorter routes. Nonetheless, the ro-ro and ferry operators are not doomed past year 2015, as there are some vi-able solutions. DFDS is testing scrubber technology that can – after further developments – help to mitigate the risk in relation to IMO rules. But not all ships are able to install scrubbers and there’s no chance of all operators fitting them by 2015. LNG also has a future, but not for now, as there’s no infrastructure. Last but not least, road hauliers have adapted to successive European fume regulations, shipping lines can do the same.

Volumes in ports and on decksComing to the volumes we should have reservations about

the numbers dealing with freight – most of them are well rounded due to the character of the cargo, imprecisions and gaps in statistics. As was aforementioned, rolling cargo is

Report

Phot

o: Vi

king L

ine

Report


Report

measured according to different rules. Units other than road vehicles are often classified together with containers or not counted at all. Precise and credible data come from traffic on short routes with fast turnarounds in terminals only because in such circumstances road vehicles make up most of the cargo.

Björn BoströmManaging Director at Port of Ystad

Last year the transportation of rail carriages on ferries between Finland and Sweden came to a halt. Will this sce-nario repeat itself in the south of the Baltic?Being the Managing Director of a proactive environmental-concerned port, soon with the world’s largest High Voltage Shore Con-nection (HVSC) in service, I do believe that

environmentally-friendly transport solutions will have a great future, even when the market for the time being is somewhat slow.Port of Ystad is today Sweden’s second largest rail ferry port. Several production companies have a high standard and policies regarding the environment. Transportation is one of the most important parts where profiling is essential for their brand. Railway transportation is often required as it is the most environmentally-friendly land-based way to transport goods, of course depending on volumes and dis-tance. For rail transports from Sweden to continental Europe there are three ways at present – the fixed link via the Øresund bridge and rail ferries to Germany and Poland.Today, most of the railway goods pass via the fixed link. On the other hand, the market demands alternative solutions and routes out of a competitive perspective, but also from a safety view as it would be a disaster for the industry not to have more than one alternative in case of disruption. It is also very important not to stress the environment by allocating all volumes in only one corridor. I am sure that there will be rail carriages for many years to come on the south Baltic.

On the other hand, on long services pure ro-ro ships are often stuffed with sto-ro cargo only and not a single tyre is stowed in the hold. As a matter of fact ro-ro traffic has its own modal split which divides cargo into one company, port or even in one ship. This rule is exemplified in Finnlines’ Annual Report 2011 which counts 2.2 mln “tonnes of freight not possible to measure in units”. This means that about 20% of cargo trans-ported by the company’s ships is classified by a port’s statistics together with general cargo or break bulk lo-lo. New cars are another example of cargo which is hard to measure together with other units or even to compare with them.

Phot

o: St

ena L

ine


Report

Tab. 7. Ro-ro cargo in the Top 10 Baltic ports in 2011

Country Port Ro-ro cargo [mln tn]

Cargo units [thou.]

1 DE Lübeck 16.3 893

2 SE Trelleborg 9.4 634

3 DE Rostock 7.3 494

4 SE Gothenburg 7.0 444

5 FI Helsinki 6.6 520

6 SE Stockholm1 6.2 422

7-8 DE Puttgarden 6.1 365

7-8 DK Rødby 6.1 365

9 SE Helsingborg 4.9 442

10 DK Helsingør 4.0 388

Remarks:1 Data for Stockholm include Nynäshamn (1.2 mln tn) and Kapellskär (2.6 mln tn)

In 2010 our first Baltic ro-ro & ferry map showed 67 ferry ports – 60 located in the BSR, six in Norway and one in the UK. Additionally, pure cargo ro-ro services listed 13 ports in the Baltic and direct links to 17 ports in Western Europe. Now the amount of ferry ports and cargo-only ports outside the Baltic remain the same, but the number of ro-ro ports in the Baltic has decreased to 11. Gävle, as well as the aforementioned Ox-elösund and Piteå, have lost scheduled services and Husum has once again been included in SCA Transforest’s services. In the North Sea changes in Mann Lines’ network excluded Terneuzen and Sheerness but new entrants to the census brought ports of Killingholme (North Sea Ro-Ro) and Southampton (UECC).

Among ports Lübeck leads the chart again and is followed by Trelleborg as before. For the first time we rank ferry ports on the basis of cargo weight, not on figures of units. This innovation

Tommy HalénManaging Director at Port of Trelleborg

Last year the transportation of rail carriages on fer-ries between Finland and Sweden came to a halt. Will this scenario repeat itself in the south of the Baltic?Even if the volume for conventional traffic going on vessels has been reduced during the last years we still have a large volume. One of the problems with the traffic be-

tween Finland and Sweden was the different rail track gauge. This generates extra costs which we don’t have in our region. I also believe that rail operators need to have a two-way strategy for coming out and in to Sweden.

Intermodal services are smoothly developing across Europe, i.e. Sweden is investing in rail connections between its ports. Isn’t it a threat to long distance (Bothnian Bay-western Europe) ro-ro links?No, I don’t see a threat arising from this development. It could even strength-en rail traffic since I can’t point out any reasons why an intermodal unit can’t go over with a rail vessel. This could actually increase the number of rail units on the vessels.

has changed the traditional following order, reshuffling seven places but introduced no new party. Having this possibility, we would like to remember our demand to develop and – what’s more important – to adopt a statistical tool to measure the pro-ductivity of ports and shipping similar to ‘compensated gross tonnage’ used by the shipbuilding industry (CGT). A tool mod-elled in a similar way (by using coefficients) – ‘compensated cargo tonne’ – maybe needs another supplement – the ‘com-pensated freight unit’, measuring every single rolling piece.

Tab. 8. Ferry passengers in the Top 10 Baltic ports in 2011 and a 5-year comparison

Country Port Pax [thou.] 5-year change

1 SE Stockholm1 11,461 +8%

2 FI Helsinki 9,124 +14%

3-4 SE Helsingborg 8,340 -22%

3-4 DK Helsingør 8,340 -22%

5 EE Tallinn 7,700 +51%

6 DE Puttgarden 6,027 -11%

7 DK Rødby 6,027 -11%

8 FI Turku 2,813 -8%

9 FI Mariehamn 2,767 +3%

10 DK Hirtshals 2,249 +8%

Remarks:1 Data for Stockholm include Nynäshamn (1,389 thou.) and Kapellskär (924 thou.)


Report

Phot

o: U

nity

Line

Phot

o: Sc

andl

ines

Report


TransAtlantic Industrial Shipping provides smart logistics solutions and reliable sea transports. We base our operations on our customers’ transport needs, and solve them in a cost efficient and environmentally sound way. By our bulk, container and roro vessels we transport our customer’s goods at sea. To increase our customers’ competitiveness and cut their costs we combine this with a logistics infrastructure in Europe, our own terminals at strategic sites as well as networks for supplementary overland transport.We have some 50 vessels at our disposal and to keep pace with the changing needs of our clients we adapt and adjust our fleet.

Welcome to read more about our company and services at: www.rabt.se

Efficient transport solutions

Baltic Press-3_Transatlantic.ind1 1 2012-04-10 13:31:56

Harm SieversManaging Director at Port of Sassnitz

In light of the impending IMO regulations in 2015, what future lies ahead for long distance ferry con-nections? Will both pax and cargo flows cascade to shorter routes?The implementation of the new sulphur emission limits in 2015 involves a com-petitive disadvantage for ro-ro and ferry

shipping in the Baltic Sea. As a result, traffic will most likely in-crease relocating to road transportation. Therefore, short-dis-tance routes will become more relevant as an alternative to the existing long-distance routes in the ro-ro and ferry traffic. This means a clear advantage for us. Port of Sassnitz – a German sea-port in the Baltic Sea – has the shortest distances geographi-cally and nautically to Scandinavia, Finland, Russia and the Baltic States. Ship owners and customers benefit from the navigational easy of accessibility without compulsory pilotage in terms of time and money. In addition, Port of Sassnitz is Germany’s largest train ferry port. Sassnitz-Mukran has tracks and handling facilities for normal and broad gauge which is unique in Western Europe. These advantages will further strengthen our position in the Bal-tic region in the future.

Pax traffic has also experienced a major split which is hidden in the statistics and can cause inaccuracy. Passengers are divided into at least two groups (omitting drivers) – people travelling to their destinations, regardless of if they are heading to work or are on holi-day, and passengers boarding a cruise only. And among the latter are persons who don’t disembark during the voyage because of the short stay at berth on the opposite coast. Now, are they counted

twice in all ports and by all operators dealing with such shuttle-cruise traffic? It seems that the two main groups should be counted separately.

Five-year changes (Tab. 8.) clearly show that ports and services located along the main transport corridors and living off only trans-portation are slowly losing passengers. Growth continues in ports which offer cruise services.

Phot

o: Vi

king L

ine


Report

Tab. 9. Top 6 Baltic operators – cargo volume

Operator Units [thou.]

1 Scandlines1 1,083

2 Finnlines 641

3 Stena Line 363

4 TT-Line 350

5 DFDS Seaways2 320

6 Tallink Silja 292

Remarks:1 Except the Rostock-Hanko service2 Only intra-Baltic services

Tab. 10. Top 6 operators – passenger volumes

Operator Pax [mln]

1 Scandlines 16.7

2 Tallink Silja 9.1

3 Viking Line1 6.4

4 Color Line 4.2

5 Stena Line 2.7

6 DFDS Seaways 2.7

Remarks:1 Data include the cruise pax of Cinderella

Phot

o: D

FDS


→→

Report


See the full Baltic Sea ro-ro & ferry network graphically depicted in the attached map poster and on the brand new Baltic Transport maps webpage – www.baltictransportmaps.com.

Service Operator Pax [thou.] Cargo units Goods

[thou. tn]

Transport work [thou. tn/km]

Pax capacity utilisation

Cargo capacity utilisation

Helsingborg-Helsingør Scandlines 8,342 388,244 4,010 20,096 17% 30%

Tallinn-Helsinki Tallink/Silja 4,270 118,413 1,660 141,100 46% 25%

Varberg-Grenaa Stena Line 165 33,860 595 68,463 16%1 40%

Oskarshamn-Visby Destination Gotland 422 20,409 299 36,000 13% 30%

Vaasa-Umeå RG Line 46 11,349 187 20,780 31% 48%

1 Highest in July – 85%

Tab. 12. Selected ferry services – business environment

Service Ships Total GT Total pax Total lane metres

Total trips per week (one way)

Distance [km]

Helsingborg-Helsingør 4 36,429 3,900 1,935 908 5

Tallinn-Helsinki 3 121,441 6,780 5,230 86 85

Varberg-Grenaa 1 19,504 900 1,235 22 115

Oskarshamn-Visby 2 36,300 2,280 1,750 28 120

Vaasa-Umeå 1 10,271 300 850 10 110

We believe that rankings based on pure tonnes, units or number of passengers are necessary, but such simplifi cations bring up the questions of fair assessment, as one passenger and one unit carried from Helsinki to Rostock is then just equal to ones simply crossing Øresund. Of course, in this case a solution is simple, we should count transport performance. Table 11 shows an example of neighbourhood services Helsingborg-Helsingør and Varberg-Grenaa. Transport work carried out on the latter was more than three times more than on the main link between Denmark and

Sweden. Only one comparable example is the ‘secondary’ serv-ice Umeå-Vaasa. It turns out that a fair comparison should in-clude all business characteristics of every service. �

Marek Błuś

Tab. 11. Selected ferry services – turnover, transport performance and capacity utilisation for cargo

Phot

o: D

estin

tion

Gotla

ndPh

oto:

Færg

en


Towards an integrated transportsystem in the Baltic Sea region

TransBalticProject part-financedby the European Union(European Regional Development Fund)

Project part-financedby the European Union(European Regional Development Fund)

Nowadays when someone says ‘green’ it is almost instantly identi-fied with ecology, while at the same time connected with the idea that taking care of the environment means sacrificing an economic deal in favour of Mother Nature. On the contrary, the main idea behind TransBaltic’s green multimodal transport corridors is that they are both environmentally-friendly and able to attract freight volumes by offering more profitable operational conditions.

In the second edition in the series of its policy reports, TransBaltic identified pol-icy challenges and summed up research findings and outcomes of debates with

stakeholders carried out around and beyond the Baltic Sea. TransBaltic aims to inspire poli-ticians, officials and private enterprises within the transport and logistics sector to take the relevant policy actions towards an integrated transport system in the Baltic region.

