Sustainable Intermodal Freiggpht Transportation Options in ...

Sustainable Intermodal Freight Transportation g pOptions in the Great Lakes: Development and

Application of a Great Lakes Geographic Intermodal Freight Transport Model

JAMES J WINEBRAKE PHD

Intermodal Freight Transport Model

JAMES J. WINEBRAKE, PHD

ROCHESTER INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

GLMRI UNIVERSITY AFFILIATES MEETING

26 SEPTEMBER 2008

Overview of Presentation

BackgroundBackground

Project Goals

GL-GIFT Model

Modeling a Route

Example Cases

F t W kFuture Work

Conclusion

J. Winebrake, GLMRI 2008

Background

Current Great Lakes freight is dominated by bulk cargo: iron ore, coal and grain.

No regular container service and few Roll-on-Roll-off (RoRo) ships.

Emergence of containers as a possible new opportunity


Background: Great Lakes Freight

Approximately 40% of all U.S. freight has an origin and/or destination i h G L k (IL IN MI MN NY OH PA WI)in the Great Lakes states (IL, IN, MI, MN, NY, OH, PA, WI).

GL Tonnage

(kt )GL Value

($B)

Avg. Value ($/t )

Non-GL Tonnage

(kt )Non-GL

V l ($B)Avg. Value

($/t )(kton) ($B) ($/ton) (kton) Value ($B) ($/ton)Road 5,146,870 $3,390 $ 659 6,110,261 $5,055 $827Rail 620,635 $ 135 $ 218 1,119,195 $ 152 $136Water 219,069 $ 15 $ 70 323,168 $ 61 $189, $ $ , $ $Air+Road 1,102 $ 55 $50,742 1,812 $ 106 $58,757Rail+Road 18,888 $ 46 $ 2,465 16,953 $ 12 $760Pipeline & Unk. 1,289,487 $ 373 $ 290 2,389,858 $ 753 $315Other Intermodal 92 549 $ 425 $ 4 592 66 769 $ 498 $7 464Other Intermodal 92,549 $ 425 $ 4,592 66,769 $ 498 $7,464TOTAL/AVG. 7,388,600 $ 4,442 $ 601 10,028,016 $6,640 $662

Data Source: 2002 Dept. of Transportation – Freight Analysis FrameworkData Source: 2002 Dept. of Transportation Freight Analysis Framework


It is a Sea of Opportunity…in fact, three “C’s”

Commerce

Congestion

Climate


Opportunities: Commerce

“Continued growth in domestic, cross-border, and import/export trade means that traffic volumes could soon be sufficient to achieve the economies of scale needed to support a viable and competitive cargo vessel service within support a viable and competitive cargo vessel service within the GLSLS system. In fact, all container traffic through the region is expected to grow by a factor of up to 2.5 times current volumes by 2050 and about one third of this could current volumes by 2050 and about one-third of this could be moved using the waterway.” (p. 100, GLSLS Study, 2007)


Opportunities: Congestion

“One way to ease traffic i i h congestion is shortsea

shipping…The objective is to reduce travel time, avoid congested routes and reduce cost congested routes and reduce cost. … For example, goods that normally travel by truck through congested metropolitan areas congested metropolitan areas might be rerouted across a lake, if fast and cost-effective water transport were available.” (p.99, p (p 99,GLSLS Study, 2007)


Opportunities: Climate

10,000

/yr

Mode gCO2/tkm

Truck 153

Rail 13 100

1,000

d T

gCO

2/Ship (Dom.) 19

Air 1135 10

100 tk

m/

yr a

nd

1

Truck Rail Ship (Domestic)

Air

Gt

Values in the above table are based on top-down analysis; emissions factors can change considerably based

(Domestic)

Gtkm/yr TgCO2/yr

on specific cargo and mode characteristics. Data from the BTS, Special Release, Table 1-46b: http://www.bts.gov/publications/national_transportation_statistics/.


GL-GIFT Project Goals

The goals of GL-GIFT are:Examine the potential for increased use of intermodal (ship, truck, and rail,) freight routes within the GLSLS regionDetermine potential for using the Great Lakes as a corridor for p gintermodal freight transportIllustrate how intermodal routes may affect economic and environmental costsProvide a tool for policy analysis, including tradeoff analysis across competing policy objectives

Developed in ArcGIS 9.2 (migrating to 9.3) with expectations for web-access in the future


The Geospatial Intermodal Freight Transport (GIFT) Model

Railroad Highway Network Network

Intermodal ConnectionsUser-Defined Segment and

Transfer Costs

Waterway Network


GIFT North American Network


The Great Lakes GIFT Network (GL-GIFT)


Obstacles: Data Inconsistencies


Obstacles: Confirming Facility Locations

Port facility locations were investigated by comparing data with satellite imagery. When inconsistent, actual port location actual port location coordinates were extracted from imagery and used to construct the intermodal network.


GIFT Operation: Modeling a Route

NTAD, ACE, Canadian D

Cost/Emission/Time F D b

Network Analyst O i i i Data, etc.

