Abstract

In recent years transport policy at an European Level has been focused on reducing the share of road transportation and promote alternative transportation means in order to reduce road congestion and carbon footprint. One of the solutions proposed has been promoting Short Sea Shipping (SSS) transportation combined with land transportation to become a door-to-door alternative to the monomodal road alternative. The maritime centered option would hit to birds with a stone: reduce congestion in the most urbanized areas of the European Union and partly replacing heavy polluting truck haulage for an environmentally friendlier option. The European Commission launched many polices and initiatives to make the modal shift happen, the crown jewel being the launch of multiple initiatives promoting the establishment of a system of Motorways of the Seas. Those are links between ports with higher standards in terms of travel time, costs and flexibility, which can compete one-on-one with road haulage among the countries in the Union. Despite different efforts from the public administration to kick off MoS lines and ensure their competitiveness, the expected momentum is still yet to come. In the light of this, this thesis aims at providing tools to assess the competitiveness of existing and MoS line to-be, to quantify the room for improvement available and the effects that some changes at an operational and strategical level might have on the success of any specific line. Particularly, the thesis presented aims at three specific objectives: (1) to identify the strategic potential of SSS in all its forms, considering the characteristics of the demand (goods to be moved) and the role of RoRo and MoS shipping in the global picture; (2) to identify the most sensible procedures in RoRo terminals operation to be addressed to improve their performance and perception from the end user, and; (3) To understand the costs of the supply chain, and the cost structure of RoRo shipping lines, and their sensitiveness in front of market changes, pricing and public funding policies. To approach each issue different qualitative, analytical and simulating models are used depending on the concerned problem. The strategic assessment makes use interviews to identify the main requirements that a transporter might face when dealing with SSS. The role of the terminal is assessed by means of two separate models: from one side an analytical model is used to assess the relationship between capacity and quality by means of quantifying the service time the ship spends in a port and calculate the probability of delays. On the other side, the resilience of the port is assessed with an arborescence interlinking its current vulnerabilities, their causes and effects and their probability to happen. Finally, and regarding the business models, first a cost and time model is constructed for each of them and tested against variations on some of the variables and from there, a tool to calculate the optimal deployment of the shipping line to ensure the maximum shift (or profit) is provided. In that case, the model is complemented with the adaptation of a transportation discrete choice model. Overall, the tools should be helpful to assess the potential of a shipping line from its planning level to its final operational deployment. Els darrers anys, la política de transports a nivell europeu s'ha focalitzat en reduir el pes del transport per carretera de mercaderies i promoure mitjans de transport que li siguin alternatius, com a mesures per reduir la congestió a les carreteres i la petjada ecològica. Una de les solucions que s'ha posat sobre la taula, és l'anomenat Transport Marítim de Curta Distància (TMCD o SSS, en les seves sigles en anglès), com a una veritable alternativa bimodal (ferrocarril/carretera combinats amb transport marítim) a l'opció de transport monomodal per carretera. Diversos estudis certifiquen que el transport porta-a-porta transcorregut parcialment amb TMCD acostuma a registrar menors externalitats (bàsicament costos ambientals i de congestió) que el transport per carretera per cada tona transportada. Des d'un punt de vista operatiu, el TMCD i especialment la seva versió en forma d'Autopistes del Mar (AdM o MoS), enteses com a enllaços entre ports amb altes prestacions pel que fa a temps de viatge, flexibilitat i freqüència a un cost competitiu s'han estudiat àmpliament com a una alternativa directa i equivalent al transport per carretera. Però malgrat els esforços fets des de l'administració pública per promoure les línies d'AdM i assegurar-ne la competitivitat, aquestes no han obtingut l'impuls previst inicialment. L'objectiu d'aquesta tesi, de fet, és proveir un conjunt d'eines per tal d'avaluar la competitivitat de qualsevol AdM i quantificar-ne el marge de millora i l'efecte que alguns canvis a nivell operatiu i estratègic podrien tenir en la seva competitivitat , tan a nivell operatiu com estratègic, per tal de garantir-ne la competitivitat futura. De forma més específica, la tesi que aquí es presenta, analitza tres aspectes específics de les AdM: (1) Quines característiques a de tenir el seu mercat potencial a nivell estratègic, (2) con rol prenen les terminals portuàries, enteses com la baula dèbil de la cadena de transport, a nivell de la valoració qualitativa de la cadena de transport per part del seu usuari final i (3), possibles models de negoci pel transportista / propietari de la mercaderia per treure el màxim profit de les AdM. Cada un dels tres aspectes s'adreça mitjançant eines diferenciades que s'adaptin a la problemàtica plantejada. L'anàlisi estratègic es basa en entrevistes a usuaris de cadenes de transport per establir els principals requeriments del transportista que es pugui plantejar l'ús d'una AdM. A partir dels requeriments, es defineixen diversos models de cadena de transport, arribant a la conclusió que les cadenes 'push-pull' i 'push against stock' són les candidates que més es beneficiarien d'una AdM, almenys a nivell estratègic. El rol de la terminal s'analitza qualitativament analitzant-ne dos aspectes per separat: d'una banda es crea un model basat en una combinació de valors d'origen estocàstic, determinista i via simulació, per calcular el temps d'operació mínim d'un buc de càrrega rodada a una terminal marítima i la relació que hi ha entre nivell d'ús de la terminal i la seva capacitat. D'altra banda, també s'estableix un marc per quantificar la vulnerabilitat i resiliència de la terminal davant de elements que afectin la seva normal operació i com aquests poden afectar la qualitat percebuda del servei. Finalment, pel que fa als models de negoci pels transportistes, es construeix un model de costos i temps per cada un d'ells, se n'analitza la sensibilitat i el pes de les principals variables que els afecten com a eina per calcular el model de negoci, les característiques de la línia marítima i les tarifes de base a cobrar des de la perspectiva de la naviliera. Per assolir-ho, el model es complementa amb l'adopció d'un model d'elecció modal. Preses conjuntament, es proporciona una metodologia per ajudar a avaluar el potencial de futures AdM o millorar les existents i l'efecte que hi poden tenir les actuals i futures polítiques de transport.

