DOCSLIB.ORG

Railway Map ERTMS Version 3.0 - Memorandum on Alternatives Content

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Railway Map ERTMS Version 3.0 - Memorandum on Alternatives Content Railway map ERTMS Version 3.0 - Memorandum on Alternatives Content Management summary 1 1 Introduction: a new protection system – benefits and need 7 2 The creation of the studied favourable scenarios 13 3 The effects of the favourable scenarios 21 4 Opportunities, risks and focus areas for the Preference Decision and Plan Elaboration Phase 39 5 Risks 55 6 Reviews of studies and the entire Exploratory Phase 59 Annex A: Summary of motions 63 Annex B: Verslag tweede marktinformatie 64 Annex C: Report of second and third round of Stakeholder meetings 68 Separate annexes Annex D: Basic report ERTMS Annex E: Report MKBA Annex F: Knowledge Book 2.0 Management summary Review including benefits and need The current train protection system ATB (Dutch: Automatische Trein Beïnvloeding) must be replaced in the coming decades. ERTMS has now expanded (also outside Europe) to become the international standard for train protection. Alongside safety and interoperability, replacement of ATB with the European developed safety and traffic management railway system, ERTMS (European Rail Traffic Management System), also offers potential gains in terms of the other goals from the Long Term Rail Agenda (LTSa) such as capacity, speed and reliability. This primarily concerns the replacement of the (electro) mechanical relay technology by ICT in the basic train protection system. This will enable a system transition that could not otherwise be realised by optimising ATB. The Temporary Maintenance and Innovation for Rail commi#ee (Kuiken commi#ee), the House of Representatives of the States General, the Cabinet and the railway sector believe that ERTMS offers opportunities for the future. The Cabinet took the in-principle decision to implement ERTMS1 on 8 June 2012. The subsequent “Building bridges” coalition agreement of 29 October included the concept that ERTMS would be implemented in a phased manner from 2016, using existing budgets. With the Railway map ERTMS version 1.0 (herea$er to be referred to as Railway map 1.0) of 13 February 2013, the Start Decision2 for the Exploratory Phase was made. With the presentation of the results from the first part of the investigation in the Explora- tory Phase in Railway map 2.03, it became clear that ERTMS would contribute towards the goals of the LTSa if its implementation was handled carefully. According to Railway map 2.0, in order to achieve the desired system transition, ERTMS Level 2 is required. ERTMS thus forms an important component in the realisation and the ambitions of the Long Term Rail Agenda: improving the quality of the railways as a transport product so that passengers and freight transporters increasingly regard it as an appealing transport option and use it. Rail- way map 2.0 also presented the funnelling process used to formulate the three favourable scenarios/final visions. These favourable scenarios have been investigated further compared to the 0 scenario. Figure 1. Diagram of favourable !nal visions studied in the Memorandum on Alternatives. EU compulsory PHS Remaining HRN Regional Zero Level 1 (overlay) ATB EG or NG Final vision 1 Level 2 Level 2, short block ATB EG or NG Final vision 2 Level 2 Level 2, short block Level 2 ATB NG Final vision 3 Level 2 Level 2, short block Level 2 Level 2 Two additional analyses were also carried out, namely the conceptual Level 2plus on final vision 2 and a mix of Level 1 and Level 2 on final vision 3. This Railway map 3.0 presents the results. The investigations serve as the basis for the Preference Decision, to which this Railway map is an annex. 1 Parliamentary papers II, session 2011-2012, 32707 nr. 16 2 In this case, Railway map ERTMS version 1.0: Parliamentary papers II, session 2012-2013, 29984 nr. 385 3 Parliamentary papers II, session 2013-2014, 33652 nr. 4 Railway map ERTMS version 3.0 - Memorandum on Alternatives | 1 Results of studies of favourable scenarios The investigations that were conducted into the three favourable scenarios and the two additional analyses concern, among other things, analyses with respect to safety, capacity, travel time effects and reliability. Cost estimates and risk analyses were also drawn up for the final visions and migration paths. The effects and costs were then translated into a social cost and benefit analysis (MKBA). The results presented in this Railway map 3.0 form, in accordance with the MIRT4, the Memorandum on Alternatives and the basis for the cabinet’s Preference Decision ERTMS. The table below provides a summary of the results or the score of the final visions with respect to the goals and the other criteria from the scope of considerations, compared to the 0 scenario. Table 1: The completed scope of considerations for the three !nal visions and additional analyses, in combination with the migration path High Frequency Rail Transport Programme (PHS) !rst. All scores relate to the 0 scenario, with the exception of investment costs. Scope of considerations Final visions Additional analyses !: Main Railway ": EU-compulsory #: PHS Network (HRN) $: NL ! HRN: L!plus $ NL: L#/! Safety ! + ++ ++ ++ + Interoperability ! ! !