<<

“ELABORATION OF THE MEDITERRANEAN MOTORWAYS OF THE SEA MASTER PLAN”

DELIVERABLE 5.2

EAST MEDITERRANEAN MASTER PLAN OF THE MOTORWAYS OF THE SEA

DECEMBER 2009

Eastern Mediterranean MoS Master Plan Study

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Introduction ...... 1-15 2 Identification & Presentation of the Potential MoS Corridors in EMR ....2-18 2.1 Introduction...... 2-18 2.2 Methodology framework...... 2-19 2.2.1 Determination/ detection of the MoS potential corridors – Identification of the predominant/ indicative MoS link ...... 2-19 2.2.2 Estimation of the potential future trade flows (2015) of the MoS potential corridors – Identification of the corridor catchment area2-21 2.2.3 Estimation of the potential future trade flows (2015) of the predominant/indicative MoS link – Competition overview...... 2-23 2.2.4 Unimodal road competition transport flows overview...... 2-24 2.2.5 Estimation of modal shift...... 2-25 2.2.6 Determination of the indicative service profile of the predominant/ indicative MoS link ...... 2-25 2.2.7 Economic viability assessment of the predominant/ indicative MoS link operation ...... 2-26 2.3 Description of MoS potential corridors ...... 2-30 2.3.1 Introduction...... 2-30 2.3.2 MoS potential corridor 1: South Adriatic - Italian ports cluster & Ionian Sea/ West ports cluster, including their respective catchment areas (Indicative MoS link Igoumenitsa – Taranto).... 2-34 2.3.2.1 Potential trade flows of the MoS corridor – Catchment Area identification – Interconnection with road transport network2-34 2.3.2.2 Articulation of the indicative MoS Link demand...... 2-41 2.3.2.3 Competition overview ...... 2-41 2.3.2.4 Indicative estimation of modal shift ...... 2-47 2.3.2.5 Indicative service profile of the MoS link ...... 2-48 2.3.2.6 Economic viability assessment of the MoS link ...... 2-48 2.3.3 MoS potential corridor 2: EMR- ports cluster & North Aegean ports cluster, including their respective catchment areas (Indicative MoS link – Kavala) ...... 2-50 2.3.3.1 Potential trade flows of the MoS corridor – Catchment Area identification – Interrelation to EMR intermodal corridors - Interconnection with road transport network...... 2-51 2.3.3.2 Articulation of the indicative MoS Link demand...... 2-59 2.3.3.3 Competition overview ...... 2-60 2.3.3.4 Indicative estimation of modal shift ...... 2-66 2.3.3.5 Indicative service profile of the MoS link ...... 2-67 2.3.3.6 Economic viability assessment of the MoS link ...... 2-68 2.3.4 MoS potential corridor 3: Ionian Sea/ West Greece ports cluster & the eastern segment of the North Adriatic ports cluster, including their respective catchment areas (Indicative MoS link Igoumenitsa – Koper)...... 2-70 2.3.4.1 Potential trade flows of the MoS corridor – Catchment Area identification – Interrelation to EMR intermodal corridors - Interconnection with road transport network...... 2-71 2.3.4.2 Articulation of the indicative MoS Link demand...... 2-78 2.3.4.3 Competition overview ...... 2-79 2.3.4.4 Indicative estimation of modal shift ...... 2-89 2.3.4.5 Indicative service profile of the MoS link ...... 2-90

Deliverable 5.2 1-2 Region MoS Master Plan Study

2.3.4.6 Economic viability assessment of the MoS link ...... 2-90 2.3.4.7 MoS proposal under the 2nd call for proposals ...... 2-91 2.3.5 MoS potential corridor 4: The central segment of the North Adriatic ports cluster & the Ionian Sea/ West Greece ports cluster, including their respective catchment areas (Indicative MoS link Venice – (Igoumenitsa) – Patra – (Korinthos)) ...... 2-93 2.3.5.1 Potential trade flows of the MoS corridor – Catchment Area identification – Interrelation to EMR intermodal corridors - Interconnection with road transport network...... 2-94 2.3.5.2 Articulation of the indicative MoS Link demand...... 2-102 2.3.5.3 Competition overview ...... 2-103 2.3.5.4 Indicative estimation of modal shift ...... 2-110 2.3.5.5 Indicative service profile of the MoS link ...... 2-111 2.3.5.6 Economic viability assessment of the MoS link ...... 2-112 2.3.5.7 MoS proposal under the 2nd call for proposals ...... 2-114 2.3.6 MoS potential corridor 5: The eastern segment of the North Adriatic ports cluster & the western segment of the North Adriatic ports cluster, including their respective catchment areas (Indicative MoS link (Igoumenitsa) – Ancona – Koper) ...... 2-114 2.3.6.1 Potential trade flows of the MoS corridor – Catchment Area identification – Interrelation to EMR intermodal corridors - Interconnection with road transport network...... 2-115 2.3.6.2 Articulation of the indicative MoS Link demand...... 2-124 2.3.6.3 Competition overview ...... 2-125 2.3.6.4 Indicative estimation of modal shift ...... 2-133 2.3.6.5 Indicative service profile of the MoS link ...... 2-134 2.3.6.6 Economic viability assessment of the MoS link ...... 2-134 2.3.7 MoS potential corridor 6: EMR – Middle East ports cluster & Central/ South Aegean ports cluster, including their respective catchment areas (Indicative MoS link - Limassol) ...... 2-136 2.3.7.1 Potential trade flows of the MoS corridor – Catchment Area identification – Interrelation to EMR intermodal corridors - Interconnection with road transport network...... 2-137 2.3.7.2 Articulation of the indicative MoS Link demand...... 2-145 2.3.7.3 Competition overview ...... 2-146 2.3.7.4 Indicative estimation of modal shift ...... 2-151 2.3.7.5 Indicative service profile of the MoS link ...... 2-152 2.3.7.6 Economic viability assessment of the MoS link ...... 2-152 2.3.8 MoS potential corridor 7: The eastern segment of the North Adriatic ports cluster & the central segment of the North Adriatic ports cluster & the northern segment of the South Adriatic - Balkan ports cluster, including their respective catchment areas (Indicative MoS link Venice – (Koper) - Ploce) ...... 2-154 2.3.8.1 Potential trade flows of the MoS corridor – Catchment Area identification – Interrelation to EMR intermodal corridors - Interconnection with road transport network...... 2-155 2.3.8.2 Articulation of the indicative MoS Link demand...... 2-162 2.3.8.3 Competition overview ...... 2-163 2.3.8.4 Indicative estimation of modal shift ...... 2-169 2.3.8.5 Indicative service profile of the MoS link ...... 2-171 2.3.8.6 Economic viability assessment of the MoS link ...... 2-171