Let’s model the futureThis hypothesis has been tested through a

combination of modelling work as well as ex-pert judgement, since the transport network analysis model TRANS-TOOLS wasn’t flawless. For instance, some obvious network errors had to be manually corrected, i.e. rail flows between south-eastern Swedish transshipment points (ports of Karlshamn and Karlskrona) and the delivery area in the Stockholm region were pre-dicted to go along the eastern coast via Kalmar, whereas as a matter of fact they are north-west bound through Alvesta, hooking up to the Scan-dinavian Corridor that links the Öresund region with the Swedish capital. Secondly, since Trans-Baltic sees the future transport system in the Bal-tic Sea region as basing upon a macro-regional

functionality (gateway areas) and not solely on the sum of present projects and those inked in national plans – two elements were added to the modelling tool. First was the fixed link for overland transport between Helsingborg and Helsingør, while the road and rail bypass for the Copenhagen metropolitan area was the sec-ond. Last, but maybe the most interesting thing, was taking into account more plucky assump-tions about BSR-Asia trade. TransBaltic estimates that by 2030 approximately 120 mln tonnes of goods per annum from Russia, Kazakhstan and China will head for the BSR, of which 90 mln will pass through the Le-Havre-Hamburg range, leaving the rest to go across alternative trans-continental routes. The Russian government has bold plans for the Northern Sea Route (NSR). If ice-free periods get longer, the cargo flow on the NSR can grow up to 2.5 mln tonnes by 2030, serving Russian trade with Scandinavia and Asia. Also, the North-East-West Corridor, running be-tween northern Scandinavia and Asia, may at-tract the same amount of goods and place the Norwegian Port of Narvik as a transit gateway to North America. The 121-year old Trans-Siberian Railway is estimated to load on some additional 7 mln tonnes, whereof over 1 mln tonnes will be carried to and from EU markets. Additionally,

the new railway via Kazakhstan will accom-modate almost 5 mln tonnes as well as 1 mln tonnes of extra freight could be carried by trucks along the same corridor. Looking to the south, an increased interest in short sea shipping will make transport through the Black Sea (Odessa) as well as the Adriatic Sea (Ravenna, Venice, Tri-este, Koper and Rijeka) a genuine alternative to direct long sea routes to the BSR. One could just wonder what would happen if some powerful container terminal were to be established in this part of Europe, since the Mediterranean Sea will avoid the most restrictive IMO regulations on sulphur content in vessel fuel. On the other hand, one can have doubts, because Slovenian and Croatian ports are far too big in terms of their countries’ domestic demand and must rely on landlocked states of Central and Eastern Europe. As the example of Hungary shows, the country can go from bad to worse in a blink of an eye. Pondering over the positive scenario, by 2030 about 6 mln tonnes could be carried by rail from the Ukrainian Odessa port to Belarus, Lithuania and then by road to southern Sweden and eastern Denmark. Transport arriving in Adri-atic ports is forecasted to be distributed along three multimodal north-south land bridges – So-nora (via Berlin), the Central European Transport

To forestall the future course of eventsShaping the network of green multimodal transport corridors

Phot

os: IM

O

Phot

os: N

orde

n





Corridor (through Prague and Wrocław) or the Baltic-Adriatic Corridor (via Warsaw and Gdańsk). The alternative way may gain some 6 mln tonnes by 2030.

When ‘cheaper’ and ‘faster’ also means ‘greener’

The TransBaltic Green Scenario 2030 simu-lates freight flows by means of well-coordinated public policies and the involvement of civil soci-ety. The network of green multimodal transport corridors, spread all over the BSR, is central to this reasoning. They are expected to be an area of policy intervention with specific legislation, har-monisation measures and incentives, and above all with proper management that develops and implements a steering mechanism to supervise and enhance performance, as even the best so-lutions are worthless without dedicated people enforcing them. The persons in charge should also be responsible for putting into practice the so called BSR blueprints – macro-level transport development solutions, stemming from market needs and customized to the transport and lo-gistics specificity of the Baltic Sea region.

Green corridors, originating from such a way of thinking, could be deemed more attractive by providing better operational conditions. For the modelling purpose, the attractiveness asset was characterized as ‘cheaper’ and ‘faster’ transpor-tation of goods. Green corridors may lower the freight transport cost by EUR 0.02 per vehicle-km as well as elevate rail speed by 30% compared to other links. What’s more, with the improved char-acteristics green corridors are capable of serving 10% more volumes and can also capture flows from other parts of the network, where such op-erational facilitations haven’t been introduced. In point of fact, TransBaltic’s Green Scenario projects a slight shift of cargo volumes from the regular to the green transport network.

But it’s not the only shift TransBaltic is pre-dicting. In addition, a portion of long-distance road transport is forecasted to leap to other modes. But what’s maybe of more importance is that possible improvements in technologies by the year 2030 may significantly determine transport externalities on the green network. TransBaltic analysed two options – ‘moderate’ and ‘progressive’ – both predicting different advancement of technological changes (ve-hicle size, engines, fuel, traffic utilisation and management) influencing road safety, traffic noise, climate change and air pollution. Miti-gation of the environmental impact is remark-able, especially in the ‘progressive’ scenario, where a broader use of alternative fuels is seen as well as much more advanced road and rail traffic noise abatement techniques along with hi-tech CO

2 lowering innovations in truck and

maritime transport are implemented. As a re-sult, technological improvements may reduce

traffic noise, climate effects and air pollution by the range of 20-40% and at the same time boost traffic safety by 60% in comparison to 2010 levels.

Alternatives and outcomesBut the TransBaltic scenario is just one of

many mainstream trajectories and tilts against other policy alternatives. The ‘IMO alternative’ tackles sulphur regulations introduced by the International Maritime Organization and analy-ses its implications for the flow patterns in the BSR green transport network. According to TransBaltic’s modelling, the Sulphur Emission Control Areas (encompassing the Baltic and North Seas along with the English Channel) translates into a 30% increase in maritime trans-port costs within the BSR. Furthermore, north-south corridors will have the upper hand over the route via the North Sea. The Black and Adri-atic Seas are both to advance from 5% to 10% in the overall share of seaborne cargo, while the share of direct sea services is to contract from 75% to 65%. Rail traffic in the Baltic Sea

the Danish Straits to consumption areas in Western Europe as well as on north- and west-bound routes from the Moscow region.

Regardless of the given scenario, some structural components of the European trans-port sector as well as specific geographical are-as are likely to experience freight flow changes. IMO regulations will affect north-south railway links which may be challenged due to rerouted cargo traffic. Intermodal terminals will become fundamental in securing efficiency of the trans-port system performance. The Barents Sea will increase its prominence by serving both north-south and east-west freight flows (mostly raw materials) to processing and consumption areas in Europe and in the Far East. Also, Rus-sian ports in the Gulf of Finland will strengthen their position, not only in terms of handling liq-uid fuels (Port of Primorsk along with the Baltic Pipeline System-2 going to Port of Ust-Luga), but also as universal ports (currently Big Port of St. Petersburg is the largest universal port in the BSR, but Ust-Luga Port has the ambition to outrun it by a few times). Ports of the three

This article is based on the “TransBaltic Policy Report 2011” authored by Dr. Wik-tor Szydarowski. The full document can be downloaded from www.transbaltic.eu.

region is to slump by 50% on the ferry cross-ings in the Baltic Sea and much more cargo destined for the south of the BSR is to come by rail from the Mediterranean, Adriatic and Black Seas. Longer shipping routes are to lose cargo in favour of coastal road connections.

The second alternative – White Paper – pre-sumes to shift approx. 30% of cargo from road to rail in long-distance traffic (over 300 km) by 2030, but TransBaltic modelled that the shift will also be to short sea shipping. The resulting projections show a growth in rail transport vol-umes by 34% in the green network, whereas for rail connections in general the figure goes up by 20%. Road traffic diminishes the most on the saturated mesh of links in the south-west-ern part of the BSR, compensated by increases in rail-borne routes between Scandinavia via

Baltic States – Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania – will enter even more intense competition for rail-borne cargo going from Central Asia and China. The Gdańsk-Gdynia-Kaliningrad belt, whose ports are to note the highest growth rates, will be in urgent need of developing effi-cient railway connections with the hinterland. Last, but not least, the Danish Straits may face a high north-south traffic intensity that may se-riously challenge capacity of the existing and planned road and rail infrastructure. �

Przemysław Myszka

Phot

os: H

HM





It’s only the beginningHub-and-hinterland development in the Baltic Sea region

In the last two decades port competition in Europe has intensified due to inland transport corridor develop-ment which has allowed transshipment centres to access formerly captive hinterlands.

The recent world tendencies in cargo transport are heading towards deploy-ment of large and fast container ships and reducing the number of ports of call.

Seaports are increasingly functioning not only as individual places that handle ships but as parts of supply chains and networks. Market players show an amplified network orientation and aim to maxi-mize network effects and synergies. As a result, the

This article is based on the report “Hub-and-hinterland development in the Baltic Sea region” compiled by a team from the Maritime Institute in Gdańsk in cooperation with TransBaltic project partners. The report in its full puts special attention to the hub development aspirations of Port of Gdańsk and Port of Ust-Luga and provides in-depth research on their respective devel-opments. The document can be downloaded at www.transbaltic.eu.


TransBaltic

great effect on liner shipping. From that moment till today, logistics service providers, shipping lines and terminal operators have gone through an un-precedented wave of consolidations. Along with this, the rapid vessel developments have increased pressures on nautical access parameters and port handling times, giving an extra competitive edge to coastal deepwater ports, such as Hamburg, Gothenburg and Gdańsk. Inland transport of the European port system has also undergone signifi-cant advances. European Transport Policy featur-ing modal shift and co-modality has been imple-mented in order to stimulate the use of inland waterways, rail and short-sea shipping. In addition, a more European perspective on port and trans-port policy issues has been created.

Baltic ports of callWith globalization, the function of trans-

shipment hubs has become increasingly domi-nant for long distance transport. Hubs tend to possess excellent nautical accessibilities, are lo-cated in close proximity to major liner shipping routes, with some at the intersection of north-south and east-west routes to accommodate cargo flows, and often possess land reserve for future expansion. Yet, the hubs occur around specific regions ideally suited for maritime hub-and-spoke distribution pattern.

The connectivity of the BSR to overseas trading areas primarily relies on feeder services to hub ports in to/from North Sea ports. How-ever, Gothenburg and Gdańsk have already seen weekly large container ships calls from Maersk Line and continue investments in order to up-grade their facilities to accommodate larger ves-sels. In particular those two ports, together with Aarhus and Ust-Luga, might be selected by other global container operators as permanent ports of call and gradually develop into real regional or even global hubs, reducing the pressure on con-gested European ports. It is a perfect solution to cope with road congestion to/from existing hubs in Central and Eastern Europe, meaning also: no feeder costs; no transshipment cost; lower inland transport cost; lower CO

2 emissions as well as a

shorter transit time. Their emergence is, however,

often exposed to enormous challenges, e.g. build-ing the facilities from scratch (including infra- and suprastructure as well as equipment), often in a completely new location (DCT Gdańsk, Ust-Luga). To develop further the idea of Baltic hubs, all in-frastructure projects ‘beyond the gate’, improving rail and road connectivity with the port terminals, should consequently be implemented.

The recent development of maritime transport in the BSR is driven by a large increase in shipping volumes accompanied by uncertainties related to the geographical structure of demand develop-ment. New and improved land transport connec-tions are expected to introduce new competition for maritime corridors. Moreover, the present struc-ture of transit flows via the Baltic Sea countries will substantially change due to the development of Russian Baltic ports’ capacity and other transport corridors. The future role of maritime transport in the transport chain should also increase in line with the current EU transport policy considering sea ports as vital elements of focus for the core network. On the whole, Baltic ports are preparing to welcome more direct calls of main line vessels. Shipping lines’ choice of port of call depends upon a variety of interrelated factors; but, most of all, the development of Baltic hubs requires a larger mar-ket potential in a wider catchment area than the respective domestic markets to generate a critical freight volume adequate to deep sea calls.

The large vessel sizes deployed on the Eu-rope-Far East route, the associated reduction in the number of ports of call and the additional diversion distance make regular direct calls to the Baltic gateway region viable in comparison to other trade routes. The functional system of gateway ports is driving the dynamics in large logistics nodes. The creation of these nodes poses new challenges to the relation between seaports and their hinterland. The challenge remains of how to increase the share of co-modal transport solutions on short distances. Since seaports are involved in providing logis-tics services to transshipment cargo, hinterland characteristics remain fundamentally important in terms of logistics attractiveness. �

Lena Lorenc

Phot

o: Po

rt of

Gda

ńsk

total costs of cargo handling in the seaports can be substantially decreased and the total time re-quired for port operations can be shortened.

Nowadays a port’s potential hinterland can be defined as an area reachable at a cheaper cost or shorter time than from another seaport, which in turn results in port and carriage provid-ers’ competition to service locations in the over-lapping segments. The rise of economic centres in the Baltic area has created opportunities to develop water-based and land-based transport networks which allow increased hinterland pen-etration. With the emergence of inland terminals and dry ports, hinterlands are now extended even further. As a part of its activities in Task 4.3., TransBaltic has prepared a study report with the objective to present findings on Baltic hub and hinterland developments focusing on the west-ern Baltic ports of Gothenburg and Hamburg, the southern Baltic Port of Gdańsk and the Russian ports of St. Petersburg and Ust-Luga.

Behind the Baltic seaports expansionDespite the risk of prolonged negative conse-

quences of the crisis, there are likely to be many opportunities associated with Baltic ports’ de-velopment. Baltic ports have started to witness a significant transition since the early 1990s. Fol-lowing the change in the political environment, economic and logistics systems as well as the port governance structures, during the second half of the 1990s Europe-Far East trade became the most important international trade route, which had a





Crossing macroregional horizonsTransBaltic’s Final Conference

On 4-5 September 2012 TransBaltic invites you to its final conference, which will mark the closure of the project after three years’ of intensive work. The two previous conferences were hosted in the southern and northern parts of Sweden, namely in Malmö (Skåne) and Skellefteå (Västerbotten). This time the project has decided to cross the Baltic Sea’s horizon and invites interested stakeholders to gather on Cyprus.

Why Cyprus? The arguments for choosing this country are mani-fold but the prime reason is that this particular country will be

chairing the EU Presidency for the second half of 2012. “We would like to take this opportu-nity to place the TransBaltic conference high on the European agenda and set a bench-mark in macroregional transport planning. We see a right time to discuss connectivity issues between the Baltic Sea region and the Mediterranean area in light of the market de-velopments, the corridor approach in the EU transport policy, and the involvement of EU neighbouring countries. The country is also renowned as a bridge between Europe, Asia and Africa in international trade,” says Wiktor Szydarowski, TransBaltic Project Manager.

The conference will be divided into three themes: 1) the Macroregional Transport Ac-tion Plan, 2) the heritage of TransBaltic in the context of the EU Baltic Sea Strategy and 3) synergies between joint transport develop-ment work in the two macroregions: of the BSR and the Mediterranean area.