/+ ++ !/+ + Capacity ! + ++ ++ ++ + Speed/journey time ! -".#% -".$% -".$% -".$% -".%% Reliability (lost hours) (index) &!! $'." $#.% $(." $#.% $).$ Investment costs infra + rolling stock in € mln) %)! (,+!! #,'!! ),&)! #,&)! #,+!! Life Cycle Costs, NCW compared with ! scenario (,'!! &,%!! ",")! ",#!! ",!!! ",")! Pro,tability of freight transporters+ ! -/-- - !/- - !/- Future robustness ! !/+ + +/++ + +/++ Bene,t/Cost-ratio (RC/GE)' ! !.'/&.! !.'/&.! !.'/&.! !.%/&.& !.'/&. ! $!% reliability interval NCW investment costs in € mln ! +/- )!! +/- +)! +/- '!! Greater than Greater $!% reliability interval NCW or equal than L" investment bene,ts in € mln ! +/- #&! +/- )&! +/- )(! to L"% NB: For the time being, Level 2plus is a concept that requires further development. The analysis assumed a working concept from 2020. Further considerations have shown that Level 2plus is expected to be available as of 2025 at the earliest. 4 Long Term Programme Infrastructure, Transport and Space. 5 Investment costs for the 0 scenario comprise the installation of Level 1 overlay on the EU compulsory corridors. Including the necessary rolling stock for the 0 scenario. 6 For 100% funding of the installation of ERTMS in rolling stock by operators. 7 The bene,t cost analysis has been conducted for two economic scenarios, i.e. the ‘higher’ Global Economy and the ‘lower’ Regional Communities. 8 The risk analysis looked at the extent to which the risk pro,le is in-uenced with respect to the ,nal vision, for the additional analyses. In terms of Level 2plus, there is also planning uncertainty in relation to the availability of the concept. 2 | Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment In terms of refurbishing rolling stock9, this study assumed the refurbishment of all of the rolling stock would be completed by the end of 2021. This was deemed to be feasible accord- ing to the then insights from bodies such as the NS. An exception to this is rolling stock for the commissioning of the European compulsory line Ro#erdam to the Belgian border. The basic principle in this regard is that sufficient rolling stock is available in order to travel under ERTMS here from 2020. For regional operators, this means that 50% of rolling stock will be refurbished in final vision 1, and 100% in scenarios/final visions 2 and 3. For final vision 2 (the entire Main Railway Network – HRN), three migration paths have been envisaged. One migration path comprises a series of corridors, including a time- path, that leads to a final vision. The migration path PHS-first is inserted with the aim of realising advantages and therefore gains for large groups of passengers as quickly as possible. The migration path Replacement-first focuses on a rollout that is as cost-effective as possible as a result of closely adhering to the replacement specification for the current protection system. The path Districts-first starts in quieter areas and aims to minimise any incon venience from the initial rollout. The score for final vision 2 is provided for the three migration paths in the table below. This involves a comparison of the paths with respect to the average outcome. Table 2: completed scope of considerations for the 3 migration paths that correspond to !nal vision 2: HRN Scope of considerations Migration path PHS &rst Replacement &rst Districts &rst Safety !/+ ! !/- Interoperability ! ! ! Capacity !/+ !/+ ! Speed !/+ + - Reliability !/+ ! !/- Costs (Lifecycle-costs), NCW in € mln compared to ! scenario ",")! ",")! ",&)! Future robustness ! ! ! Bene,t/Cost-ratio (RC/GE) !.'/&.! !.%/&.! !.'