Deliverable 5.2 1-3 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

2.3.9 MoS potential corridor 8: Ionian Sea/ West Greece port cluster & the Italian ports of the Central Mediterranean ports cluster, including their respective catchment areas (Indicative MoS link Patra - Catania) ...... 2-174 2.3.9.1 Potential trade flows of the MoS corridor – Catchment Area identification – Interrelation to EMR intermodal corridors - Interconnection with road transport network...... 2-174 2.3.9.2 Articulation of the indicative MoS Link demand...... 2-181 2.3.9.3 Competition overview ...... 2-182 2.3.9.4 Indicative estimation of modal shift ...... 2-187 2.3.9.5 Indicative service profile of the MoS link ...... 2-189 2.3.9.6 Viability analysis of the MoS link ...... 2-189 2.3.10 MoS potential corridor 9: The western segment of the North Adriatic ports cluster & the southern segment of the Central Mediterranean ports cluster, including their respective catchment areas (Indicative MoS link - Venice)...... 2-192 2.3.10.1 Potential trade flows of the MoS corridor – Catchment Area identification – Interrelation to EMR intermodal corridors - Interconnection with road transport network...... 2-192 2.3.10.2 Articulation of the indicative MoS Link demand...... 2-200 2.3.10.3 Competition overview ...... 2-201 2.3.10.4 Indicative estimation of modal shift ...... 2-206 2.3.10.5 Indicative service profile of the MoS link ...... 2-207 2.3.10.6 Viability analysis of the MoS link ...... 2-208 2.4 Missing Links Identification ...... 2-211 2.4.1 Introduction...... 2-211 2.4.2 Methodology...... 2-211 2.4.3 Presentation of missing links ...... 2-212 2.5 Proposed Projects under the 2nd Call for Motorways of the Sea Project Proposals in the East Mediterranean area 2009 ...... 2-215 2.5.1 ELEUSIS-BARCELONA...... 2-216 2.5.2 ADRIAMOS...... 2-217 2.6 Overall Master Plan results...... 2-218 2.6.1 Master Plan cut-view...... 2-218 2.6.2 Results of the assignment ...... 2-220 2.6.3 Sum-up of indicative/ predominant MoS links’ economic feasibility pre-assessment results ...... 225 2.6.4 Conclusions ...... 2-229 3 Specification of Minimum Requirements for MoS...... 3-232 3.1 Scope and general context for Minimum Requirements for MoS.... 3-232 3.2 Minimum Requirements for MoS...... 3-233 3.2.1 Port hinterland connections...... 3-235 3.2.2 Land-side terminal and quay ...... 3-235 3.2.3 Sea-side terminal and quay...... 3-238 3.2.4 Shipping operations...... 3-239 3.2.5 Information exchange and Documentation...... 3-240 3.2.6 Overall performance efficiency indicators ...... 3-242 4 Gap analysis and action drivers ...... 4-244 4.1 Identification of discrepancies between Quality labels and MoS links4-244 4.1.1 Approach...... 4-244 4.1.2 Port hinterland connections...... 4-248

Deliverable 5.2 1-4 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

4.1.3 Land-side terminal and quay ...... 4-252 4.1.4 Port sea-side terminal and quay ...... 4-255 4.1.5 ICT and Safety & Security issues ...... 4-258 4.2 Actions identification including possible incentives ...... 4-262 5 Strategic Environmental MoS Assessment...... 5-267 5.1 Definition of environmental impact assessment criteria ...... 5-267 5.2 Outline of MoS main environmental aspects...... 5-270 5.3 Relevant aspects of the current state of the environment in the East Med Area (environmental characteristics and main problems to be addressed) ...... 5-270 5.4 Environmental protections main objectives...... 5-273 5.5 Likely significant effects on the environment...... 5-277 5.6 Mitigation measures to prevent and reduce any significant adverse effects on the environment...... 5-279 5.7 Main measures for the monitoring of the environmental impact .... 5-280