The first part of the conference will be dedicated to a presentation of the Macrore-gional Transport Action Plan (MTAP) – the ultimate product of the strategic process run by TransBaltic in cooperation with several transport corridor projects, the pan-Baltic net-works, the national governments of the Baltic Sea countries and the European Commission. The document, currently in its drafting proc-ess, will contain a number of policy incentives addressing the need to better integrate the national and regional networks around the Baltic Sea in the context of accessibility, con-nectivity, territorial cohesion and sustainable regional growth. It will also contain prepared-ness measures to make the transport system in the Baltic Sea region robust enough to ab-sorb the increasing transcontinental transport flows. The Macroregional Transport Action Plan complements the stock of transport har-monisation actions by the national govern-ments and other governance tiers within the framework of the European Union Strategy for the Baltic Sea region. It is going to broaden the decision-making horizons by elaborating

For more information regarding the conference and to register, please visit www.transbaltic.eu.

on so far little or unexplored transport devel-opment processes both within and outside the region’s territory. Thereby, it may become a source of inspiration for other macrore-gions spanning the European Union Member States and the neighbouring countries in an attempt to create and put into operation joint transport development frameworks.

The second part will look at the transfera-bility of TransBaltic’s results to the implemen-tation of the EU Baltic Sea Strategy in Priority Area 11 – ‘To improve internal and external links’. TransBaltic has been acknowledged as a building block for green transport develop-ment within the framework of this particular priority area and the conference will dis-cuss how to apply policy recommendations related to the future geography of freight flows. The conference will also highlight spe-cific business concepts developed within the project (e.g. the dry port concept, empty con-tainer management, ICT tools for better use of intermodal transport, competence man-agement systems in harbour logistics, solu-tions to increase the use of rail freight, etc.), which may become the subject of relevant transport policies and contribute to sustain-able regional growth.

The third part of the conference will posi-tion the MTAP in a broader context and discuss possible synergies between the Baltic Sea

region and the Mediterranean area in light of macroregional transport planning. The Mediterranean region, like the BSR, borders non-EU countries with much dependency on such transport relationships. For that reason, the conference will offer an opportunity to compare and mutually transfer approaches to joint transport planning between EU Member States and the EU’s neighbouring countries in the Baltic Sea area and in the eastern Medi-terranean area. The concept of core network corridors in the new TEN-T guidelines comes as another reason for such a dialogue, as one of the corridors is expected to connect the two macroregions.

The TransBaltic Final Conference 2012 is expected to attract some 150 stakehold-ers representing the administration, the academic sector and the industry through-out Europe. It shall give a strong impetus for further implementation of the EU and national transport policies, the macrore-gional strategies and a new generation of territorial cooperation programmes co-funded by the European Union. �

Evelina Hansson Malm

Wikt

or Sz

ydar

owsk

i, pho

to: T

rans

Balti

c


� There has been intense lobbying of the shipping and port sectors as well as in-dustries that rely heavily on them to de-lay the 0.1% sulphur limit in the Baltic and North Sea ECAs beyond 2015. Has the outcome of this lobbying been posi-tive for the Baltic ports so far?

The unfortunate aspect of this lobbying is that it already started after the MARPOL Annex VI revision. One of the matters that we have been highlighting was positioning of the BSR ports and shipping lines in a disadvantageous situation, leading to unfair competition in the EU internal market. There is no doubt that the same regulations should concern the whole maritime transport market in the European Union. We’re carefully observing the works of the Commission as far as the proposed chang-es to the EU Sulphur Directive, unifying it with the 2008 revision of MARPOL Annex VI, are concerned. And we are seeing how increasingly the voice of the Baltic ports is heard. European Parliament’s Environmental Committee in its proposed changes goes beyond IMO’s regula-tion in certain areas, as in the case of a general

Interview with Bogdan Ołdakowski, Secretary General of the Baltic Ports Organization

LNG in the Baltic portsBaltic ports have proposed a significant and mature action in response to the 2008 revision of IMO rules regarding sulphur emissions from shipping. The ports wish to develop a network of LNG infra-structure in the BSR, serving as objects of reference to ports in the Baltic and other EU regions.

standard of 0.1% sulphur content in marine fuels to the ‘12-mile-zone’ along all EU coasts. If these propositions are approved by the Eu-ropean Parliament, it will be welcomed by the Baltic ports. BPO focuses on promoting sea transport in the Baltic as well as environmen-tal management in the ports, to contribute to the sustainable development of the BSR. And sustainable means well balanced, we don’t want it to lead to a situation where the com-petitiveness of our region is compromised, as we do compete with other European regions for the same market.

� Maritime transport in the Baltic Sea will face a significant cost increase and almost inevitably a modal shift from sea to land. What will these regulations bring to the ports?

These new rules will have a crucial impact on the whole Baltic market. We can expect some of the shipowners and shipping lines to re-calculate their businesses (costs and prices), certainly at the beginning, and it may lead to less business for seaports. In a long term perspective Baltic ports need to answer the question of how to face this challenge and develop along with the new circumstances, since the port sector has to play a vital role in this new reality. Therefore, BPO is supporting LNG, seeing it as the fuel of the future. The sector has to ensure the proper infrastructure for the LNG bunkering, so this idea can be-come a reality. We are not ready for it today as a whole region, though some of the ports are almost there, but we’re actively working on it. The Baltic Ports Organization has initi-ated the project “LNG in the Baltic Sea Ports”, which was delivered last year to TEN-T EA for co-financing by the European Commis-sion within the TEN-T/MoS Program.

� What are the project’s objectives?

The project in general is aimed at making it possible to use LNG as fuel for the ship-ping industry within the Baltic, in order to decrease emissions to the atmosphere and make sea transport more environmentally-friendly. It will result in jointly developed

operational ship bunkering installations in ports, which can serve as a reference to other seaports in the BSR and to other EU regions. It is divided into 11 different activities, one of which is the Stakeholders’ Platform. The idea behind it is to gather the key actors from the Baltic and from outside the region around the same table, securing a dialogue process and distribution of the project results. The key in the discussion about LNG as the fuel of the future is to talk to all actors involved in the supply chain – shipowners, shipping lines gas operators, bunkering companies, and others. It is crucial to debate with the mar-ket, since it’s e.g. the shipping lines that will or will not be adapting their fleet to the LNG fuel. The participating ports are: Aarhus, Co-penhagen, Malmö, Stockholm, Helsingborg, Turku, Helsinki, Tallinn and Riga. Addition-ally, other ports supported by many industry organizations are involved as well.

� And how far along is the project?

The initiative was very well received by the TEN-T Financial Assistance Committee. A decision has already been taken and at present we’re establishing how it will be managed. This discussion takes place between the ports and TEN-T Executive Agency, which manages TEN-T projects on behalf of the EC. The first phase involving pre-investment studies in the participating ports will officially be launched the moment the Commission issues the final decision of its co-funding, although some of the ports have already started the works. The EU support is one great aspect of this project, but more importantly is the fact that leading Baltic ports and natural competitors have de-cided to work together in order to develop the idea of LNG infrastructure in the Baltic. All those seaports have slightly different plans, re-sources and expectations, but are aware of the importance of cooperation. The project is to be finalized in 2014, when the ports are ready for concrete investments. One of its outcomes will be the LNG Guidebook on how to develop Liq-uefied Natural Gas infrastructure in a seaport to be used by any other port within the EU.

Lena Lorenc

Phot

o: B

PO


BPO Lunch Debate 2012

Baltic transport market after 2015On 20th of March 2012 within the halls of the European Parliament a consecutive

BPO Lunch Debate took place. The meeting was devoted to the theme of year 2015 and its far-reaching consequences for the competitiveness of the Baltic Sea region.

Maria Bruun Skipper, advisor at the Danish Shipowners’ Association (DSA), stated that DSA welcomes the IMO decision to tighten emission requirements. However, major challenges to the short sea shipping sector will arise – an 80% increase in fuel price, high risk of modal back shift and that alternatives (scrubbers and LNG) are still immature. In light of this, concrete solutions must be tabled – i.e. “Amendment 33” should apply to all vessels of all flags, including vessels whose journey begin outside the Union, without prejudice to exemptions contained in Annex VI to MARPOL. How-ever, during the debate doubt was shed on the reality of a modal back shift, because most of the BSR’s seaborne cargo traffic is prone, both in terms of economics and time, to go exactly via sea and not by other means of transport.

Mogens Schrøder Bech from the Danish Maritime Authority, also in opposition, outlined the topic of liquid natural gas and its development as a viable maritime fuel. In his opinion the most vital condition for LNG to become successful is the set-ting up an LNG supply chain – both “hard” (maritime filling stations) and “soft” (law, industry standards, etc.). The European Commission along with BPO supports such an approach.

Anne E. Jensen, a member of the European Parliament and a host of the meeting, underlined the unjust treatment of north (North Sea, BSR, English Channel) and south (the Mediterranean) regions, in which the latter won’t be subjected to such restric-tive regulations. She also pointed out that the ecological way of thinking should be exported to the south, in favour of what BPO has been evoking for a long time. And as a matter of fact, the discussion within the EU Environmental Committee drifts to-wards enacting similar rules to SECA’s encompassing all EU coastal zones. �

Przemysław Myszka

Baltic Ports ConferenceBaltic transport market at the edge of changes

Dedicated seminar: Focus on Russiaand

BPO General Assembly 2012

6-7 September 2012, Turku, Finland | Radisson Blu Marina Palace Hotel, Kustaa-Juhana room

BALTIC PORTS ORGANIZATION • Secretariat Offi ce – Actia Forum Ltd.ul. Pułaskiego 8, 81-368 Gdynia, POLAND, ph.: +48 58 627 24 67, fax: +48 58 627 24 27, e-mail: [email protected], [email protected], www.bpoports.com

Phot

o: B

POPh

oto:

Wiki

pedi

a

EWTC II newsletter


Lithuanian Railways, a partner of the EWTC II project, has attempted to realize in practice the idea of ‘green’ transport in cooperation

with ports, other railway companies, freight carriers, forwarders and cargo owners. The company has signed cooperation agree-ments with the Lithuanian Association of Freight Forwarders, VPA Logistics, Hupac, the Ukrainian company Plaske as well as with many other actors. Strong political support as well as smooth cooperation with parties that have rich experience using the 1,520 mm wide gauge rail network and with private companies has led to an optimistic view about setting off shuttle trains.

The shuttle train project was discussed for the first time during the Lithuanian and Kazakhstan Cross-border Trade and Eco-nomic Cooperation Commission meeting in September 2011. Transport Ministries of both states supported the project. The presidents of Lithuania and Kazakhstan approved the idea at an official summit in Kazakhstan in October the same year. Lithuanian Railways, Kazakhstan State

Shuttling East and West

Divine connectionThe growth of trade volumes between Asia and Europe has encour-aged the development of new overland logistics chains and therefore increasing attention has been paid to the East-West transport corri-dor’s development in recent years, especially to its ‘green’ mode – rail.

The project came into effect by adjust-ing the route in a flexible manner, shaped by the pickup and delivery locations. The first test journey was from Chongqing in China through Kazakhstan, Russia, Belarus, Lithuania, Poland and Germany to Antwerp in Belgium. The train – Saulė (named after the sun goddess in Baltic mythology) – was loaded with 40-foot containers, packed with electronic goods. Saulė departed from China on 28th of October 2011 and reached Dostyk station in Kazakhstan on November 3rd. Then in five hours’ time containers were transhipped to 1,520 mm gauge wagons. The next railway station, Sestokai, was reached on 11th of November, where containers were once more shifted onto a 1,435 mm gauge train. After 18 days and 10,929 km, Saulė successfully reached its final destination in Antwerp.

Now the time has come for a West to East ride. On 26th of January 2012 Saulė took off from the Draugyste railway sta-tion in Klaipėda and headed for the former capital of Kazakhstan, Almaty. The train transported 45 containers (1 x 45’, 31 x 40’, 13 x 20’) with household goods. The eastbound trip took just over seven days, and the way back from the Dostyk railway station on the Kazakhstan/China border lasted one day longer.

The service proved to be successful and future departures have already been scheduled. If the train earns in the long-run the favours of the real Saulė, a sun-ny future may lay ahead of it. �

Stasys Zurba, JSC Lithuanian Railways

Railway Company along with VPA Logis-tics were chosen as the main players for the project’s implementation. Polish, German, Russian and Belorussian railway compa-nies have assisted with the project.

EWTCII Final ConferenceRealizing the potential of the East West Transport Corridor

Phot

o: Li

thua

nian

Min

istry

of Tr

ansp

ort a

nd Co

mm

unica

tions

07-08 June 2012 | Vilnius, Lithuania


Focus


Going deeper

Ports and terminals are like any other business area – they need investments in order to stay on the market and yield profits.

Dredging is a must for them.

Everybody says – deeper!Last year Port of Klaipėda was one of the

busiest ports within the Baltic Sea region. On 6th of August 2011 the port authority signed a EUR 6 mln contract with Rohde Nielsen A/S. Th e agreement foresees enhancing the naviga-tion conditions by widening the entrance chan-nel at seven points, preserving the same project depths. In order to do so – 461.1 thou. m3 of soil is planned to be excavated as well as 399 boul-ders in a diameter from 0.8 to 1.5 m and 189 boulders above 1.5 m are to be extracted.

Secondly, on 12th of October the port authority signed a contract agreement with the Dutch company Van Oord and Marine Contractors BV. Th e project “Capital Dredg-ing and Widening of Klaipėda State Seaport Navigation Channel”, worth EUR 37.51 mln, is aimed at extending the port’s navigation fairway to 150 m (presently 120 m) as well as dredging it further to 14.5 m (currently 13-13.5 m). As a result, Port of Klaipėda will be able to receive longer and wider postpanamax vessels – 300-310 m in length and 40 m in beam. Th e project’s implementation kicked off last year

The arms race is on. Bigger, longer, wider and larger-draught vessels are calling at Baltic ports. Shipping lines’ order books are fi lled with container ships with over 10,000 TEU of capacity, which need deeper access ways to reach the quay.