/&.! Risks in € mln (e.ect on balance NCW assuming delay) -(#! -(#) -(#! Key results of studies into favourable scenarios On the basis of the study into favourable scenarios, key findings have been formulated. These findings must be regarded in combination with the previous summary table. ERTMS scores be!er than ATB on all goals and in final vision 1 (EU-compulsory + PHS) is the comparative best. Safety is improved The scenarios all score be#er on the five goals from Railway map 1.0 than the 0 scenario in which ATB is largely maintained. ERTMS thus provides an improvement in safety. A reduc- tion in STS incidents (Signals Passed at Danger) of between 50 and 70% is also expected. Level crossing safety will also improve if the ‘Constant Warning Time’ concept (currently under development) is applied. As a result, the closure of a level crossing will depend on the speed of the approaching train. The score on project goals improves as the share of the network on which ERTMS is rolled out expands. 9 In addition to rolling stock for the HRN, also regional rolling stock, freight rolling stock, maintenance trains and museum trains Railway map ERTMS version 3.0 - Memorandum on Alternatives | 3 The costs are highest for final vision 1 (EU compulsory + PHS). In final vision 1, ERTMS is rolled out on the busiest corridors. In order to prevent transfers/ interfaces between protection systems as far as possible, all final visions will include the rail hubs on the outer edges of the area.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Signalling on the High-Speed Railway Amsterdam–Antwerp
    Computers in Railways XI 243 Towards interoperability on Northwest European railway corridors: signalling on the high-speed railway Amsterdam–Antwerp J. H. Baggen, J. M. Vleugel & J. A. A. M. Stoop Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands Abstract The high-speed railway Amsterdam (The Netherlands)–Antwerp (Belgium) is nearly completed. As part of a TEN-T priority project it will connect to major metropolitan areas in Northwest Europe. In many (European) countries, high-speed railways have been built. So, at first sight, the development of this particular high-speed railway should be relatively straightforward. But the situation seems to be more complicated. To run international services full interoperability is required. However, there turned out to be compatibility problems that are mainly caused by the way decision making has taken place, in particular with respect to the choice and implementation of ERTMS, the new European railway signalling system. In this paper major technical and institutional choices, as well as the choice of system borders that have all been made by decision makers involved in the development of the high-speed railway Amsterdam–Antwerp, will be analyzed. This will make it possible to draw some lessons that might be used for future railway projects in Europe and other parts of the world. Keywords: high-speed railway, interoperability, signalling, metropolitan areas. 1 Introduction Two major new railway projects were initiated in the past decade in The Netherlands, the Betuweroute dedicated freight railway between Rotterdam seaport and the Dutch-German border and the high-speed railway between Amsterdam Airport Schiphol and the Dutch-Belgian border to Antwerp (Belgium).
    [Show full text]
  • Modeling of ERTMS Level 2 As an Sos and Evaluation of Its Dependability Parameters Using Statecharts Siqi Qiu, Mohamed Sallak, Walter Schön, and Zohra Cherfi-Boulanger
    This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination. IEEE SYSTEMS JOURNAL 1 Modeling of ERTMS Level 2 as an SoS and Evaluation of its Dependability Parameters Using Statecharts Siqi Qiu, Mohamed Sallak, Walter Schön, and Zohra Cherfi-Boulanger Abstract—In this paper, we consider the European Rail Traffic INCOSE International Council on Systems Engineering. Management System (ERTMS) as a System-of-Systems (SoS) and GSM-R Global System for Mobile communications— propose modeling it using Unified Modeling Language statecharts. Railways. We define the performance evaluation of the SoS in terms of dependability parameters and average time spent in each state RTM Radio Transmission Module. (working state, degraded state, and failed state). The originality BTM Balise Transmission Module. of this work lies in the approach that considers ERTMS Level 2 TIU Train Interface Unit. as an SoS and seeks to evaluate its dependability parameters by DMI Driver Machine Interface. considering the unavailability of the whole SoS as an emergent EVC European Vital Computer. property. In addition, human factors, network failures, Common- Cause Failures (CCFs), and imprecise failure and repair rates are RBC Radio Block Center. taken into account in the proposed model. EEIG European Economic Interest Group. MUT Mean Up Time. Index Terms—Common-Cause Failures (CCFs), dependability, emergent property, European Rail Traffic Management System MDT Mean Down Time. (ERTMS), human factors, network failures, statecharts, System- MTTF Mean Time to Failure. of-Systems (SoS). MTBF Mean Time Between Failures. ACRONYMS ERTMS European Rail Traffic Management System.