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2-1 Example of the calculation form used for the economic viability assessment of the indicative/ predominant MoS links ...... 2-29 Figure 2-2 MoS corridors potential demand per direction for 2015...... 2-33 Figure 2-3 The MoS flows of the indicative MoS link Igoumenitsa – Taranto on the potential MoS 1 corridor (South Adriatic- Italian & Ionian Sea/ West Greece ports clusters ) ...... 2-35 Figure 2-4 Map of the MoS potential corridor 1 (South Adriatic- Italian & Ionian Sea/ West Greece port clusters) ...... 2-37 Figure 2-5 Map of the MoS potential corridor 1 in relation to the Adriatic- Ionian intermodal corridor...... 2-38 Figure 2-6 MoS potential corridor 1 (South Adriatic- Italian & Ionian Sea/ West Greece port clusters) and interconnection with TEN-T road network ...... 2-40 Figure 2-7 Existing maritime links between the catchment areas of the South Adriatic- Italian & Ionian Sea/ West Greece port clusters ...... 2-42 Figure 2-8 MoS potential corridor 1 (South Adriatic- Italian & Ionian Sea/ West Greece port clusters) and interconnection with the main railway network s...... 2-45 Figure 2-9 MoS link economic viability assessment results- Year 6 ...... 2-49 Figure 2-10 The MoS flows in the indicative MoS link Limassol – Kavala (MoS potential corridor 2 (EMR-Middle East & North Aegean ports clusters)2-52 Figure 2-11 Map of the MoS 2 potential corridor (EMR-Middle East & North Aegean ports clusters) ...... 2-55 Figure 2-12 Map of the MoS potential corridor 2 in relation to the Middle East- intermodal corridor...... 2-56 Figure 2-13 MoS potential corridor 2 (EMR-Middle East & North Aegean ports clusters) and interconnection with TEN-T road network...... 2-58

Deliverable 5.2 1-5 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-14 Existing maritime links between the EMR-Middle East & North Aegean ports clusters...... 2-60 Figure 2-15 MoS potential corridor 2 (EMR-Middle East & North Aegean ports clusters) and interconnection with the main railway network...... 2-63 Figure 2-16 Indicative shortest paths displaying the two alternative ways of connection between the EMR-Middle East & North Aegean ports clusters...... 2-67 Figure 2-17 MoS link economic viability assessment results- Year 3...... 2-69 Figure 2-18 MoS flows in the indicative MoS link Igoumenitsa – Koper (MoS potential corridor 3 (Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the eastern segment of the North Adriatic ports clusters) ...... 2-72 Figure 2-19 Map of the MoS potential corridor 3 (Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the eastern segment of the North Adriatic ports clusters)...... 2-74 Figure 2-20 Map of the MoS potential corridor 3 in relation to the Adriatic- Ionian intermodal corridor...... 2-75 Figure 2-21 MoS potential corridor 3 (Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the eastern segment of the North Adriatic ports clusters) and interconnection with TEN-T road network ...... 2-77 Figure 2-22 Existing maritime links between the catchment areas of the Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the eastern segment of the North Adriatic ports clusters...... 2-80 Figure 2-23 MoS potential corridor 3 (Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the eastern segment of the North Adriatic ports clusters) and interconnection with the main railway networks...... 2-84 Figure 2-24 Indicative shortest paths displaying the two alternative ways of connection between the catchment areas of the Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the eastern segment of the North Adriatic ports clusters . 2-89 Figure 2-25 MoS link economic viability assessment results- Year 4...... 2-92 Figure 2-26 MoS flows in the indicative MoS link Venice - Igoumenitsa – Patra - Korinthos (MoS potential corridor 4 (Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the central segment of the North Adriatic ports clusters)...... 2-95 Figure 2-27 Map of the MoS 4 potential corridor (Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the central segment of the North Adriatic ports clusters & Central/ South ports clusters) ...... 2-98 Figure 2-28 Map of the MoS potential corridor 4 in relation to the Adriatic- Ionian intermodal corridor...... 2-99 Figure 2-29 MoS potential corridor 4 (Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the central segment of the North Adriatic ports clusters) and interconnection with TEN-T road network ...... 2-101 Figure 2-30 Existing maritime links between the catchment areas of Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the central segment of the North Adriatic ports clusters...... 2-104 Figure 2-31 MoS potential corridor 4 (Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the central segment of the North Adriatic ports clusters) and interconnection with main railway networks...... 2-107 Figure 2-32 Indicative shortest paths displaying the two alternative ways of connection between the catchment areas of the Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the central segment of the North Adriatic ports clusters & Central/ South Aegean Sea ports clusters ...... 2-111 Figure 2-33 MoS link economic viability assessment results- Year 4...... 2-113