Abstract

[EN] Motorways of the sea operated as RoPax services are natural competitors with only-road freight haulage transportation. Cost, time and quality perceived are the determinants that make transporters and shippers use one route or another. This research considers the role that shipping companies and their ship deployment and pricing strategy have in the equation, as incentives for modal shift from road to sea. A model of the ships and transporter costs is developed considering different business models for the transporter (accompanied versus unaccompanied cargo) followed with a discrete choice model that, once calibrated, allows to test the influence that variables such as frequency, ship size and commercial speed might play into the competitiveness of a shipping line. As a result, different pricing strategies for the shipping line are developed and the characteristics of the optimal shipping line for each of them are found, to either maximize the profit of the shipping company or the modal shift.DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.4995/CIT2016.2016.4148 http://ocs.editorial.upv.es/index.php/CIT/CIT2016 Morales Fusco, P.; Grau Sala, M.; Saurí Marchán, S. (2016). Finding the right RoPax vessel size and freight price. A coste and mode choice model. Editorial Universitat Politècnica de València. 1456-1470. https://doi.org/10.4995/CIT2016.2015.4148 OCS 1456 1470

Abstract

This study aims to provide a systematic overview and comparison of capital and O&M costs models for CO2 pipelines and booster stations currently available in literature. Our findings indicate significantly large cost ranges for the results provided by the different cost models. Two main types of capital cost models for pipeline transport were found in literature, models relating diameter to costs and models relating mass flow to costs. For the nine diameter based models examined, a capital cost range is found of, for instance, 0.8–5.5 M€2010/km for a pipeline diameter of 0.8 m and a length of 25 km. For the five mass flow based cost models evaluated in this study, a cost range is found of, for instance, 0.9–2.1 M€2010/km for a mass flow of 750 kg/s over 25 km (TRUNK-25). An important additional factor is that all capital costs models for CO2 pipeline transport, directly or indirectly, depend on the diameter. Therefore, a systematic overview is made of the various equations and parameter used to calculate the diameter. By applying these equations and parameters to a common mass flow, height difference and length result in diameters between 0.59 and 0.91 m for TRUNK-25. The main reason for this range was different assumptions about specific pressure drop and velocity. Combining the range for diameter, mass flow and diameter based cost models gives a capital and levelized cost range which varied by a factor 10 for a given mass flow and length. The levelized cost range will further increase if the discrepancy in O&M costs is added, for which estimations vary between 4.5 and 75 €/m/year for a pipeline diameter of 0.8 m. On top of this, most cost models underestimate the capital costs of CO2 pipelines. Only two cost models (namely the models who relate the costs to the weight of the pipeline) take into account the higher material requirements which are typically required for CO2 pipelines. The other sources use existing onshore natural gas pipelines as the basis for their cost estimations, and thereby underestimating the material costs for CO2 pipelines. Additionally, most cost models are based on relatively old pipelines constructed in the United States in the 1990s and early 2000s and do not consider the large increase in material prices in the last several years. Furthermore, key model characteristics are identified for a general cost comparison of CCS with other technologies and a system analysis over time. For a general cost comparison of CCS with other technologies, pipeline cost models with parameters which have physical or economic meaning are the preferred option. These are easy to interpret and can be adjusted to new conditions. A linear cost model is an example of such an model. For a system analysis over time, it is advised to adapt a pipeline cost model related to the weight of the pipeline, which is the only cost model that specifically models thickness of the pipeline and include material prices, to incorporate the effect of impurities and pipeline technology development. For modeling booster station costs, a relation between capacity and costs including some economies of scale seems to be the most appropriate. However, the cost range found in literature is very large, for instance, 3.1–3.6 M€2010 for a booster station with a capacity of 1.25 MWe. Therefore, validation of the booster station cost is required before such models are applied in further research.