    [Show full text]
  • Voortgangsrapport 14/2003 ® Betuweroute Inhoud
    1 - Voortgangsrapport 14/2003 ® Betuweroute Inhoud 1 Inleiding en samenvaUing 4 Leeswijzer 4 Samenvatting 4 2 Essentialia van het project 7 3 De omgeving van het project 9 3.1 Beleidsontwikkelingen 9 3.2 Communicatie 9 3.3 Voortgang per deelproject 9 Zuid-Holland 9 Gelderland 13 Bovenbouw 17 4 Projectbeheersi ng 19 4.1 Scope 19 4.2 Planning 19 4.3 Financien 20 4.4 Risico's 28 4.5 I<waliteit 29 4.6 Audits en onderzoeken door derden 30 Betuweroute, Voortgangsrapport 1412003 3 .. ,1 InleJdingen samenvatting . In dit veertiende rapport over de voortgang van de aanleg van de Betuweroute wordt verantwoording afgelegd over de werkzaamheden in de periode van 1 januari tot en met 30 juni 2003. Het rapport wordt twee maal per jaar uitgebracht aan de Tweede Kamer. Het project Betuweroute valt onder de procedureregeling 'Grote Projecten' van de Tweede Kamer. Deze regeling voorziet in een halfjaarlijkse rapportage over de vorderingen van het project. Zowel qua uitvoering als qua financien. In de rapporten komen naast de voort­ gang, ook de wijzigingen ten opzichte van de oorspronkelijke projectbeschrijving en het vorige voortgangsrapport aan de orde. Op deze wijze rapporteert Verkeer en Waterstaat vanaf januari 2002 over alle grote projecten. Dit zijn naast de Betuweroute ook de HSL, Ruimte voor de Rivier en de Maaswerken. Leeswijzer Dit voortgangsrapport bestaat uit twee hoofdonderdelen. Na een korte blik op de omgeving van de Betuweroute beschrijft het de voortgang per projectonderdeel (hoofdstuk 3). Vervolgens informeert het rapport u over de stand van zaken aan de hand van de verschillende aspecten van de projectbeheersing (hoofdstuk 4).
    [Show full text]
  • Railterminal Gelderland
    Inpassingsplan | Toelichting Railterminal Gelderland Provincie Gelderland Datum: 23 november 2018 Projectnummer: 170537 ProjectnummStatus: voorontwerper: 170537 ID: NL.IMRO.9925.RailterminalGLD-vo01 Projectnummer: 170537 Projectnummer: 170537 INHOUD 1 Inleiding 3 1.1 Aanleiding 3 1.2 Doel 3 1.3 Ligging en begrenzing plangebied 3 1.4 Bij het plan behorende stukken 4 1.5 Vigerende bestemmingsplan 4 1.6 Keuze voor provinciaal inpassingsplan 5 1.7 Leeswijzer 6 2 Bestaande feitelijke situatie 7 2.1 Ruimtelijke structuur 7 2.2 Functionele structuur 8 3 Beleidskader 9 3.1 Europees beleid 9 3.2 Rijksbeleid 10 3.3 Provinciaal beleid 14 3.4 Gemeentelijk beleid 18 4 Planbeschrijving 20 4.1 Voorgeschiedenis van het inpassingsplan 20 4.2 Concept-gebiedsvisie/gebiedsprogramma Knoop 38 24 4.3 Programma van het inpassingsplan 26 5 Onderzoek en verantwoording 34 5.1 Inleiding 34 5.2 Besluit milieueffectrapportage (m.e.r.) 35 5.3 Archeologie 37 5.4 Bedrijven en milieuzonering 40 5.5 Behoefte 42 5.6 Bodem 45 5.7 Cultuurhistorie 47 5.8 Explosieven 49 5.9 Externe veiligheid 51 5.10 Flora en fauna 55 5.11 Geluidhinder 58 5.12 Geurhinder 63 5.13 Kabels en leidingen 66 5.14 Landschap 71 5.15 Lichthinder 75 5.16 Luchtkwaliteit 77 5.17 Verkeer en parkeren 79 5.18 Water(toets) 84 5.19 Conclusie 88 6 Juridische planopzet 89 6.1 Inleiding 89 6.2 Bevoegd gezag omgevingsvergunningen en wijzigingsplannen 89 6.3 Opbouw van de verbeelding en regels 90 6.4 Bestemmingen 91 7 Economische uitvoerbaarheid 95 7.1 Inleiding 95 7.2 Beoordeling plan 95 7.3 Grondverwerving 95 7.4 Conclusie 95 8 Overleg en zienswijzen 96 8.1 Inleiding 96 8.2 Inbreng en informatie omgevingspartijen in voorbereidingsfase: 96 8.3 Zienswijzen 97 8.4 Crisis- en herstelwet 97 Bijlagen 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Rhine-Alpine Corridor Work Plan
    Rhine DECEMBER 2016 Alpine Second Work Plan of the European Coordinator Paweł Wojciechowski Mobility and Transport DECEMBER 2016 This report represents the opinion of the European Coordinator and does not prejudice the official position of the European Commission. Table of Contents Table of Contents ...........................................................................................1 Table of Figures ..............................................................................................2 Table of Tables ...............................................................................................2 Abbreviations .................................................................................................3 1 Towards the updated work plan of the Rhine-Alpine Corridor.............................4 2 Charac teristic s of the Rhine-Alpine Corridor ...................................................6 2.1 Corridor alignme nt ..............................................................................7 2.2 Compliance with the technical infrastructure parameters of the TEN-T guidelines (including KPI's analysis results) .................................................... 10 3 Results of the Multimodal transport market study (MTMS) .............................. 14 3.1 Current market characteristics ............................................................ 14 3.2 Market forecasts ............................................................................... 15 3.3 Conclusions of transport market study .................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Brabantse Spoor Agenda 2030