Deliverable 5.2 1-6 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-34 MoS flows in the indicative MoS link Ancona - Koper (MoS potential corridor 5) (The eastern & western segments of the North Adriatic ports cluster) ...... 2-115 Figure 2-35 Map of the MoS 5 potential corridor (The eastern & western segments of the North Adriatic ports cluster) ...... 2-120 Figure 2-36 Map of the MoS potential corridor 5 in relation to the Adriatic- Ionian intermodal corridor...... 2-121 Figure 2-37 MoS potential corridor 5 (The eastern & western segments of the North Adriatic ports cluster) and interconnection with TEN-T road network ...... 2-123 Figure 2-38 Existing maritime links between the catchment areas of the eastern & western segments of the North Adriatic ports cluster ...... 2-126 Figure 2-39 MoS potential corridor 5 (The eastern & western segments of the North Adriatic ports cluster) and interconnection with the main railway networks...... 2-129 Figure 2-40 Indicative shortest paths displaying the two alternative ways of connection between the catchment areas of the eastern & western segments of the North Adriatic ports cluster...... 2-133 Figure 2-41 MoS link economic viability assessment results- Year 5...... 2-135 Figure 2-42 MoS flows in the indicative MoS link Piraeus - Limassol (MoS potential corridor 6) (EMR – Middle East ports cluster & Central/ South Aegean ports cluster)...... 2-138 Figure 2-43 Map of the MoS 6 potential corridor (EMR – Middle East & Central/ South Aegean ports clusters)...... 2-141 Figure 2-44 Map of the MoS potential corridor 6 in relation to the Middle East-Europe intermodal corridor...... 2-142 Figure 2-45 MoS potential corridor 6 (EMR – Middle East & Central/ South Aegean ports clusters) and interconnection with TEN-T road network2-144 Figure 2-46 Existing maritime links between the EMR – Middle East & Central/ South Aegean ports clusters ...... 2-146 Figure 2-47 MoS potential corridor 6 (EMR – Middle East & Central/ South Aegean ports clusters) and interconnection with the main railway network ...... 2-148 Figure 2-48 MoS link economic viability assessment results- Year 6...... 2-153 Figure 2-49 MoS flows in the indicative MoS link Venice – (Koper) – Ploce (MoS potential corridor 7 (The central segment of the North Adriatic & the northern segment of the South Adriatic - Balkan ports clusters) 2-156 Figure 2-50 Map of the MoS potential corridor 7 (The eastern segment of the North Adriatic ports cluster & the central segment of the North Adriatic ports cluster & the northern segment of the South Adriatic - Balkan ports cluster)...... 2-158 Figure 2-51 Map of the MoS potential corridor 7 in relation to the Adriatic- Ionian intermodal corridor...... 2-159 Figure 2-52 MoS potential corridor 7 (the central segment of the North Adriatic & the northern segment of the South Adriatic - Balkan ports clusters) and interconnection with TEN-T road network...... 2-161 Figure 2-53 Existing maritime links between the catchment areas of the central segment of the North Adriatic & the northern segment of the South Adriatic - Balkan ports clusters...... 2-164

Deliverable 5.2 1-7 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-54 MoS potential corridor 7 (the central segment of the North Adriatic & the northern segment of the South Adriatic - Balkan ports clusters) and interconnection with the main railway networks ...... 2-166 Figure 2-55 Indicative shortest paths displaying the two alternative ways of connection between the catchment areas of the central segment of the North Adriatic & the northern segment of the South Adriatic - Balkan ports clusters ...... 2-170 Figure 2-56 MoS link economic viability assessment results- Year 4...... 2-173 Figure 2-57 MoS flows in the indicative MoS link Patra – Catania (MoS potential corridor 8 (Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the Italian ports of the Central Mediterranean ports clusters) ...... 2-175 Figure 2-58 Map of the MoS potential corridor 8 (Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the Italian ports of the Central Mediterranean ports clusters)...... 2-177 Figure 2-59 Map of the MoS potential corridor 8 in relation to the Adriatic- Ionian intermodal corridor...... 2-178 Figure 2-60 MoS potential corridor 8 (Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the Italian ports of the Central Mediterranean ports clusters) and interconnection with TEN-T road network...... 2-180 Figure 2-61 Existing maritime links between the catchment areas of the Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the Italian ports of the Central Mediterranean ports clusters ...... 2-182 Figure 2-62 MoS potential corridor 8 (Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the Italian ports of the Central Mediterranean ports clusters) and interconnection with the main railway networks ...... 2-184 Figure 2-63 Indicative shortest paths displaying the two alternative ways of connection between the catchment areas of the Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the Italian ports of the Central Mediterranean ports clusters2-188 Figure 2-64 MoS link economic viability assessment results- Year 6...... 2-191 Figure 2-65 MoS flows in the indicative MoS link Malta – Venice (MoS potential corridor 9) (The western segment of the North Adriatic & the southern segment of the Central Mediterranean ports clusters) ..... 2-193 Figure 2-66 Map of the MoS potential corridor 9 (The western segment of the North Adriatic & the southern segment of the Central Mediterranean ports clusters) ...... 2-196 Figure 2-67 Map of the MoS potential corridor 9 in relation to the Adriatic- Ionian & Black Sea Aegean North-South intermodal corridors ...... 2-197 Figure 2-68 MoS potential corridor 9 (The western segment of the North Adriatic & the southern segment of the Central Mediterranean ports clusters) and interconnection with TEN-T road network...... 2-199 Figure 2-69 Existing maritime links of relevance to the MoS 9 corridor...... 2-202 Figure 2-70 MoS potential corridor 9 (The western segment of the North Adriatic & the southern segment of the Central Mediterranean ports clusters) and interconnection with the main railway network...... 2-204 Figure 2-71 Indicative shortest paths displaying the two alternative ways of connection between the catchment areas of the western segment of the North Adriatic & the southern segment of the Central Mediterranean ports clusters ...... 2-207 Figure 2-72 MoS link economic viability assessment results- Year 3...... 2-210 Figure 2-73 Map presenting flow difference comparing”Do Nothing” with “Do Something” scenario...... 2-223