Phot

o: N

orde

n

and is to carry on throughout the year. Pursu-ant to the contract, the intended volume of the dredged soil throughout during the fi rst stage will amount to 3.86 mln m3, 440 stones (0.8-1.5 m) along with nearly 60 boulders above 1.5 m. During the second stage 655 thou. m3 of soil is going to be dredged and over 50 boulders above 0.8 m in diameter will be excavated. Th e European Union participates in the invest-ment, co-funding the works within the EU structural assistance priority 5 “Development of the Trans-European Transport Network”.

Worth mentioning is that the above project is a record-breaker in several aspects. It’s the largest contract, by its scope and price, signed by the Klaipėda port authority and currently ongoing. It’s also the biggest and most expensive contract in the whole history of the port, not only in comparison to other dredging investments. Last, but not least, it is the port’s largest project implemented with the help of EU funds.

Master and his challengerInternal competition is forcing the pace of

development of Russian Baltic ports. Ust-Luga is a deepwater port with a brand new container terminal as well as with the ambition of becom-ing the biggest universal port in the Baltic Sea. But as of now Big Port of St. Petersburg bears the palm and won’t make it easy for its younger

competitor. In January 2011 the construction of coastal infrastructure at Port of Bronka – a multifunctional marine cargo complex located in the new freight dedicated area just under the Kotlin Island and within St. Petersburg port – started. Th en the placing of a temporary drive-way road was ended along with the construction of piling foundation of two berths; currently pile foundations for another two are being built and should be placed in May. Earlier a 1 km long dike of the perimeter was raised, so that workers can proceed with the renourishment of 85 ha of artifi cial land along with dumping 2 mln m3 of sand and silt, which will enable the construction of the main buildings and facili-ties. During the fi rst stage (2013-2015), a 1.45 mln TEU container terminal as well as a ro-ro terminal with an annual handling capacity of 260 thou. units will be situated in the port. Th e second stage (2017) will bring the improvement

Phot

o: Po

rt of

Klai

pėda


Focus

of the container operations to 1.9 mln TEU of yearly capacity and a logistics centre. In the fi -nal stage, Port of Bronka will off er a 3 mln TEU container terminal. St. Petersburg’s avantport will be capable of serving panamax class con-tainer ships and Star type ro-paxes. In the fi rst stage, the port’s approach canal and operational area will have 11.2 m of depth, while in the sec-ond stage they will be dredged to 14.4 m.

Investments chasing investmentsLast year Port of Gdynia, at the expense of

EUR 24 mln (with the help of EU co-funding), dredged its channel to 13.5 m. Now vessels of up to 280 m long and with 13 m of draught can berth at the port’s quays. In January 2012 the Baltic Container Terminal Gdynia welcomed the largest ship ever to visit Gdynia – MSC Krystal (5,700 TEU). But Gdynia cannot rest

on its laurels – if the Polish port won’t have things in hand, in the long run terminal op-erators will pack their bags and Gdynia will be marginalized in favour of rivals in the nearby vicinity. From this year on the port authority plans to invest EUR 59.5 mln in development works. First of all, Gdynia port is to be dredged further to 15.5 m, so container ships of up to 10-12 thou. TEU capacity can call at it. Ne-gotiations with the insolvent Naval Shipyard Gdynia are proceeding. If everything goes ac-cording to the plan, the shipyard’s pier will be bought and demolished, enabling a new 490 m turntable to be built. Th en if the proper mod-ernization works of the Helskie and the Bul-garian quays are fi nished, the way to dredge the port’s channel even further will be open. Aft erwards, ships of up to 370 m in length will have the possibility to enter Port of Gdynia.

Ro-ro goes deep, tooBut dredging isn’t only about making access

for monstrous container vessels. Th e growth rate has forced Port of Trelleborg to evolve and expand to both take good care of the increasing amount of cargo, but also to enable next gen-eration ferries (length of up to 240 m) to call at the port. Th e development plan consists of new breakwaters, shoreside power connections for vessels at berth, waste and rain water treatment

facilities and dredging the port and its fairway from 8.1 to 9.5 m. In order to construct the 3 km line of breakwaters, approx. 600 thou. m3 of stone will be necessary and they will be brought in by barges. Th e whole dredging works will provide approx. 600 thou. m3 of sediments which will be used for fi lling.

Jumping to Sweden’s neighbour, Finland, one can see that dredging has many faces. As a part of Helsinki’s Western Harbour re-devel-opment scheme, the Hernesaari dockyard area will grow by landfi ll from 33 to 44 ha, chiefl y for the construction of housing, recreation and tourism-related services. Th e new area will ac-commodate a heliport, a marina, a water sports centre and a 5 ha park as well as a new quay for

Phot

o: M

aersk

Phot

o: J.

Kaln

ins


Focus


Mindet 2, DK-8100 Aarhus CTel. +45 86 13 32 66, [email protected] www.aarhushavn.dk

Container tra�c A large number of shipping lines connect the port of Aarhus with ports in the Nordic countries, Northern, Southern and Eastern Europe and ports in the UK, the Eastern Mediterranean and Asia and therefore an important hub for transshipment.

Passenger ferriesFrom the Ferry Terminal on Pier 3 there is a regular ferry service between Aarhus and Zealand several times a day with catamaran ferries transporting passengers, cars and busses. Transit time is approx. 70 min.

Port of Aarhus – unique opportunities

Ro/Ro tra�c Ro/Ro facilities in the port of Aarhus are available at the Container Terminal, the Multi Terminal and Pier 3. There is regular Ro/Ro tra�c to Finland, Russia, Lituania and Zealand (DK). Close to the quays are spacious areas for trailers waiting for shipment.

cruise ships (in addition to the current two).Another Finnish port – Raahe – is stick-

ing to its core business, too. In October 2011 the port set off its new deepwater quay. So as to build the new 355 m long pier, preparations works to dredge the port’s fairway further to 10 m began in 2002. Th e project was initiated towards the end of 2007 and during the follow-ing two years the sea fairway was deepened. Th e investment totalled EUR 48 mln and enhanced the unloading operations of bulk cargo, the main freight handled at Port of Raahe.

Neighbourhood watchMeanwhile, ports outside the BSR are

carefully watching what’s happening on the

dredging market to anticipate events as well as to outrun competitors. Since April 3rd 2012 Port of Hamburg has been in a jubilant mood, as fi nally the state of Lower Saxony has as-sented the adjustment of the navigation chan-nel on the Lower and Outer Elbe. Aft er proper works are completed, vessels with a draft up to 13.8 m will be able to visit Port of Hamburg independent of the tides and up to 14.8 m depending on the tides. Frank Horch, Ham-burg’s Minister of Economics, Transport and Innovation, welcomed the decision and said that, “it was only right to take time to arrive at a fair reconciliation of the diff erent interests. Th is satisfactory outcome means that the offi -cial approval procedure can now be complet-ed.” At present the Waterways and Shipping Directorate North and the Free and Hanseatic City of Hamburg will incorporate the results of the negotiations into the fi nal planning ap-proval document. It will be displayed for scru-tiny among the communities aff ected along the Elbe at the end of May along with support-ing documents. As the deepening of the Elbe is of great importance and it may easily have an eff ect on people living nearby, not to mention the surrounding environment with its fl ora and fauna, the German Administrative Court in Leipzig will be the fi rst and fi nal instance re-sponsible for hearing any possible objections.

Aft er displaying a draft version of the fi nal ap-proval (most probably at the end of June), four weeks will be available to anyone who wants to lodge a complaint against the idea of deep-ening the Elbe river. Nonetheless, to limit the impact on the environment, an engineering concept has been tabled, enabling hydrologi-cal and ecological consequences to be mini-mized. Th is was and probably will be the apple of discord between the state of Lower Saxony and other parties. Th e state wants to ensure the safety of riverbank levees so no more saltwater is released into the Elbe, since it can damage fruit crops on its shores and therefore hurt the local fruit growers. Th e coarse friendship be-tween Lower Saxony and Port of Hamburg has its history. Th e latter must not only compete with its hereditary adversaries in Rotterdam and Antwerp, but also pick up the gauntlet thrown down by Wilhelmshaven and its deep-water terminal – JadeWeserPort.

Dredging is a brutal activity – tearing out the sea’s fl esh and bones requires power-ful machines and has something to do with humans’ struggle to tame nature and trans-form it to the needs of mankind. But it’s also a necessary piece in the port’s master plan, as future money lies deeper and deeper. �

Przemysław Myszka


Focus

When partnership is the best choice

Small ports are often located in or close to cities around the coast. It is in the town’s interest to expand with living ar-eas, public and business space closer and closer to sea and use the port jetties and their industrial atmosphere. The in-

terest from the city has very often stronger economic reasons with which a small port can’t compete. The result of this expansion is the slow vanishing of a port. Larger harbours, subject to national and governmental strategies and support, usually serve containers and trailers in a logistics chain made up of road, rail modes and shipping. To secure strategies for development of these ports and their infrastructure, the EU has suggested a small number of these harbours to be a part of the core TEN-T network.

As far as the expenses involved in running a port are concerned, overhead is not just limited to machines, storage areas and berthing areas in the port; as was already highlighted, this also includes infra-structure. Therefore, to be one or become one of the TEN-T ports is of vital importance.

Despite the existence of several big ports in the Baltic Sea, the region is blooming with small and medium-sized ports that usually hold out limited services. Even though they report good results the ports struggle day-to-day, adjusting equipment, infrastructure and staff to offer special services in order to survive.

Management of medium-sized ports

Tab. 1. SWOT analysis for small ports

Strengths Weaknesses

• High-level of service for existing customers• Specialized in handling ongoing cargo• A moderate need for infrastructure investments• Small and effective machines• Cost effectiveness• Limited number of persons (easy agreements between union and company and low fixed costs)

• Low flexibility for new customers• Low flexibility for new cargoes• No governmental aid in infrastructure investments• The port land as an attractive area to develop public & business space• Limited flexibility and dependence upon singular persons and their knowledge

Source: Anders Sjöblom, Port of Oskarshamn

Tab. 2. SWOT analysis for TEN-T ports

Strengths Weaknesses

• High-level of service for new customers• Possibility to serve and handle project cargoes, e.g. wind farms• Regional importance and a political back-up• Governmental aid in infrastructure investments• Flexibility to rotate personal assets and strong “human capital” within the company

• Limited to adjust service to one single requirement from customers• Very high need for infrastructure investments• High number of persons with fixed costs for administration• Crucial to be TEN-T port

Source: Anders Sjöblom, Port of Oskarshamn

Generally, small ports have their function and are shaped to be as effective as possible to serve their customers. In a long term perspective it is a high risk to act as a small port and only serve a limited number of customers; it could always lose its clients by them moving their produc-tion or changing their transportation mode. The risk of modal shift to e.g. containers is noticeable; containerization of all traditional bulk cargoes such as timber, pulpwood, scrap, is an ongoing process. This course of action will be extra strong within the Baltic Sea due to the trade balance with Europe and Asia. Therefore, it is important for small ports to find partners and to complement the strategic ports, according to the EU TEN-T scheme.

Ports in Småland must be Ports of SmålandPort of Oskarshamn is a medium-sized port located on the coast

of Småland, southeast Sweden. The region has a strong sawmill in-dustry as well as a “home team” of companies such as Scania, SAFT, PPI, Swedwood, Södra, Arla, SAPA, Kährs, Smurfit Kappa and more. The area is sparsely populated with relative long distances between larger industries and cities.

Since Port of Oskarshamn is classified as a comprehensive TEN-T port and is not big enough to feel the positive infrastructural spin-off effect that the EU core ports will have, it must win its day by other means. Therefore, the regional councils of Kalmar and Jönköping together with Oskarshamn port and the region’s strategic dry ports are cooperating within the project CARGOTO. The initiative also in-volves forwarders in order to highlight the quantity of freight transport through the region of Småland. A strategic must for the project is to have one TEN-T core port with governmental support, thus CAR-GOTO is working together with the ports of Ventspils and Gothen-burg. Durable solutions for container and trailer traffic will occur when green transport corridors will be established between Gothenburg

Phot

o: Po

rt of

Osk

arsh

amn

Focus


and Oskarshamn as well as to Ventspils via Jönköping and Nässjö.Westbound transport flow will be strengthened thanks to

Gothenburg’s ro-ro link with the UK and container vessels coming and going worldwide. Eastbound cargo flows will con-solidate over Oskarshamn with its ro-ro traffic, while contain-ers heading for the Baltic States will be accommodated together with Freeport of Ventspils, serving as the project’s hub with freight trains to Russia, Kazakhstan and China. North- and southbound cargo traffic destined for Sweden will go by rail through Höglandsterminalen and via Ventspils to Russia and Germany.