    Brabantse Spooragenda Brabantse Spoor Agenda 2030 Juni 2012 INHOUDSOPGAVE Inleiding……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 3 DEEL 1 DE COMPACTE AGENDA 1. Aanleiding……………………………………………………………………………………………….6 2. De Agenda…………………………………………………………………………………………….10 DEEL 2 TOELICHTING EN ACHTERGRONDEN 1. Inleiding…………………………………………………………………………………………………22 2. Beleidskaders…………………………………………………………………………………..….…24 3. Ambities…………………………………………………………………………………………………26 4. Aanpak/activiteiten…………………………………………………………………..…………….47 BIJLAGEN…………………………………………………………………………………………………..57 Brabantse Spoor Agenda 2030 Inleiding De provincie Noord-Brabant heeft samen met spoorgemeenten en –partijen deze Brabantse Spoor Agenda opgesteld. Deze agenda sluit aan op de ambitie om Brabant verder te ontwikkelen als Europese top kennis- en innovatieregio, zoals die in de afgelopen jaren door samenwerkende partijen onder andere is geformuleerd in de MIRT-Gebiedsagenda (Rijk en regionale overheden), de Agenda van Brabant (provincie Noord-Brabant), de Strategische Agenda BrabantStad, de visie Brainport 2020 en de Strategische Agenda West-Brabant. Deze spooragenda vormt een strategisch en operationele agenda van de provincie en partners rondom vijf speerpunten: internationale verbindingen, het Programma Hoogfrequent Spoorvervoer (PHS), dedicated goederenverbindingen voor Zuid-Nederland, spoorontsluiting bedrijven(terreinen) en spoorse doorsnijdingen (Spodo). Het geeft overzicht van een samenhangende, integrale inzet van diverse belanghebbende partijen op alle aspecten van het spoorvervoer
    [Show full text]
  • Rln00445-V001.Pdf
    Assetmanagement Richtlijn ETCS System Compatibility (ESC) Beherende instantie: AM Architectuur en Techniek Inhoud verantwoordelijke: Manager AM Treinbeveiliging Status: Definitief Datum van kracht: Versie: Documentnummer: 01-06-2020 V001 RLN00445 © 2020 Behoudens de in of krachtens de Auteurswet 1912 gestelde uitzonderingen mag niets © 2020 Apart from the exceptions in or by virtue of the 1912 copyright law no part uit deze uitgave worden verveelvoudigd en/of openbaar gemaakt door middel van druk, of this document may be reproduced or published by print, photocopying, fotokopie, microfilm of op welke andere wijze dan ook, zonder de voorafgaande schriftelijke microfilm or any other means without written permission from the author. toestemming van de auteur. model versie 2012 RLN00445 ETCS System Compatibility (ESC) INHOUD 1 Revision information ................................................................................5 2 General ......................................................................................................6 2.1 Language ............................................................................................................................. 6 2.2 Scope ................................................................................................................................... 6 2.3 Terms and abbreviations / Definities en afkortingen ........................................................... 6 3 Process ......................................................................................................8
    [Show full text]
  • Post-2020 Multiannual Financial Framework: Views of the Rail Sector
    VIEWS OF THE RAIL SECTOR POST-2020 MULTIANNUAL FINANCIAL FRAMEWORK 0 For the Commission, rail is a key sector: You are the centre piece of our decarbonisation strategy. We want to see more people travelling by train and more companies choosing to move their goods by rail. I have faith in the sector, I fully support you: but I am relying on you to keep your side of the bargain. Violeta Bulc, EU Commissioner of Transport Innotrans, September 2016 In the context of the budgetary discussions for the post-2020 period, we – the European associations representing the rail sector – would like to explain in this joint paper why it is important for the European Union to continue investing in rail projects, particularly considering the benefits of rail transport for the economy and the whole society. Besides illustrating the European added value of rail projects, the paper also highlights the considerable financial resources