Deliverable 5.2 1-8 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-74 Map presenting flow difference comparing”Do Nothing” with “Do Something & KPI’s” scenario...... 2-224 Figure 2-75 Sum up of traffic estimation (in Ktns) by MoS link used for the service economic viability assessment ...... 226 Figure 3-1 Synthesis of MoS services by its integral components ...... 3-234 Figure 3-2 Overall MoS chain performance efficiency indicators (targets)3-243 Figure 5-1 The Environmental Assessment Procedure according to EU Directive 2001/42...... 5-268 Figure 5-2 Coastal zone protected by Natura 2000 (%, 2006)...... 5-271 Figure 5-3 Land Based vs Shipping SO2 and NOx emissions 2000-2030 .... 5-275

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2-1 Operating costs for a Ro-Ro/ Lo-Lo link...... 2-27 Table 2-2 Operating revenues for a Ro-Ro link ...... 2-27 Table 2-3 Operating revenues for a Lo-Lo link...... 2-27 Table 2-4 Overview of Nine potential MoS Corridors ...... 2-31 Table 2-5 Estimated potential demand in 2015 between the South Adriatic- Italian & Ionian Sea/ West Greece port clusters...... 2-36 Table 2-6 Evolution of demand on the indicative link of the MoS potential corridor 1...... 2-41 Table 2-7 Evolution of demand in the competitive existing maritime links on the MoS potential corridor 1 ...... 2-44 Table 2-8 Estimated potential demand in 2015 between the EMR-Middle East and North Aegean ports clusters...... 2-53 Table 2-9 Evolution of demand on the indicative link of the MoS potential corridor 2...... 2-59 Table 2-10 Evolution of demand on the competitive existing maritime links of the MoS potential corridor 2 ...... 2-62 Table 2-11 Estimated potential demand in 2015 between the Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the eastern segment of the North Adriatic ports clusters2-73 Table 2-12 Evolution of demand on the indicative link of the potential MoS corridor 3...... 2-79 Table 2-13 Evolution of demand on the competitive existing maritime links of the MoS potential corridor 3 ...... 2-82 Table 2-14 Difference in unimodal road transport flows following the operation of the indicative MoS link on the potential MoS corridor 32-88 Table 2-15 Estimated potential demand in 2015 between the Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the central segment of the North Adriatic ports clusters2-95 Table 2-16 Evolution of demand on the indicative link of the MoS potential corridor 4...... 2-103 Table 2-17 Evolution of demand on the competitive existing maritime links of the MoS potential corridor 4 ...... 2-105 Table 2-18 Difference in unimodal road transport flows following the operation of the indicative MoS link on the MoS potential corridor 42-110 Table 2-19 Estimated potential demand in 2015 between the eastern & western segments of the North Adriatic ports cluster...... 2-116 Table 2-20 Evolution of demand on the indicative link του MoS potential corridor 5...... 2-125

Deliverable 5.2 1-9 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Table 2-21 Evolution of demand on the competitive existing maritime links of the MoS potential corridor 5 ...... 2-128 Table 2-22 Difference in unimodal road transport flows following the operation of the indicative MoS link on the MoS potential corridor 52-132 Table 2-23 Estimated potential demand in 2015 between the EMR – Middle East & Central/ South Aegean ports clusters ...... 2-138 Table 2-24 Evolution of demand on the indicative link of the MoS potential corridor 6...... 2-145 Table 2-25 Evolution of demand on the competitive existing maritime links of the MoS potential corridor 6 ...... 2-147 Table 2-26 Estimated potential demand in 2015 between the central segment of the North Adriatic & the northern segment of the South Adriatic - Balkan ports clusters...... 2-157 Table 2-27 Evolution of demand on the indicative link of the MoS potential corridor 7...... 2-163 Table 2-28 Evolution of demand on the competitive existing maritime links of the MoS potential corridor 7 ...... 2-165 Table 2-29 Difference in unimodal road transport flows following the operation of the indicative MoS link on the MoS potential corridor 72-169 Table 2-30 Estimated potential demand in 2015 between the Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the Italian ports of the Central Mediterranean ports clusters...... 2-176 Table 2-31 Evolution of demand on the indicative link of the MoS potential corridor 8...... 2-181 Table 2-32 Evolution of demand of the competitive existing maritime links of the MoS potential corridor 8 ...... 2-183 Table 2-33 Estimated potential demand in 2015 between the western segment of the North Adriatic & the southern segment of the Central Mediterranean ports clusters ...... 2-194 Table 2-34 Evolution of demand on the indicative link of the MoS potential corridor 7...... 2-201 Table 2-35 Evolution of demand on the competitive existing maritime links of the MoS potential corridor 9 ...... 2-203 Table 2-36 Difference in unimodal road transport flows following the operation of the indicative MoS link on the MoS potential corridor 92-206 Table 2-37 Overview of the missing links...... 2-212 Table 2-38 Overview of the proposed MoS potential corridors of the EMR MoS Master Plan...... 2-219 Table 2-39 Scenarios definition (year 2015) ...... 2-222 Table 2-40 Sum up of the freight traffic by unit of cargo used for MoS services’ economic viability assessment...... 227 Table 2-41 Results of MoS links’ economic viability assessment by year .. 2-228 Table 3-1 Key Minimum Requirements for MoS port hinterland connections3-235 Table 3-2 Key Minimum Requirements for the land-side of MoS terminal(s) / quay(s) ...... 3-237 Table 3-3 Key Quality Labels / Indicators for the sea-side of MoS terminal(s) / quay(s) ...... 3-239 Table 3-4 Key Minimum Requirements for MoS shipping operations ...... 3-240 Table 3-5 Key Minimum Requirements for MoS procedures related to Information Exchange and Documentation ...... 3-241 Table 3-6 Overall MoS chain performance efficiency indicators (targets)3-242