Fig. 1. CARGOTO strategic network to connect the core TEN-T ports of Gothenburg and Ventspils

Tab. 3. SWOT analysis of CARGOTO

Internal Strengths Weaknesses

• Lower transport costs• Shorter lead times for customers• New complementary shipping service• Central localization in the south of Sweden• Overall logistics solutions for clients• Connects the region of Gothenburg with the Baltic States and Russia• Several interested stakeholders

• Road connections to Oskarshamn have some quality limitations according to interviewed companies; the same goes for rail routes• Punctuality and costs predictability of Russian rail services are unreliable• Lack of knowledge about transport alternatives among potential customers

External Opportunities Threats

• Growing markets to the East• New business relations between Sweden, the Baltic States, Russia and China• New intermodal transport corridor• Possibilities to attract transit goods as well as other cargo to the region itself• Improved logistics for companies in southern Sweden• New shipping companies to call Oskarshamn• Infrastructure development and investment in southeast Sweden

• Critical goods volumes may not be reached• The profitability of the new shipping service may not be reached• Tough competition from existing shipping services• Costs and lead time negatively affecting demand• Political instability in the region, especially in Russia• Security issues in Russia

Source: Ulrika Roupé and Linda Styhre, SSPA Study of competitive factors and customer demands on new shipping service between Oskarshamn and Ventspils

The biggest threat to be dealt with is not only to reach and maintain critical volumes, but also to handle them with high efficiency, so that proper quality of the overall service is earned and long term profitabil-ity is secured. If, and only if, this is done, carriers, shipping lines and rail companies will come to put into effect CARGOTO visions. If critical volumes are to low and/or here to stay just for a limited time, then i.e. a new ferry route is cursed to be a dead cert debacle, going straight in the red. But how to achieve real profitability? Tempting as it may be, living on EU charity or – even worse – subsidies from the local municipality are dead ends. As the renewable energy sector shows, when subsidies are axed, then the project is doomed to be swept away by the invisible hand of the market. The other case is for EU start-up programmes such as Marco Polo and Motorways of the Sea, which give a nice kick off, but do not inject a permanent financial drip from start to long after the

Port of Oskarshamn is a TEN-T port and serves bulk, liquid bulk, container and ro-ro traffic to the

island of Gotland. The port is strategic for export of sawn timber in bulk to North Africa, the US as well as in containers to Asia. More information at: www.port.oskarshamn.se; [email protected].

investment is a goner. The same goes for governmental infrastructure investments that provide a solid backbone for transport corridor initia-tives, as long as suitable infrastructure is in place and at the right time.

CARGOTO has made some financial calculations, indicating that 15-20 years will be necessary to establish a new cargo corridor until criti-cal volumes and cost-effective financing pop up. Additionally, if a new route kicks off and shortly afterwards (within three years) stops due to lack of clients, the trust put in the corridor will be lost for decades.

For success, parties within the CARGOTO project must work together to strengthen each other. In light of this, competition isn’t a sound alternative, since other regions will gain the upper hand over the quarrelsome neighbour. Transport corridors are to go through Småland, not around it. In the end, Småland with its spe-cialized small ports, connected additionally with core ports, will complement and strengthen the TEN-T maritime part, not men-tioning the given backup to local industries in their struggle on the world market. The future lies in Ports of Småland. �

Anders Sjöblom, Port of Oskarshamn


Energy

Will Europe be able to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by at least 80% by 2050 and maintain competitiveness? Energy is one

of the biggest challenges we are confronted with today. While being at the helm of the fight against climate change, our economic competitiveness fully depends on reliable en-ergy supply at an affordable price. And in turn, this depends on adequate infrastructure.

What does the Energy Roadmap 2050 say?

Through an analysis based on scenarios, the Roadmap 2050 indicates possible path-ways to achieve a decarbonisation of the EU energy system. The purpose is not of choos-ing one over the other, rather on identifying common emerging elements that support long-term approaches to investments. The real world will never look like these models, but the conclusions drawn from them give fundamental signals for our future policy.

The main conclusion of the Roadmap is simple: transformation of the energy system is technically and economically feasible – if we make the right choices. Five key lessons can guide us in making the policy choices

The Energy Roadmap 2050

Is Europe ready to take up the challenge?

Until the end of the 1990s, boosting demand was more important than energy efficiency and energy suppli-ers primarily served national markets. From now on energy systems need to be designed to run on variable renewable and low-carbon fuels at continental level.

to shift our energy system towards a more sustainable future.

(1) Energy savings are crucialThere is a vast amount of untapped poten-

tial to save energy. Significant energy savings would need to be achieved in all decarbonisa-tion scenarios. Primary energy demand drops in a range of 16% to 20% by 2030 and 32% to 41% by 2050, as compared to peaks in 2005-2006. Thus, energy efficiency is crucial for the energy system transformation – at the stages of production, supply and end use. Maintaining our efforts at the current level, we would not achieve enough progress. In a recent proposal for an Energy Efficiency Directive, the Com-mission has spelled out where we need urgent action. The directive needs to be quickly adopt-ed if we want to deliver on potential savings.

But we must be more ambitious. In the long-run, higher energy efficiency in new and existing buildings is crucial. Nearly zero energy buildings should become the norm. Products and appliances should fulfil the highest energy efficiency standards. In transport, efficient ve-hicles and incentives for behavioural change are needed. All this requires more action both at EU and Member State level.

(2) The share of renewables rises sub-stantially

The analysis shows that the biggest share of energy supply technologies in 2050 comes from renewables. In 2030, all decarbonisation scenarios suggest growing shares of renewables of around 30% in gross final energy consump-tion. In 2050, renewables will achieve at least 55%, up 45 percentage points from today’s lev-el. This is both a huge change and a challenge. Renewables will play a central role in Europe’s energy mix, from technology development to mass production and deployment, from small-scale to large-scale, from subsidised to competi-tive. All these shifts require parallel changes in policy. Incentives in the future have to become more efficient, create economies of scale, and lead to more market integration.

(3) Building the necessary infrastruc-ture is key

With electricity trade and renewables’ pen-etration growing up to 2050 under almost any scenario, adequate infrastructure at distribu-tion, interconnection and long-distance trans-mission levels becomes a matter of urgency. The existence of adequate infrastructure is a condition sine qua non. In the long-run, the

Phot

o: Va

ttenf

all

Phot

o: Ch

ris La

uren

s

Energy


extension of the current planning meth-ods to a fully integrated network planning for transmission, distribution, storage and electricity highways looking at a potentially longer timeframe will be needed. And above all, we need to develop more intelligent elec-tricity grids, able to deal with variable gen-eration from many distributed sources, al-lowing for new ways to manage electricity demand and supply.

(4) The European energy markets need to be fully integrated

Th e European market off ers the right scale to assure access to resources and to provide the huge investments needed. Th e single energy market must be fully inte-grated by 2014. An additional challenge is the need for fl exible resources in the power system, as there will be more variable re-newables. Access to fl exible supplies of all types (e.g. demand management, storage and fl exible back-up power plants) has to be ensured. Another challenge is the impact of renewable generation on the wholesale mar-ket prices. Whatever the answer, it is impor-tant that market arrangements off er cost-eff ective solutions to these challenges. Th e cross-border impact on the internal market deserves renewed attention. Now more than

ever, coordination is required. Energy poli-cy developments need to take full account of how each national system is aff ected by decisions in neighbouring countries.

(5) Investing in low-carbon technolo-gies

Carbon pricing can provide an incentive for deployment of effi cient, low-carbon tech-nologies across Europe. Th e ETS is a neces-sary condition for the energy system trans-formation, but it is not suffi cient. Higher public and private investments in R&D and technological innovation are also crucial in speeding-up the commercialisation and the modernisation of all low-carbon solutions, whatever the sources are. In particular Eu-rope will certainly have to develop further Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) from around 2030 onwards in the power sector in order to reach the decarbonisation targets.

New opportunities for EuropeIndeed, it is cheaper and easier for Europe

to work together. Th e European market gives us the chance to make economies of scale and speed up new markets for low-carbon tech-nologies. Between now and 2050, there must be a wide-scale replacement of infrastructure and appliances throughout the economy

including consumer goods in people’s homes. Modernizing the energy system will bring high levels of investment into the European economy. It can bring more jobs, better qual-ity of life, and more growth. Decarbonisation can also be an advantage for Europe, placing itself as an early mover in the growing global market for energy-related goods and servic-es. Energy system transformation also helps reduce import dependency and exposure to the volatility of fossil fuel prices.

The way forwardA debate has been launched. In the next

months all actors in all Member States will continue an open debate, discussing mile-stones and the policy framework for 2030. Th ese will help provide Member States and investors with the certainty they need. We cannot wait any longer: we need to act now for the future. What we are doing already is helping reduce our carbon footprint. But we need to step up our eff orts: more renewables, more clean technology, more investment in networks, more integration, and more en-ergy effi ciency. We need decisions and in-vestments. We need political will. �

Günther H. OettingerEuropean Commissioner for Energy

Sustainable Growth from the Oceans, Seas and Coasts:

Blue Growth

European Maritime Day in Gothenburg, Sweden, is where our common maritime future will be taking shape. Come, be a part of it and experience high-level meetings, stakeholder workshops and public events in our truly maritime region and discuss how we can tackle global challenges together.

Welcome on board!


Energy

Do the decisions of countries start-ing the construction of nuclear power plants in our region (Po-land, Lithuania and Belarus, as

well as Finland and Kaliningrad) have the economic, technological and environmental justification? Or is it only political justifica-tion which is based on diminishing energy dependence? Justification of such decisions is easier when it is based on myths spread around the public. With this article I’ll try to confront them.

Myth №1: There is no other way to meet high energy needs

The development of other technologies is so rapid that they can ensure faster, cheaper and more reliable restoration of the production potential of the energy sector. Some of them are combined heat and power stations and re-newable energy sources (RES). Gas-fired com-bined heat and power stations, which generate electricity on the basis of the heat demand, are capable of producing 60-70% of electricity de-mand. First of all, the CHP stations should be used in district heating systems and secondly, in multi-family and single-family residential building heating systems. With the develop-ment of agricultural biogas plants, natural gas could be replaced with biogas.

RES are the most advanced technologies: small wind turbines placed on top of/next to single-family houses or on top of multi-family houses and office buildings producing elec-tricity for their own needs are already com-petitive to electricity from the grid. Moreover,

Nuclear vs. renewable energy

Is nuclear energy necessary?The large electrical power systems with high material-consuming nuclear and coal power plants built nowadays will have to be kept operational for tens of years, if their construction is to be a profitable

investment. Is it reasonable to undertake such an investment project in our present reality?

photovoltaic cells installed on top of single-family houses, blocks of flats and office build-ings can produce electricity for their own needs. With this technology, already in 2-3 years’ time, it will be possible to produce elec-tricity on our latitude cheaper than the pro-jected price of electricity from the grid. And thirdly, large wind farms on land and offshore – e.g. in Poland and in the Polish economic zone only, there is enough space for the instal-lation of at least 22 GW of wind power – 12 GW on land and more than 10 GW at the Baltic Sea. It will allow to generate 55 TWh/a of electricity, which equals 30% of the overall electricity demand in Poland.

Myth №2: Electricity from nuclear power plants is cheap

The current cost of nuclear power plant construction probably amounts to EUR 7 bln for 1,000 MW (Ontario tender of 2009) and the investment payback period, while maintaining a competitive price of electric-ity, is approx. 50 years. However, taking into consideration the fact that the average lifecy-cle of all nuclear power plants shut down so far was approx. 21 years, it becomes obvious that it is the cost of amortization that cre-ates a major part of the energy price. What’s more, the nuclear energy sector is suscepti-ble to public opinion. As experience shows, public opinion in democratic countries may not allow the construction or commission-ing of a nuclear power plant, or may cause its decommissioning at any stage of the con-struction or operation. This may result in

unpredictable losses taking into account that the investment cost is very high.

Myth №3: Nuclear power plants exem-plify an advanced technology

The contemporary nuclear energy sector does not yet match the advanced technology. The industry produces large amounts of radi-oactive waste threatening us for several tens and hundreds of years.

Due to lack of research work in the nuclear energy sector over the past 25 years (after the Chernobyl disaster) little progress has been made in the development of nuclear technolo-gies. The generation of the power plants which are built at present, the so-called ‘3+’, is based on the same technology as the earlier reactors. The manufacturers of the equipment and own-ers of know-how are interested in sustaining the technologies which are dying out. The countries which want to make a profit on selling these technologies are able to invest any funds and involve any authorities in order to persuade countries in favour of their own products.

Myth №4: Nuclear energy is safeEven developing enhanced safety meas-

ures cannot keep up with unforeseen circum-stances that may arise in reality. In each of the following incidents – Three Miles Island, Chernobyl, Fukushima – it was either human error or new unpredictable circumstances to be blamed. The safety devices are fitted only to already known or predictable situations.

The by-product of nuclear energy is pluto-nium, which can be used to produce a nuclear

Energy

Orm

onde

Offs

hore

Win

d Far

m -

jacke

t fou

ndat

ions

bein

g tra

nspo

rted,

phot

o: B

en B

arde

n

Energy


www.posidonia-events.com

Posidonia4 - 8 June 2012, Metropolitan Expo, Athens Greece

The International Shipping Exhibition

A unique blend of business and social interactions at the heart of ShippingBe part of the great Posidonia experience at a state of the art new venue

Baltic Transport Journal 19-01-12 16:57 ™ÂÏ›‰· 1

bomb. Therefore, nuclear power stations are under severe control. A country with nuclear power plants is under surveillance of secret services. The area where the power plant is located should be under specific protection. It cannot be doubted that the location of the nuclear power plant in the region authorises the secret service to spe-cial actions and results in the militarization of the region. Living in such an area might become rather inconvenient.

The waste from nuclear power plants must be deposited for hundreds of years. Im-mersed in molten glass and packed in rust-proof containers, it must be stored in ware-houses, ventilated and supervised, located in safe places far away from human dwellings. In my opinion the present waste repositories do not meet these standards. There are only a few genuine waste reception facilities in the world. All nuclear waste should be stored in such facilities. Waste utilisation and nuclear power plants demolition affect the price of electricity generated by nuclear power plants and its commercial suitability.

Myth №5: Nuclear energy causes zero emissions

The construction of nuclear power plants is highly material-consuming and

the processes of enriching uranium fuel are very energy-intensive, which results in the fact that CO2 emission from nu-clear power generation does not equal “0”, but amounts to approx. 120 g/kWh. In case of dynamic development of the nuclear energy sector, deposits of ura-nium low in uranium ore will have to be used and then the process of fuel ac-quisition may double or even triple CO2 emissions*. Such a scenario may happen in 35 years, that is, for example, on the 20th anniversary of the first Polish nu-clear power plant launch. In comparison, emission from electricity generation in gas power plants amounts to under 400 g/kWh and is steadily dropping with the upgrading of this technology and its in-creasing efficiency. The EU may impose fees on nuclear plants, similar to the ones in the CO2 Emission Trading Scheme, which will have a significant impact on the price of electricity.