still required to complete the TEN-T rail network, modernise and digitalise rail infrastructure in Europe for the benefit of Europe’s citizens. Investments in rail as a key lever for social inclusion, economic growth, and environmental sustainability As the greenest1 and safest mode of transport, rail provides a significant contribution to the EU economy and to the completion of the Single Market. To enhance Europe’s competitiveness internationally, it is therefore necessary to further develop the efficiency of the rail system for the benefit of all EU citizens. There is an enormous need for investment in rail transport at all levels: European, national, regional and urban. The European Commission estimates that €430 billion is needed in rail investment by 2030.2 The resources allocated to rail transport in the post-2020 Multiannual Financial Framework will play a key role in ensuring that the transport system as a whole efficiently supports EU’s economic growth.
    [Show full text]
  • The Relation Between Port Competition and Hinterland Connections
    1 THE RELATION BETWEEN PORT COMPETITION AND HINTERLAND CONNECTIONS THE CASE OF THE ‘IRON RHINE’ AND THE ‘BETUWEROUTE’ Hilde Meersman, Tom Pauwels, Eddy Van de Voorde and Thierry Vanelslander Department of Transport and Regional Economics University of Antwerp, Prinsstraat 13, B-2000 Antwerp, Belgium Abstract This paper discusses the relationship between port competition and hinterland connections. The analysis presented is based on expected trends in maritime transport and the likely consequences for seaports. The inauguration of the Betuweroute in 2007 offered the port of Rotterdam additional rail capacity to Germany. The port of Antwerp, meanwhile, is pressing for the reactivation of the Iron Rhine, a direct rail link to that same German hinterland. Research has shown capacity to be the key to success, both in maritime throughput and in hinterland transportation services. Keywords Port competition , hinterland connection, capacity, Iron Rhine, Betuweroute 1. Introduction Within the Hamburg-Le Havre range, the ports of Antwerp and Rotterdam are engaged in a competitive struggle involving two railway lines to the German hinterland. In 2007, the Netherlands inaugurated the so-called Betuweroute, connecting Rotterdam with the Ruhr Area in Germany. Belgium, for its part, intends to reactivate the Iron Rhine, an existing line between Antwerp and the Ruhr. So here we have two transport projects to the same destination zone: a perfect illustration of how port competition can manifest itself on the battlefield of hinterland transportation. In
    [Show full text]
  • Railterminal in Gelderland
    Bijlage bij Statenbrief - zaaknummer 2012-020480 Railterminal in Gelderland Aanleiding en vertrekpunt Provinciale Staten hebben op 25 april 2012 het Strategisch uitvoeringsprogramma Logistiek en Goederenvervoer 2012-2015, “Logistiek als Gelderse Motor”, vastgesteld. Het programma is opgebouwd rond twee actielijnen: 1. Het voorzien in een goed toegerust multimodaal vervoernetwerk 2. Het versterken van de logistiek als economische sector Een speerpunt binnen de actielijn 1 is het benutten van de Betuweroute. Het gaat om het creëren van een mogelijkheid om containers om te slaan van spoor naar de weg en vice versa. Er is toen een voorkeur voor een locatie bij Valburg uitgesproken. In het programma is aangegeven dat er een verkenning wordt uitgevoerd om te bepalen of een ROP tot de ruimtelijke, financiële en maatschappelijke mogelijkheden behoort en tot voldoende regionale spin-off leidt. Tot medio 2012 is er sprake geweest van een duidelijke samenwerking met een marktpartij (RSC Rotterdam) waarmee samen gewerkt is aan de invulling van de locatie en het opstellen van de businesscase. Vanwege gewijzigde economische omstandigheden heeft deze marktpartij zich terug getrokken. Hiermee is een nieuwe situatie ontstaan. We hebben getracht om een nieuwe marktpartij te vinden die het bedachte concept zou willen overnemen. Deze is toen echter niet direct gevonden. Daarmee komen we uit bij een nieuw startpunt rond de ontwikkeling van het Railopstappunt in Valburg. Bij dit nieuwe startpunt hebben we ook de nieuwe initiatieven betrokken voor het vestigen van railterminals elders in Gelderland. Door het wegvallen van de vorige marktpartij heeft de aangegeven verkenning rond het ROP Valburg een andere uitwerking gekregen. Het vertrekpunt bestaat nu uit het invullen van vier opgaven: - Op zoek gaan naar een nieuwe marktpartij - Ontwikkelen van een nieuw exploitatieconcept - In beeld brengen van de ladingstromen - Het vaststellen van de juiste locatie en inrichting De uitkomst van deze opgaven hebben de input geleverd voor deze notitie.