Deliverable 5.2 1-10 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The present document is one of the core studies carried out for the “East Med MoS Master Plan”, whose scope is to identify and present the proposed by the countries as well as potential MoS corridors for the East Meditteranean Master Plan. More specifically, the door-to-door service corridors are identified, in terms of , clusters of ports and maritime connections, for setting up and operating MoS schemes.

Deliverable 5.2 1-11 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Moreover, the economic viability of the proposed MoS schemes is analyzed together with the definition of each scheme’s “operational goal” in order for it to become attractive, as part of the intermodal logistic chains in the study area. Current bottlenecks and missing links in terms of infrastructure and techniques to reach the aforementioned operational goal are also identified. Finally, a strategic environmental assessment of the East MoS reference network is carried out.

The methodology carried out for the identification and analysis of the potential MoS corridors includes the estimation of the potential future trade flows (2015) of the MoS potential corridors and identification of the corridors cathment areas, the estimation of the potential future trade flows (2015) of the predominant/ indicative MoS links, the unimodal road competition transport flows overview for each of the MoS potential corridors, the estimation of the modal shift for each of the MoS potential corridors, the determination of the indicative service profile of the predominant/ indicative MoS link, and finally, the economic viability assessment of the predominant/ indicative MoS link.

Nine MoS potential corridors were identified, which were derived from the application of the methodology, as well as from the relevant response of the industry to the two calls of proposals launched by the Steering Committee of the “East Med MoS Master Plan” project, as follows:

• MoS 1: Igoumenitsa – Taranto

• MoS2: Kavala –Limassol

• MoS 3: Igoumenitsa-Koper

• MoS 4: Venice- (Igoumenitsa)-Patra-(Korinthos) (it was submitted as ADRIAMOS proposal by the interested parties)

• MoS 5: Igoumenitsa-Ancona-Koper

• MoS 6: Limassol-Pireas

• MoS 7: Venice-(Koper)- Ploce

• MoS 8: Patra-Catania

• MoS 9: Malta-Venice

• In addition, MoS corridor Eleusis-Barcelona, connecting East and West Mediterranean, as submitted by the interested parties. To this end, a detailed description of the above MoS corridors is provided, including relevant information regarding potential corridor trade flows and catchment areas, road network interconnection, the demand on the link and its articulation, competition overview (on the maritime and land surface part of the intermodal maritime-based

Deliverable 5.2 1-12 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study proposed services/ MoS corridors), estimation of modal shift, indicative service profile, and service viability analysis.

In addition to the implementation of the methodology, a final assignment was made in the relevant traffic model, assuming the implementation of all the proposed MoS potential corridors in the year 2015.The implementation of this scenario showed a potential increase in the total maritime freight volumes to the level of approximately 117.7 million tns, which when compared to the “do nothing” scenario for 2015, gives an average increase of about 2.7% in volumes transported by sea. Also, a total service operation deficit at the amount of approximately 200 million , associated to the first 6 years of services operation, was predicted, to be faced if all the services included in the East Med MoS Master Plan are put in operation.

The Master Plan scenarios and the relative traffic assignments demonstrtaed that a significant number of maritime links would benefit by the implementation of the MoS corridors connections, while at the same time, a reduction in traffic volumes in major road segments would be displayed. Also, with regards to the competition with existing maritime connections, no major reduction in volumes of the existing maritime services was observed. Furthermore, the Adriatic-Ionian intermodal corridor appeared to be gaining additional volumes with the implementation of the proposed MoS corridors, since these connections further promote SSS and the integration of the maritime links between Italy, Greece and .

Seven out of the ten identified MoS corridors displayed evidence of creating modal shift from the road to sea, while the remaining ones, may not create modal shift but can be justified in terms of EU policy requirements (cohesion and peripheral regions) and transport network efficiency/ utilization. Island regions involved in the East Med MoS may also increase cohesion between the EU and its peripheral and island Member States.