Nuclear energy in Poland?Instead of spending hundreds of mil-

lions of Polish zloty on convincing soci-ety in favour of the nuclear energy sector, would it not be better to start a decent debate on the future of the energy sector in the 21st century? In a world of modern technologies: the Internet, telecommu-nications and robotics; where buildings could be heated with nothing more than solar power. In a world where electri-cal energy consumption for lighting and equipment operation can be reduced by 80% and where dispersed energy sources can provide for human needs at costs lower than those of the extended systems of power grid. The nuclear power energy sector can wait a little longer. �

Dr. Edmund Wach, Eng.Baltic Energy Conservation Agency

Baltic Energy Conservation Agency (BAPE) was founded in January 1996 in order to implement the prin-ciples of sustainable development, to promote renewable energy sources and to improve energy ef-ficiency. The agency cooperates with local authorities, companies manufacturing biofuels, producers of thermal energy and its consumers. BAPE participates in realisation of numerous European projects con-cerning energy conservation under “Intelligent Energy Europe” Programme of European Commission. More information at: www.bape.com.pl.

* Lutz Mez. The future of nuclear energy. Is there any nuclear renaissance? Ekolumna, Spala, May 13, 2010.


Logistics

T he weather and climate need to be considered to ensure the functioning of a safe, reliable and sustainable transport system that meets users’ needs for mobility. The weather and climate affect all parts of the transport system: physical structures;

controlling/communication systems; vehicles; and both traffic and in-frastructure operations, as well as our local and international supply chains. Adverse weather has negative impacts on transport through reduced capacity and safety. In the worst cases, adverse weather results in economic losses and injuries or even fatalities. The EWENT project (Extreme Weather impacts on European Networks of Transport) has the objective of assessing the impact of extreme weather on the Eu-ropean transport system. The work is coordinated by Dr. Pekka Lev-iäkangas from VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland.

European hazardous weather – a lot to choose fromThe intermediate EWENT study provides the first comprehen-

sive climatology of the adverse and extreme weather events affect-ing the European transport system by estimating the probability of phenomena for the present climate (1971-2000), and also gives an overview of projected changes in some of these adverse and extreme phenomena in the future climate up to the 2050s. The following phenomena which were deemed to result in most of the harmful impacts were analysed: strong winds; heavy snowfall; blizzards; heavy precipitation; cold spells; and heat waves. In ad-dition, visibility conditions determined by fog and dust events, small-scale phenomena affecting transport systems such as thun-derstorms, lightning, large hail and tornadoes, and events that damage the transport system infrastructure were considered.

There are large differences in the probabilities and intensity of extremes affecting transport systems across Europe. Northern Europe and the Alpine region are impacted most by severe winter extremes, such as heavy snowfall, chilling cold spells and violent winter storms. On the other hand, the probability of sweltering heat waves is the highest in southern Europe. Extreme winds and bliz-zards are most common over the Atlantic and along its coastline. Heavy rainfall occasionally impacts the whole continent. European-wide transport operators face a wide range of weather-related haz-ards but luckily not tropical cyclones.

European atlas on adverse weather for transport

To meet the needs of mobility

The Finnish Meteorological Institute together with four other European research institutes has constructed a European atlas on the probabilities and occurrence of adverse weather events for transport. Conceivable

impacts of global climate change on the occurrence of these events were also studied.

Improved visibilityFog occurrence is a problem for many modes of transport, most

importantly aviation and shipping. For shipping, it may be neces-sary that the vessels reduce their speed to ensure safe operation. Similarly, for aviation, an increase in separation between aircraft is required as visibility deteriorates. In addition to horizontal vis-ibility, vertical visibility is another factor of importance. Vertical visibility is operationally measured by ceilometers that measure the height of the base of a cloud deck, called the ceiling.

The horizontal and vertical visibility conditions at airports are relevant to the requirements for the Instrument Landing System (ILS) on aircraft. These are, with increasing demands on that sys-tem, CAT I, CAT II, CAT IIIa, CATIIIb and CAT IIIc.

Tab. 1. List of Instrument Landing System categories

Horizontal visibility Vertical visibility

CAT I ≥ 550 m > 60 m

CAT II ≥ 300 m ≥ 30 m

CAT IIIa ≥ 200 m

CAT IIIb/c < 200 m

Recent studies have shown an improvement in visibility in many European airports. It has been shown that this decline in low visibil-ity conditions is due to the decrease in aerosol emissions over Eu-rope, and not e.g. by changes in atmospheric flow patterns. The pan-European improvement in visibility conditions can be seen in Fig. 1, which shows that the average hours with conditions of CATII or worse have been reduced by about a factor of four. When considering the individual categories, it can be seen that the duration of CATII has decreased much less (by a factor of 2.5) compared with that of the CATIIIb/c conditions (a factor of 5). This means that the lower aerosol content of the air is more effective at reducing the occurrence of very dense fog, compared with that of less dense fog. These CATII conditions may additionally be caused in part by heavy snowfall, very heavy rain or dust episodes in southern Europe, which are probably less sensitive to changes in aerosol content. This improvement in vis-ibility has been achieved as a somewhat unexpected externality of im-proving air quality.

Phot

o: W

ikim

edia

Com

mon

s

Logistics

Logistics


PORT OFHAMINAKOTKA

www.haminakotka.fi

Fig. 1. Annual numbers of hours with particular visibility conditions averaged over the 24 airports (ILS categories, see Table 1)

Both negative and positive impacts on the transport sectorThe future climatic conditions were studied with climate models.

The multi-model approach adopted by the researchers indicates robust changes in temperature extremes. Extreme heat is likely to intensify across the entire continent, being more accentuated in the south. However, the projections are less coherent with regard to extremes in precipitation and wind. Both cold extremes and snow events are likely to become rarer by the 2050s. On the other hand, heavy snowfall is not expected to decrease all over Europe. Interestingly, the models project a slight increase in Scandinavia. On average less snow but an increased frequency of heavy snowfall would be a great challenge to road maintenance.

Vehicle technologies will play an important role when considering the impacts of adverse weather: the technologies seem to improve, e.g. safety of the transport system, more rapidly than any other develop-ment trend. Hence, even if extreme weather phenomena become more frequent, it will not radically affect traffic safety. As to time costs and reliability of the transport system and supply chains if the increased

extreme weather cases become more frequent, it might bring serious effects to these areas. Reliability could well decrease unless we prepare to handle extreme weather.

Climate change is expected to have both negative and positive im-pacts on the transport sector. A reduction in cold events would have many positive impacts, reducing disturbances caused, e.g. by slipperi-ness, as well as reducing ice at sea and on rivers. On the other hand, the future increase in frequency and severity of heat waves indicates a need to consider the heat tolerance of various transport modes. For example, transport chains of low temperature goods could become more challeng-ing. The ongoing work packages of the EWENT project will study the impacts and consequences of the climate changes projected. �

Heikki Tuomenvirta, Dr. Pekka Leviäkangas

The EWENT project, funded by the European Commission under the 7th Framework Programme (Transport, Horizontal Activities), is carried out by VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland, the Finnish Meteorological Institute, the German Aerospace Center, via Donau (Austria), the Transport Economics Institute (Norway), the European Severe Storms Laboratory (Germany), Cy-prus Meteorological Institute, Foreca Consulting Ltd. (Finland) and the World Meteorological Organisation. More info at: ewent.vtt.fi.

Logistics

Phot

o: W

ikim

edia

Com

mon

s


Logistics

� Th e road freight market and the lo-gistic sector are viewed as those which strongly refl ect the macro-economic picture. Everybody now is quivering about another wave of the crisis. Are any of its symptoms visible in the road sector?

Joerg Herwig: We have to exactly defi ne which markets should be considered in or-der to use the logistics industry and specifi -cally the road transport as an indicator for the current and future situation. Certainly orders will be reduced in economically dif-fi cult times, which aff ect transport volumes. However, this does not aff ect all sectors and countries correspondingly, as some states are coping better than others. In countries like Russia and Poland, we had and still have

Interview with Kuehne + Nagel’s Joerg Herwig, Senior Vice President Road & Rail Logistics and Egidijus Kazukauskas, National Manager Lithuania

Driving at new chances

Transport and logistics are like the bloodstream, circulating with goods around organs and keeping them alive. If somebody neglects this the whole organism may be easily slain. On the other hand, transport and logistics are dynamic areas, going after healthy, profi table industries. We talk with Kuehne + Nagel’s repre-sentatives about the way both sectors are coping in uneasy times.

� Contract logistics has been one of the directions in which companies have headed to deal with the crisis. Is this model of running a business just a tem-porary remedy or is it a long-term ten-dency?

Joerg Herwig: When companies decide to outsource their logistics contract, it is a strategic decision. Typically, they agree to contracts with service providers with a duration of several years. It creates the possibility of faster economic growth, both nationally and in international markets, so such a decision isn’t economically sound as a short-term move. It’s about setting the pace for the whole industry, too, and outrunning the competition. An interna-tional provider, such as Kuehne + Nagel, is

to use the high specialization of an outside service. All in all, it’s a win-win situation, when both parties are professionals and know their job. Producers produce, logis-ticians take care of transport and everyone is happy as far as there’s a proper demand for goods.

� What do you think about the future of intermodal transport in our region and the role that road transportation can play in it?

Joerg Herwig: I am sure that intermodal traf-fi c will play an increasingly important role and that the advantages of both road and rail transport can be optimally combined. Th e constraints regarding personnel and cargo space and the threat of gridlock are major

a high demand for consumer goods despite the crisis, especially for textiles, cosmetics and body care, etc. Th e automotive market in Russia is growing as well, and the same applies to the engineering industry. Th is is particularly associated with Eastern Europe and the Baltic region, with their supply net-works and transport of end products. In Kuehne + Nagel we develop transport con-cepts for many companies in these sectors. It is important to segment the market and by this exploit its potential. It’s also the case of fl exibility. When a market does not give fair promise in the long-run, one needs to make a quick shift in order to stay profi table.

represented globally by its own companies and is familiar with the regional and local markets and conditions. Companies focus on the production or distribution of their products and are therefore looking for a specialist, who can implement new logistics concepts to elicit potential for optimization and to apply them consistently as well as of-fer holistic and integrated approaches. We, for example, do not only off er storage serv-ices, but also sea and air freight shipments and take care of national or international distribution on the road or by rail. Like be-fore, the customer remains in control over these processes, but at the same time is able

challenges to trucking, e.g. with respect to de-fi ned running time. Here, the railway mode has clear advantages. With fi xed schedules and a very low default it’s much more sta-ble. In particular, establishing long routes is easier to overcome. Concerns exist possibly due to the volatile quantity of transport vol-umes. Th is is why some companies fear that block trains will fail due to a lack of utiliza-tion. Finally, of course, cost is an issue. Th e planning is more diffi cult for a truck, because prices quickly go up and down, while train fares are agreed upon over a longer period of time. We are already operating 16 trains per month, which run between Hamburg

Phot

os: K

uehn

e + N

agel

Egid

ijus K

azuk

ausk

as

Joer

g Her

wig

Logistics


A crossroads for markets – A road map for the future

FIRST TRADE FAIR FOR INTERNATIONAL TRANSPORT AND LOGISTICS MANAGEMENT

12 - 14 June 2012

Trade Fair Centre Hamburg, Germany

Organiser:

EUROEXPO Messe- und Kongress-GmbH Tel.: +49 89 32391-241Fax: +49 89 32391-246E-mail: [email protected]: www.transfairlog.com

First-class accompanying

programme

with 16 Knowlege Forums

and Live Events

www.transfairlog.com

and the Austrian city of Ens. With our daily traffi c train between Greece (Th essaloniki) and Austria (Lannach) we have created a fl exible solution for our customers. Th e de-mand for car-load transport on rail is rising. Just recently, we developed a transportation concept for a consumer goods manufacturer for products from Romania, Hungary and Slovakia to Western Europe.

� You have recently joined K + N. Can you tell us about the challenges you have encountered in your new job?

Joerg Herwig: I previously held a senior position at a market leader in road freight, where I was responsible for the develop-ment of the Eastern European market. At present one of the biggest challenges for my team and me is of course the further expansion of the LCL network in Eastern Europe. For this we have very good con-ditions and a strong base. In January, we opened our East hub in Vienna, which we will further expand into a hub for Eastern Europe and connect with everyday traffic with the European hub in Germany. The choice fell on Vienna, as the geographic location is optimal and our customers benefit from easy access to the East and

West – from Greece to the Baltic States and Russia. Kuehne + Nagel is continu-ously and systematically introducing new scheduled services. The company is get-ting stronger through acquisitions, such as the purchasing of the company RH Freight in the past year.

� Th e International Maritime Organisa-tion’s restrictions concerning the sul-phur content in ship’s fuel are coming into force in 2015. Studies show that there will be a signifi cant cargo shift from sea to road in the BSR. Are road transport companies and the road in-frastructure ready for this?

Egidijus Kazukauskas: Currently, shipping lines are increasing their capacities by in-troducing modern vessels, which also im-prove their effi ciency. In my opinion, when it comes to stricter environmental regula-tions, the sea freight sector is quite pre-pared. In addition, multimodal transpor-tation becomes more and more signifi cant due to various policies aimed at reducing the impact of transport on the environ-ment. Nonetheless, the study results should be interpreted thoroughly with caution, concerning a forecasted signifi cant modal

back-shift , but saying this unveils only one perspective. Th e biggest challenge I see is the limited possibility of many hauliers to increase their capacities, so it’s also a matter which the road sector must deal with.