    [Show full text]
  • PDF995, Job 91
    Cost Overrun in the Public Sector, A Case Study Dr Maarten S.A. Vrijland, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands Summary The case studied is that of the Betuwe Route, a new 160 km double track railway, exclusively for freight, that will link the Port of Rotterdam with her European hinterland. This megaproject has been strongly disputed ever since it’s conception. Government, opponents and proponents have spent tremendous efforts in studies and reports. In most cases these are easily accessible to the general public. At first sight the cost seems to have tripled in ten years. Was it so difficult then to provide a reliable estimate, or should an explanation be sought elsewhere? With this question in mind many reports were studied, and the final conclusion is that not so much the estimators as well as politicians are responsible. Introduction Mid 1997 first ground was broken for the construction of the so called Betuwe Route, a new 160 km double track electrified railroad, exclusively for freight. As from 2006 it will be an addition to existing rail-, road- and water-ways linking the Port of Rotterdam with her European Union hinterland. Most likely the total cost of this civil construction project will exceed 5 milliard. This fact classifies it as a megaproject, less spectacular, but nevertheless in the same order of magnitude as the Channel tunnel between France and England, the Øresund bridge between Denmark and Sweden, or the Three Gorges Dam in China. Such projects tend to have strikingly poor performance records in terms of economy, environment and public support.
    [Show full text]
  • The Relationship Between Seaports and the Inter- Modal Hinterland in Light of Global Supply Chains European Challenges
    JOINT TRANSPORT RESEARCH CENTRE Discussion Paper No. 2008-10 March 2008 The relationship between seaports and the inter- modal hinterland in light of global supply chains European challenges Theo NOTTEBOOM ITMMA University of Antwerp, Belgium The views expressed in this paper are those of the author and do not necessarily represent positions of the University of Antwerp, the OECD or the International Transport Forum. 2 Notteboom — Discussion Paper 2008-10 — © OECD/ITF, 2008 Research Round Table, Paris, 10-11 April 2008 ‘Seaport Competition and Hinterland Connections’ THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SEAPORTS AND THE INTERMODAL HINTERLAND IN LIGHT OF GLOBAL SUPPLY CHAINS: EUROPEAN CHALLENGES Rapporteur: Professor Theo Notteboom ITMMA – University of Antwerp 14 March 2008 Abstract The seaport-hinterland interaction plays an increasingly important role in shaping supply chain solutions of shippers and logistics service providers. Scarcity concerns combined with concerns over the reliability of transport solutions have led seaports and hinterland corridors to take up a more active role in supply chains. This contribution looks at port developments and logistics dynamics in Europe and proposes some steps towards a further integration between seaports and the hinterland. The key point put forward in this paper is that the competitive battle among ports will increasingly be fought ashore. Hinterland connections are thus a key area for competition and coordination among actors. The paper approaches port-hinterland dynamics from the perspective of the various market players involved, including port authorities, shipping lines, terminal operators, transport operators (rail, barge, road and short sea) and logistics service providers. The paper will address the impact of horizontal and vertical relations in supply chains on the structure of these chains and on the relationships between seaports and the intermodal hinterland.
    [Show full text]