Important conclusions may also be drawn for the EMR island regions (Malta & ). MoS involving the two regions are of different typology (feeder service interface in Malta and region isolation alleviation in the case of Cyprus) prove the need for rationalizing MoS not only on strict modal shift issues among the EU countries involved in the East Med MoS but also in terms of increasing cohesion between the EU and its peripheral and island member states, which is of course one of the main stated objectives of the overall EU MoS policy.

Furthermore, it is noted that from the competition analysis that was realized, and analytically presented in the previous sections where each of the potential MoS corridors were presented, emerges the low competitiveness of rail based transport alternatives in the study which are is mainly due to the topology of the core study area and the low level of service rail can provide. This situation is not expected to change drastically until 2015 taking into account the foreseen in the core study area projects for rail infrastructure rehabilitation and rail operation enhancement. The TEN-T

Deliverable 5.2 1-13 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study development relevant provisions and the priorities of national-transnational initiatives as officially published indicate major improvements in both areas (infrastructure & operation) of rail mode in the area in the period 2020-2025.

In addition to the above, the minimum requirements of an integrated MoS service were defined, in order to establish a first basis for "certification" for MoS services in the EMR. For this reason, these minimum requirements were developed by categorizing them in terms of performance quality for port hinterland connection, land-side terminal and quay, sea-side terminal and quay, shipping operations, and information exchange and documentation. Finally, a minimum number of quantitative indicators was set up, as overall performance efficiency targets of MoS port nodes.

A structured analysis of the gaps between the current service levels and operational characteristics of each MoS corridor and market needs was carried out, based on the MoS Quality Labels identified. This analysis led to the identification of the infrastructure interventions and possible incentives needed in relevant MoS ports, in order to guarantee a MoS service with an adequate level of quality. The new proposed incentive scheme foreseen that a Port Authority of a MoS could promote calls for tender in order to grant public contribution to ship-owners for the start-up of new MoS links among MS’ .

Finally, a strategic environmental assessment of the East MoS reference network was carried out, according to the Environmental Assessment Procedure set by EU Directive 2001/42. The main environmental effects of MoS development in the East Mediterranean, based on external costs parameters used by the Marco Polo Programme, consisted positive ones, due to the reduction of external costs generated by the shift of goods from road to sea. These positive effects could be partly mitigated by the new infrastructures that need to be developed in order to support the enhancement of MoS in the area.

Deliverable 5.2 1-14 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

1 Introduction The present document, Deliverable 5.2, constitutes a minor revision of Deliverable 5 “East Mediterranean Master Plan of the Motorways of the Sea”, with a number of necessary modifications resulting from:

• the third phase of the project, which was based on the extension of the project in accordance with the additional activities envisaged in the Management Plan of Commission Decision C(2008)8785, amending Commission Decision C(2006)6456 of EastMed-MoS and the original Management Plan. • the two projects submitted under the 2nd call of proposals launched by the Steering Committee of the “Elaboration of the East Mediterranean Motorways of the Sea Master Plan”.

Deliverable 5 was one of the three study deliverables that consolidated the East Med MoS Master Plan. The other two deliverables that make part of the Master Plan were namely Del 6 “Report on financial investment and time planning for the implementation of the East Mediterranean Motorways of the Sea” and Deliverable 9 “Report on Policy Initiatives”.

The above mentioned deliverables D5 and D6 were the main outcomes of the second phase of the project, which dealt with dedicated technical, economic, financial, organizational & political propositions for achieving successful implementation of MoS in Eastern Mediterranean. These were prepared by the Project Consulting consortium [PLANET ( Partner – Greece), TREDIT (Partner - Greece), PriceWaterhouseCoopers Italy (Partner - Italy) , UL FPP (Partner - Slovenia), PLANHOLD (Partner - Cyprus), PriceWaterhouseCoopers Malta (Subcontractor - Malta), T-Bridge (Subcontractor - Italy) , FORTHcrs (Subcontractor - Greece) , Rete Autostrade Mediterranee (Promoting partner – Italy)], and approved by the Parties of the Project “ELABORATION OF THE EAST MEDITERRANEAN MOTORWAYS OF THE SEA MASTER PLAN”, namely the Hellenic Ministry of Mercantile Marine, Aegean and Islands Policy, the Ministry of Transport of the Italian , the Ministry of Transport of the Republic of Slovenia, the Cyprus Ports Authority and the Malta Maritime Authority.

The modifications and additions to the core document of D5 (as well as D6) were carried out by the Technical Assistant.

D9 was partly carried out during phase II and phase III.

In the first phase of the project, the existing situation regarding intermodal sea based transport and logistics in the study area was assessed (both private and public sector), estimated potential flows for MoS in Eastern Mediterranean and identified/analyzed critical success parameters and barriers for MoS implementation.

Deliverable 5.2 1-15 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

The three deliverables that constitute the East Med MoS Master Plan, as specified above, aim to provide to decision makers at national and regional level and to the industrial actors related to the MoS set up and operation, structured information regarding the following pragmatic questions:

1. Which D2D service corridor should be considered (regions, clusters of ports & maritime connections) by priority for setting up & operating MoS schemes? How economically viable are the proposed MoS schemes? (East Med MoS reference network for 2015).