� How do you fi nd the future develop-ment of transport and logistics in coun-tries bordering the Baltic region to the east?

Egidijus Kazukauskas: Transit will always remain a major business segment for the Baltic region. Th ere is a demand for goods in Belarus and Ukraine, but it is not easy to make reliable forecasts, since the govern-ments of these countries are less predictable than in western democracies. One must also fathom that both Belarus and Ukraine are bearing a couple of decades of Soviet shift lessness, which tainted their transport infrastructure. Ukraine is slowly moving ahead, although for a country with such potential, it might proceed better. Belarus is still stuck in the past era. On the other hand, we have noticed an increasing com-petitiveness from Russia, as providers are investing in new fl eets and lanes.

Marisa Lutter


Logistics

Green Highway is a registered trademark that refers to a com-bination of activities with the same goal – an environmen-tally-friendly transportation corridor based on local and renewable energy, intended for people who drive ecologi-

cal vehicles. The project is led by the cities of Sundsvall and Östersund in Sweden and Trondheim in Norway. Kjell I. Stellander, the Project Manager from the City of Trondheim, says, “We call it Green Highway; not necessarily for what it represents today, but for what we are going to create in less than 10 years’ time: A fossil-free transport corridor across Mid-Scandinavia by 2020; a corridor and region that will contribute to the creation of business opportunities, sustainable economic growth, reduced greenhouse effects, and be attractive to local people as well as tourists.” This is an ambitious goal; however, the vision for the project reveals that this is a step towards green growth, where environmental gain is strongly connected to economic and social development.

One of the unique aspects of the Green Highway project is that it links relatively low-dense, small and medium-sized towns that have long commuting distances between them. The obvious dependence on private cars in these areas in turn promotes the opportunity of using lo-cally abundant renewable energy to fuel private cars and helps to solve the significant constraint for reducing CO2 emissions in the region.

EU: clean technologies as the futureRoad transport is responsible for almost three quarters of trans-

port greenhouse gas emissions by EU countries. Transport is also

Green Highway: a fossil-free transportation corridor

Eco is for economy

The world’s first ‘green highway’ stretches from Trond-heim in Norway on the Atlantic Coast, via Östersund, to Sundsvall on the Baltic Sea, along the E6 and E14 motorways. It connects a region where sustainable growth is given the highest priority.

threatened by energy poverty and is vulnerable to price instability, and in spite of considerable reductions in emissions of pollutants, there are still concerns about its effect on air quality. Thus, there is a growing concern about climate change, public health, depletion of natural resources and security of energy supply.

Accordingly, discussions in the EU focus on a shift from a fos-sil fuel-dependent economy towards one in which renewable alter-natives and new vehicle systems are at the forefront. The EU has set out policy agendas such as the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) for aviation and CO2 emission targets for cars. Through its recent Roadmap for moving towards a competitive low-carbon economy in 2050, the European Heads of State and Government have decided to extend their commitment to achieving an ambi-tious target; reducing domestic emissions by as much as 95% by 2050. It is clear that the EU is placing emphasis on green ways of creating a European economy in which environmentally-friendly technologies are to be prioritized. In this context, the Green High-way project illustrates how a green economy may become reality.

A road towards a low-carbon economy and better environ-ment

The three abovementioned Nordic cities have set out to create changes in their region through political commitment, their ability to realize projects as well as extensive co-operation between public and private partners who share the cities’ ambitions and see the potential future economic growth of their businesses that would result from a focus on climate and environmental issues. The region has potential for green growth in the form of large reserves of renewable energy such as biomass, wind and hydropower. Additionally, many R&D activities, industrial establishments and technological developments connected to transport systems as well as energy production exist there, provid-ing the cities with unique potential and an advantageous starting point. Other key regional actors are energy and high-tech companies, Trond-heim Airport Værnes, Åre Östersund Airport, the region’s colleges and universities as well as local and regional authorities.

Achievements so farAll activities of the project are well coordinated and focus on the

main goal of a fossil-free transport corridor in line with the Europe 2020 strategy. So far, the project has achieved the following goals:• Constructionoftheworld’slongestmainroadsystem,wherepeople

canchargetheirelectricvehicles; thereare94chargingstationsandmorethan240chargingpoints(slowcharging,230V/16A)alongthe447kmmainroadsystem.

• Construction of quick-charging stations for electric vehicles inmu-nicipalcentresalongtheGreenHighway.Thefirstquick-chargingsta-tioninNorthernEuropewasopenedontheGreenHighwayinÖster-sundinApril2011.ThesecondstationopenedatTrondheimAirportVærnesinJanuary2012.Fourmorequick-chargingstationsalongtheGreenHighwayarealreadyunderconstruction.

Elect

ric sn

ow-s

coot

er: e

xam

ple o

f a n

ew te

chno

logi

cal s

olut

ion.

Phot

o: w

ww.

gree

nhig

hway

.nu,

phot

o: G

reen

Hig

hway

Logistics


• Establishmentofafillinginfrastructureforbiofuels:biogas,biodiesel(RME)andbioethanol.

• Promotionoftheuseofelectricvehiclesinfleetsaswellasbyprivatecarowners.

• Performance of a large test program for electric vehicles, includinglong-termperformancetestinginthewinterclimateinÖstersund.

• Development of a prototype electric snow scooter.The technologyused in the scooter is easily adaptable toother transportplatforms,includingelectricalpinehillpistemachines.

• Development of Internet-based communication systems throughwhichtravellerscanplanroutesusingpublictransport,includingde-tailsofthecarbonfootprintforthedifferentroutes.

• Developmentofameetingplannerthatprovidesoptimalmeetinglo-cationstominimizetime,costsandemissions.

• Publicationofacomplete‘BuyersGuideforElectricandPlug-inHy-bridCars’,whichisupdatedannually.

• EstablishmentofataxiprojectwithelectricvehiclesinTrondheim.An overall evaluation of the project regarding total energy is in-

tended for a later stage of the project.

The road to resultsAn important principle for the Green Highway project is that

the development should be based on a range of operations and so-lutions. Certainly, it is not possible to claim that one specific fuel, means of transport or change in attitude alone is required to achieve the ultimate goal. The truth is rather the opposite – the inclusion of and competition between solutions and technologies will catalyse development, according to the project managers.

Apart from the region’s favourable conditions, comprehensive and systematic accumulation of competence in low- and zero-emission transport solutions, such as electric and biofuel vehicles, the other reason for which it was possible to make the Green Highway project a reality is the strong will and interest from local and international investors to invest in the region. Moreover, there exist two large plants in Östersund and Sundsvall that produce biogas for transport purposes from recycled organic waste and a production facility in Trondheim using raw material from the salmon industry is planned. Moreover, Kjell I. Stellander em-phasizes that the Green Highway has proven the strength of cross-border collaboration between cities, municipalities and countries in working towards common goals. The project management focuses on an action-oriented approach: “We do not go through long strategy processes and

plans; we move quickly into operations and harvest results along the way. Organization and methodology is for us the road to success. Although it is important to build your actions on sound strategies and plans, the duration of the project is only 3 years, so we cannot initiate new strategies but we try to build on already existing plans.”

The future of the Green HighwayFrom the project management’s point of view, the political dimen-

sion is very important. An absence of political commitment to a low-carbon economy endangers the project. Political leadership is seen as essential for the long-term engagement of the cities, and for the devel-opment of institutional capacity across national borders. This is espe-cially important for life after the project: What happens once it is final-ized? Will the cities be ready to take the project further by themselves?

The platform for the project has boosted interest in involvement from other actors, which has raised the profile of the Green Highway even further. Such an expanding platform and network will make faster development possible, with bottleneck effects eliminated through new technology and increasing competence. Inclusion of new participants will therefore create potential for more and faster results.

Zero Rally 2012The next big step in the project is the 2012 Zero Rally along the Green

Highway. The 2012 Zero Rally, from the 14th to 16th of June, is intended to showcase environmentally-friendly cars as alternatives to fossil fuel cars. It is also an arena for new technology and new car models, and an exciting meeting place for the most important stakeholders in environmental aware-ness. The rally runs from Östersund, Sweden to Trondheim, Norway, with special stages and festivities along the Green Highway. The rally is a collab-orative effort between Zero (an NGO) and Green Highway. �

Aslı Tepecik DişResearch Fellow at Nordregio

Aslı Tepecik Diş specialises in European spatial planning de-velopment perspectives, regional sustainable development, a cross-disciplinary approach on relations between gender and climate change in respect to their impacts on spatial planning. You can reach Aslı at [email protected]. For more information about the project go to: www.green-highway.nu or www.sundsvall-ostersund-trondheim.com.

Map

show

ing t

he G

reen

Hig

hway

, sou

rce: w

ww.

gree

nhig

hway

.nu


Events

RORO 2012: The business rolls on

At the free-to-attend conference and exhibition representatives from the ro-ro business – i.e. Scand-lines, Stena Line, DFDS Seaways,

North Sea RoRo, Wallenius Wilhelmsen and Port of Gothenburg – will show how the market players are preparing for some of the biggest developments in their history.

Ro-ro on stranger tidesSara Skold, an environmental specialist

at the Clean Shipping Project, commented that, “cargo owners are now looking at the performance of their entire supply chain and ro-ro operators must start investigating new, environmentally-friendly ways of running their businesses.” If not, then competitors will seize their cargo flows and the ro-ro net-work will be decimated. Sara will also discuss the outcomes of the Clean Shipping Index, which allows shipping lines to showcase their fleet’s ‘green’ credentials as well as enables cargo owners to pick the most environmen-tally-friendly operator. As a follow up, Arild Iversen, CEO of Wallenius Wilhelmsen Lo-gistics, will present his perspective on fuels,

cleaning solutions, supplying and moderniz-ing vessels in terms of the Emission Control Areas. Additionally, Mike Garratt, managing director at MDS Transmodal, will give a glo-bal outlook of the ro-ro market as well as Dr. Gernot Tesch, managing director at Scand-lines Deutschland, and Lennart Svensson, executive vice-president of the port and lo-gistics department at TTS Groups ASA, will discuss the current and future requirements of ro-ro shipping lines.

Äsa Wilske, environmental manager at Port of Gothenburg, will elaborate on the emergence of the onshore power supply, as Gothenburg takes pride in being the first port to have a fully efficient shoreside power sup-ply for vessels at berth. During RORO 2012 Äsa will also be highlighting what Gothen-burg port has prepared for the industry over the coming years.

And, as the event is an exhibition too, the whole buying chain – from logistics compa-nies, freight forwarders and operators, through naval architects and ports, to rail hauliers and the shipping industry – will set up their stands and present their best products and services.

Baltic Ro-ro/Ferry Yearbook sessionsBaltic Transport Journal – in relation to its

brand new yearbook publication – invites you to the free-to-attend sessions on the last day of RORO 2012, where together with selected market players we will discuss key outcomes of this comprehensive market summary, as well as business opportunities currently available. The sessions will touch upon a comparison of ro-ro/ferry links and freight traffic in the region, opportunities for investments and network development, future of rail ferries, roll-trailer/combi trains, port-to-port rail connections and last but not least – adjusting ro-ro tonnage in the Baltic Sea in context of capacity, maritime spatial planning and SOx/NOx limits.

The BTJ conference will kick off with a presentation of the Yearbook’s outcomes. Ses-sion I will focus on the Baltic North-South axis with representatives from the ports of Gdynia and Szczecin-Świnoujście, while Ses-sion II will address the West-East axis with the assistance of Talllink/Silja, Lübecker Hafen-Gesellschaft and Port of Turku. �

Przemysław Myszka

Another year has passed and the shipping business is one step closer to the new sulphur rules. How far along are roll on-roll off operators in adapting to these changes? The only dedicated exhibition to the ro-ro industry is re-turning to Gothenburg and the event’s agenda will be packed with themes covering energy consumption, emis-sions and environmental regulations. On top of that the BTJ’s Baltic Ro-ro/Ferry Yearbook will have its premiere.

BALTIC RO-RO/FERRY YEARBOOK SESSIONSPloughing through the North-South & West-East matrix

RORO 2012 Exhibition & Conference24th May 2012, Conference Theatre 2, Svenska Mässan, Gothenburg, Sweden

MODERATORSLena Lorenc, Editor-in-Chief, Baltic Transport Journal, Piotr Trusiewicz, Publishing Director, Baltic Transport Journal

SESSION I 10:00-11:45

Baltic North-South axis Piotr Trusiewicz, Publishing Director, Baltic Transport JournalJarosław Siergiej, Managing Director, Ports of Szczecin & Świnoujście, PolandJanusz Jarosiński, Managing Director, Port of Gdynia, Poland

• An overall review of the current trends as well as a deepened analysis of shipping lines and their fleet, ports/terminals and an overall view of overland traffic

• All backed up with statistics, tables, graphs and maps• Supplemented by a printed wall map poster (100 x 70 cm) – displaying an updated and confirmed Baltic Sea ro-ro liner network as

well as intermodal connections from the ports & terminals to their hinterland• The Yearbook goes hand-in-hand with an interactive map version at www.baltictransportmaps.com – the comprehensive freight

transport map portal of the Baltic Sea, giving an even more detailed view on maritime & the land side

SESSION II 12:00-13:30

Baltic West-East axisOrtwin Harms, Director Marketing & Sales, Lübecker Hafen-Gesellschaft, GermanyChristian Ramberg, Managing Director, Port of Turku, FinlandHåkan Fagerström, Director Cargo Services, Tallink Silja, Finland

More info: www.baltictransportjournal.com Register for FREE at: www.roroex.com/btj

All attendees will receive a FREE COPY of the Baltic Ro-ro/Ferry Yearbook 2012

Balt

ic R

o-Ro

& F

erry

Yea

rboo

k 20

12

Events


Transfairlog: Logistics takes the fl oor

Transfairlog aims at tackling the most burning questions of the logistics industry in earnest, pointing out the key market trends in their pros and cons. The event is designed to be a bold and future-shaping venture.