• Input Origin/Destination

Factor Database

• Select Evaluators and Optimization Parameters

Optimization Algorithm

• Optimize Route for Desired Parameter

3


Example Casesp


Container Movement: Cleveland to Toronto

Container vessel basedContainer vessel based on cargo vessel: DUTCH RUNNER

MAIN ENGINE: Wärtsilä 6R32D POWER: 2250 kW SPEED: 13.5 mph


Example Inputs

Emission Rates (g/TEU‐mi) $/TEU mph

Transport Mode CO2 PM10 Cost Speed

Truck 1000 0.12 $ 0.87 50$

Rail 200 0.09 $ 0.55 25

Ship 340 0.06 $ 0.50 13.5

• Emissions factors for modes from GREET, TEAMS, EIA, BTS, and other sources; emissions factors for spokes (transfer facilities) based on bottom-up analysis using EPA off-road emissions models.

• Costs from various sources (e.g., Global Insight study) – user needs to define.g g y• Values very much dependent on cargo, technology, and mode type.• Example does not include such things as delays at border crossings, congestion delays, or

bottom-up calculations for operating costs (e.g., tariff structure). These can be input by the user based on the case being evaluated.g


Case Study IUseful for evaluating tradeoffs and running

i f diff experiments for different input values (e.g., costs, speed, emissions). Can be helpful for determining “ ” l h i “green” supply chain pathways.

Primary Mode Ship Truck RailCost ($) 240 330 290Time (hrs) 20 6 15


CO2 (kg) 115 340 95

Case Study IUseful for exploring infrastructure and

h l i technology investment decisions. For example, we could look at varying time delays to mimic port

i tiexpansion options.


Case Study IIPrimary Mode Cost ($) Time (hrs) CO2 (kg) PM (g)

Ship 500 72 330 115

Truck 765 16 760 420

Rail 655 42 205 300

Note that we do not (yet) account for congestion in this case study which will affect


case study, which will affect emissions and time..

Future Work

Continue to Refine the GL-GIFT ModelValidate the capabilities of intermodal transfer facilities

Expand interface to allow bulk and container traffic, and bottom up calculations of emissions and costsbottom-up calculations of emissions and costs

Allow for variable speed limits for each network (road, rail, and ship) to improve time-of-delivery accuracy

Improve usability of the model and make web-accessible

Generate case studies that will be useful in comparing policies (both public and private)(both public and private)

Host a workshop to demonstrate the model and obtain feedback from potential users


Conclusions

Multiple opportunities exist to increase intermodal freight transport in Great Lakes region GIFT allows policy makers to assess the in Great Lakes region. GIFT allows policy makers to assess the attributes of potential freight projects.

GIFT can evaluate and optimize individual routes or sum multiple p proutes to characterize emissions on a larger scale.

GIFT allows modification of parameters (cost, speed, emissions, l di ti t ) t ti l l t li hloading time, etc.) to prospectively evaluate policy changes.

GIFT allows for trade-off analysis and identification of optimal modal choice depending on policy objectivesmodal choice depending on policy objectives

GIFT can be used to explore impacts of congestion, infrastructure improvement, changing economic conditions, new technology, etc.p , g g , gy,


The GL-GIFT Team

Research TeamD J S tt H k S ft E i i RITDr. J. Scott Hawker, Software Engineering, RITDr. Karl Korfmacher, Environmental Science, RITDr. James J. Winebrake, STS/Public Policy, RITDr James J Corbett Marine Studies UDELDr. James J. Corbett, Marine Studies, UDELBryan Comer, RIT Graduate StudentChris Prokop, RIT Graduate Student

AcknowledgementsAaron Falzarano, RIT GraduateSai Ketha RIT Graduate

Special thanks to:

Sai Ketha, RIT GraduateColin Murphy, RIT GraduateBen Weisberg, RIT GraduateSid Pendelberry RIT ITSSid Pendelberry, RIT ITS


For more information about the Laboratory for Environmental Computing and Decision Making (LECDM) or GIFT please visit http://lecdm.rit.edu


SS. Badger Expansion

Operates between Ludington, MI and Manitowoc, WI.Capable of carrying 120 Heavy-Duty Trucks with trailers Can accommodate oversized loadstrailers. Can accommodate oversized loads.Currently operates two round trips daily. Cost: $240-275 per truck.75 pAlternative is 400-500 mile driving trip.What if there were additional service?What if this service were subsidized to reduce cost to freight trucks?


Links to information used to put together the Canadian piece of the network.

Border Crossings between the US and Canadahttp://en ikipedia org/ iki/List of Canada %E2%80%93 Unitedhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Canada_%E2%80%93_United

_States_border_crossings

Canadian PortsCanadian Portshttp://www.worldportsource.com/ports/CAN.phphttp://www.tc.gc.ca/en/menu.htmhttp://www.maritime-database.com/country.php?cid=64http://www.maritime database.com/country.php?cid 64

Canadian Rail Lineshttp://www.cn.ca/productsservices/intermodal/en intermodal.shtmlhttp://www.cn.ca/productsservices/intermodal/en_intermodal.shtmlhttp://www8.cpr.ca/cms/English/Customers/Existing+Customers/Fa

cilities/Intermodal/default.htm


Sustainable Intermodal Freiggpht Transportation Options in ...

Documents

Transcript of Sustainable Intermodal Freiggpht Transportation Options in ...