In June 2012 the halls of the Hamburg Trade Fair Centre will welcome a new trade fair. Completely geared towards business, Transfairlog will be focused on

the effi cient organisation of internal logistics processes as well as optimisation of interna-tional freight transport.

Everyone is welcomeWhile the event carries on professionals

and managers from the fi elds of supply chain management, procurement, production, storage, dispatch along with IT companies will keep their ear to the logistics ground. Exhibitors – from warehouse and operating equipment companies, through ports, ship-ping lines and freight forwarders, to IT spe-cialists – will show a vivid range of products and services and present their best.

During the second day of the trade fair, the 2nd German-Finnish Logistics Forum will be opened by the consulate general of Finland in Hamburg. Finnish ports – HaminaKotka, Helsinki and Turku – as well as companies – Freight One Scandinavia and Finnlines – will be introducing themselves by having a collective stand at the fair.

Valuing knowledgeTh e thematic focus of Transfairlog will

also be refl ected in 16 knowledge forums, spread around three lecture areas in the mid-dle of the exhibition halls. One of them – “Th e hinterland connections of German mari-time ports – a competitive factor aff ecting

eastern European growth markets” – will ponder the hub role for eastern Europe of both Bremerhaven and Hamburg ports, but what’s also interesting – will show their competition with Rhine estuary ports and the ones situated in the Baltic. Will Germa-ny’s maritime ports consistently develop their seaward approaches as well as rail and waterway infrastructure and thus still sup-ply the region or some eastern Baltic tiger is to arise and cut its share? And as the pres-entation done by TransBaltic will show, too, the interested parties will play hard, since the Baltic Sea region is to attract additional 100 mln tn of goods by 2030.

But logistics isn’t only about cargo. When some lose, others win, and that’s the case of nuclear power in Germany. Aft er last year’s Fukushima accident in Japan, the gradual phase-out of atomics in Germany has sped up and the shift in energy towards green renewables such as wind energy is on the go. A forest of German off shore wind farms with an output of 25 GW is to rise by 2030, but so far only a few turbines are ac-tually running. Experts are turning their at-tention from particular issues to the overall process and want to bite through the whole logistics chain. Concepts for intelligent pro-duction supply, cost-effi cient repowering

and eff ective spare part maintenance are what is required, and this will be the focal point of this forum.

As Transfairlog will concentrate on the optimization of local and global international freight transport and logistics, the theme of IT will appear. Concepts such as ‘Logistics on demand’, ‘Soft ware as a service’ and ‘Busi-ness by design’ sound catchy and promise a new, bright and fl exible IT heaven for intral-ogistics. But do these ideas really work? Does soft ware truly accelerate hardware? During the “Logistics soft ware from the Cloud” fo-rum, users and suppliers will share their day-to-day experiences.

Where the fi rst steps are takenTh ese are just few of the upcoming high-

lights – many more are to come during the event. But what’s most important, Trans-fairlog wants to be the road map for the fu-ture. Th e biggest success will be when ideas, projects and creative mindsets will be forged during the three days in Hamburg and truly form the forthcoming course of events.

Th e entrance for the fair is incl. par-ticipation at the accompanying programme (forums and live-presentations). �

Przemysław Myszka

12-14 June 2012, Trade Centre Hamburg, GermanyMore information at: www.transfairlog.com

Sponsored


Collector’s corner

Th e Stockholm landscape (also oil on plywood) is a curious piece bought in a second-hand shop with furniture in Sweden. Th e signature “K-A. Boström 48” again says noth-ing and the cat got the Internet’s tongue once again. Maybe Mr/Mrs Boström lived a genuine life of an artist by selling craft s on the promenades of Stockholm, wan-dering through Sweden’s capital, penniless but with his or her heart full of love for Muses? Of course, the naive painting should have a separate corner in the collection.

Forgotten by people and Wiki

And last, but not least, another class of visual art – a photo-graphic keepsake from the fi rst international voyage of the Swedish cruiser Gotland. Th e work is signed by the famous German photographer Arthur Renard but in fact it was taken by his anonymous apprentice. Cay Jacob Arthur Renard died in 1934 and Gotland passed the Kiel Canal for the fi rst time on December 10th, 1935. Such items were delivered the next day to Hamburg and sold to

crew members. How many copies are still lying around within the lumbers of of-fi cers’ descendants, seamen and cadets who brought them home? And how many have passed to collectors who still care and ask: who, where and when?

Collecting paintings is an expensive and exclusive hobby, we come across such private collections most often in galleries or museums, where they are donated as precious gifts of wealthy people (or in our secret treasuries if we are one of them…). But there’s another side of the coin, too, since even at flea markets one can find cheap works created by forgotten professional painters and suitable pictures by amateurs. It is an open question – what looks better on the wall – a copy painted by a computerised robot or a piece of original art, even if it’s not necessarily a masterpiece. Believe it or not, in the latter case your emotions could be the same as the millionaire’s, who buys, for example, Turner or Monet…

crew members. How many copies are still lying around within the lumbers of of-

Albert Karl Hermann Wöbbeking (1879-1956) signed his pictures H. Wöb-beking and this is his “Aus dem Ham-burgen Hafen” (watercolour on paper). Th e only piece of information about him is that in 1920 he moved from Hannover to Hamburg. Sometimes his paintings appear at auctions. I bargained over the price for two weeks being certain that nobody would buy it – would-be clients absolutely don’t understand the subject. Th e romanticism of the mooring dol-phin cannot be appreciated by people born and living among cornfi elds.

Teodor Gałysz’s (1912-?) bio has only five lines on the web. He also moved from the depths of the land to the coast in his adulthood – in 1957 he jour-neyed from Lublin to Szczecin, where he died. And like in Wöbbeking’s case, sometimes his works are auctioned on the Internet. “Minesweeper” (oil on plywood) has a buyer’s inscription on the reverse: “For the beloved original, a first original on the oc-casion of his 25th birthday – Parents”.

The oil on canvas, depicting a sailing ship passing Kronborg Castle in the north entrance of Øresund, seems to be painted by a gifted amateur and signed “Haugaard”. The painting has a special ‘overseas’ atmosphere, but the most important reason for purchasing this was… rain. “A marchand”, drunk a little, kept the uncovered work in pouring rain. I was afraid the paint would run if I didn’t buy it. Franciszek Tylman

Transport miscellany


Two editions ago we mentioned amphibians Ził 485 which served in the Polish SAR service till the early 1990s. They took part in many rescue campaigns in lagoons but never tasted real action on the open sea except exercises in calm weather. But the amphibian presented on this mystery photo proves that such a vehicle can pierce even against breaking waves! Please just note the folding breakwater on the bow and the two men standing aft. But what’s maybe the most

interesting is the black strip along the side that looks like a fender. In fact it is a retouch covering an inscription! Probably the picture illustrated a piece of information about another rescue service and such compilation should be hidden. We would be very obliged if you could help us with any further particulars regarding this mystery photograph.

The banner of a local trade union of warehouse workers in Gothenburg reminds of the times when people working in logistics didn’t know who they really were and where they were really employed. They mis-takenly called themselves carriers, coachmen, loaders, stevedores, transport workers… in a similar way Es-kimos have dozens of names for frozen falls but don’t know the general term ‘snow’. Thank you, scholars, for the discovery, now we know where we belong – at the end of thousands of logistics chains.

Phot

o: G

öteb

orgs

Stad

smus

eum

Homeward bound

In 1952 the nearly forgotten, though never by us, British factory Saunders-Roe made the world’s larg-est all-metal flying boat for transatlantic flights. The SR.45 Princess had 91 recliners on two decks, plus seven double-berth cabins for first class pax. It was driven by 10 turboprop engines in six gondolas. The prototype made 46 successful flights in 100 hours but all flying boats were on a straight course towards a dead end because ground-based aircraft were evolv-ing like lightening. Sadly to say, but not one of three SR.45 planes found a buyer. They all were cocooned, turned up corroded in 1964 and scrapped by 1967.

Supplementing the foregoing edition of Collector’s Corner, we want to show an old shipyard’s name plate which is still in the right place – on the poop bulkhead of the sail-ing ship Gorch Fock I. The barque was built in 1933 for Reichsmarine, sunk in 1945 and sailed again in 1951 as the Soviet Tovarishch. In 1991 she hoisted the Ukrainian flag and in the end of 20th century was bought by the German association Tall-Ships Friends. Since 2003, as Gorch Fock again (plus I), she has been hulked in Stralsund which was originally her first home port. She serves as a museum and as a stationary training ship. Restoration works are slowly underway and the owner be-lieves that one day she will set sail again…

Flying dream that sharply dropped

Logistickers?

Stripping the mystery

From paddlewheels to pods

Phot

o: M

arek

Błu

ś

The replacement of both Scandlines’ fer-ries on the route Rostock-Gedser is a good opportunity to remind of the very beginning of the first ferry line between Denmark and Germany. It started in 1903 with four rail ferries including two unique side-wheelers with four funnels – the German Friedrich Franz IV and the Danish Prinsesse Alexan-drine. Both were built by Schichau in Elbing (Elbląg) and they differed a little in silhou-ettes – Friedrich had no forecastle and looked more symmetrical. The depicted Alexandrine served till 1933 and was scrapped in 1935.

Phot

o: R

uthA

S

Phot

o: W

ikim

edia

Com

mon

sSo

urce

: Mici

ński’

s col

lectio

n


Who is who

ALEXANDER DUDKOGeneral manager at Moby Dik

Alexander Dudko, who previously worked as director of operations at Vostochnaya Stevedoring Company, has been chosen as the new general manager of Moby Dik container terminal in St. Petersburg. Dudko obtained a degree from the Saint Petersburg State Marine Technical Univer-sity, the UK Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport as well as received a mas-ter’s degree from the Cass Business School of the City University London.

ANDREY BOGDANOVCEO at ULCT

Andrey Bogdanov, previously commercial director of First Container Terminal, has moved to the Ust-Luga Container Terminal as the new chief executive officer. Bogdanov started his career in 1984 working nine years for the Sea Port of St. Petersburg. In years 1993-99 he was the head of department and COO at MCT Petersburg and later on he was the CEO of MCT PORT. In 2003 Bogdanov re-turned to the Sea Port of St. Petersburg and from 2007 he worked at FCT.

Business blooms with the Spring

ANATOLY MESHCHERYAKOVVP at Russian Railways

Russian Railways’ Board of Directors has ap-pointed Anatoly Meshcheryakov as their new vice-president as well as secretary of state. Between 2004 and 2011 he worked at Transmashholding as director of external relations and from 2009 as the compa-ny’s first deputy managing director. From December 2011 Anatoly Meshcheryakov served as senior advisor to the president of Russian Railways.

PATRICK ZILLESHead of Intermodal at DB Schenker Logistics

DB Schenker Logistics has created the post of Head of Intermodal Activities for Patrick Zilles as the importance of intermodal so-lutions is growing without a break. In his new role Zilles will be responsible for link-ing different modes of transport efficient-ly, in particular DB SCHENKERhangartner, offering the company’s customers a com-bination of trucking and rail services from a single source.

REMI ERIKSENCEO at DNV Maritime and Oil & Gas

Remi Eriksen has been chosen to lead the new company – Det Norske Veritas Maritime and Oil & Gas. He will head the 5,500 employees’ classification society and steer a well-established provider of risk management services to the oil and gas industry. Formerly, Eriksen worked in Singapore as chief operating officer, gov-erning DNV’s Asia Pacific and Middle East operations.

BJÖRN PETRUSSONStena Line’s group freight director

To strengthen its freight organization Stena Line has appointed Björn Petrusson as Group Freight Director, with the overall respon-sibility of running and developing Stena Line’s freight business from the beginning of August. Björn Petrusson, who holds an MSc from Chalmers, worked earlier, among others, as MD at DFDS Tor Line. Previously, Jacob Koch-Nielsen was appointed freight commercial manager at Stena Line Freight Scandinavia.

RON WIDDOWSCEO of Rickmers-Linie

Ronald Widdows is the new chief execu-tive officer of both Rickmers-Linie and Rickmers Holding. Widdows has over 40 years’ experience in the shipping indus-try, the last 31 years of which were with APL and Neptune Orient Lines where he worked as the group president and CEO. In his rich career Ron Widdows has been, among others, the chairman of the World Shipping Council as well as headed the Transpacific Stabilization Agreement.

TROND KLEIVDALPresident of the NSA

The Norwegian Shipowners’ Association has a new president in the person of Trond Kleivdal, a graduate of the Norwe-gian School of Economics, who has also been the CEO of Color Line since 2001; a year later Kleivdal joined the NSA Board. His previous experiences include a spell at Kværner AS and working as a shipbro-ker for P.F. Bassøe AS.

WHERE IT ALL FITS TOGETHER

THE ONLY DEDICATED EVENT FOR THE ROLL-ON/ROLL-OFF SHIPPING INDUSTRY RETURNS WITH ITS BIGGEST EVER VISITOR PROGRAMME.

Register FREE at www.roroex.com/btj

RORO 2012’s unmissable line-up includes:

• Free conference open to all visitors• Over 120 participating companies• Training Zone – covering all of your

training needs

NEWFree to attendconference

FREEConference and Exhibition

22 - 24 MAY 2012 | GOTHENBURG, SWEDEN

Follow us on: Co-located with:

• Networking Bar and Internet Lounge• Baltic Transport Journal Conference• Plus much more...

Report Baltic ro-ro & ferry traﬃ c A house on the ro-ck ...baltic-press.com/ftp/btj46_2-12.pdf ·...

Documents

Transcript of Report Baltic ro-ro & ferry traﬃ c A house on the ro-ck ...baltic-press.com/ftp/btj46_2-12.pdf ·...