2. What is the “operational goal” that should be foreseen for making MoS attractive in being part of intermodal d2d logistic chains in the area? (Operational concept of East Med MoS in terms of KPIs).

3. What is missing in terms of infrastructure and techniques for achieving the operational goal of East Med MoS up to 2015? (East MoS gap analysis)

4. What investments are required for filling the gaps and how these investments could be financed? (East Med MoS Investments Financing & time planning)

5. What are the direct actions to be taken for having East Med MoS implementation in accordance to the industrial expectations for facilitating trade and releave negative environmental impact of transport in the region? (East Med MoS Action Plan)

6. How we can challenge the industry in being involved in MoS set up & operation? (East Med MoS )

7. What should the EU, the countries & the regions do in terms of policy for minimizing constraints that hinder the implementation and the expansion of the East Med MoS? (East Med MoS policy recommendations).

Deliverable 5.2 provides answers to the first three questions above. It also provides the results of the strategic environmental assessment of the East Med MoS reference network.

Deliverable 6.2 deals with questions 4, 5 & 6 above & Deliverable 9 consolidates policy and incentives proposals for successful implementations of East Med MoS towards 2015 horizon.

More specifically the structure of Deliverable 5.2 is as follows:

Chapter 1 Introduction

Chapter 2 describes the analysis that to the identification of nine MoS potential corridors (East Med MoS reference network for 2015) that will formulate the foundation of the EMR Master Plan and presents these corridors on a case by case level, including relevant information regarding :

Deliverable 5.2 1-16 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

• potential trade flows, catchment areas and road network interconnection of the MoS corridors

• identification of the predominant/indicative MoS links

• potential future trade flows/ articulation of demand and indicative service profile of the predominant/indicative MoS links

• intermodal maritime and unimodal road competition overview and estimation of modal shift of the predominant/indicative MoS links

• economic viability pre-assessment of the predominant/indicative MoS links

• missing links identification.

• proposed projects submitted under the 2nd call for proposals

Chapter 3 attempts the identification and specification of MoS Quality Labels, in order to establish a first basis for "certification" for MoS services in the EMR.

Chapter 4 presents a structured analysis of the gaps between the current service levels and operational characteristics of each MoS corridor and market needs, as represented by key indicators, based on the MoS Quality Labels identified in Chapter 3. This analysis leads to the identification of the infrastructure interventions needed in relevant MoS ports in order to guarantee a MoS service with an adequate level of quality.

Chapter 5 presents the strategic environmental assessment of the East Med MoS.

Deliverable 5.2 1-17 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

2 Identification & Presentation of the Potential MoS Corridors in EMR

2.1 Introduction

The main objective of this chapter is the identification and presentation of the potential MoS corridors in the EMR which constitute the proposals of the study team for the EMR MoS Master Plan. Nine MoS potential corridors were identified which were derived from the analysis carried out in previous stages of the project as well as from the relevant response of the industry to the call of proposals.

The methodology followed for the identification and analysis of the potential MoS corridors is described in detail in section 2.2. Section 2.3 covers the examination, analysis and presentation of each of the identified potential MoS corridor connections on a case by case level with the provision of relevant information regarding potential corridor trade flows and catchment areas, road network interconnection, the demand on the link and its articulation, competition overview (on the maritime and land surface part of the intermodal maritime-based proposed services/ MoS corridors), estimation of modal shift, indicative service profile, and service viability analysis.

Section 2.4 presents the missing links identified in the study area as they emerged by the application of a specific methodology in order to identify other ares in the EMR in which while there is demand, there are no services. The aim of this section is to cover the whole of the study area with cases of potential connections that do not exist and could possibly be considered as potential extensions to the proposed MoS corridors.

Section 2.5 presents a brief outline of the two proposed projects submitted under the 2nd call, launched by the Steering Committee of the “Elaboration of the East Mediterranean Motorways of the Sea Master Plan”, namely the “Eleusis-Barcelona” and the “Adriamos”. The first proposed project “Eleusis-Barcelona”, is considered on the basis of its unique nature and importance in connecting the East and West MoS, whilst the second one, the Adriamos (originally submitted under the 1st call, and now resubmitted under the 2nd call) relates to a corridor that has already been identified as a potential corridor by the East Med MoS simulation model, developed in prior stages of the project, with regards to the strengthening of the Motorways of the Sea (MoS) within the Adriatic sea.

Finally, in section 2.6, the Overall Master Plan Results are presented in terms of the Master Plan cut-view, the results of the assignment of the simulation model and the sum-up of the the indicative/ predominant MoS links’ economic feasibility pre- assessment results.

Deliverable 5.2 2-18 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

2.2 Methodology framework

In this chapter the methodological framework followed is presented,

o for the determination/ detection of the MoS potential corridors and the identification of the predominant/ indicative MoS link

o for the estimation of the potential future trade flows (2015) of the MoS potential corridors and the identification of the corridors cathment areas

o For the estimation of the potential future trade flows (2015) of the predominant/ indicative MoS links and the competition overview

o For the unimodal road competition transport flows overview for each of the MoS potential corridors

o For the estimation of the modal shift for each of the MoS potential corridors

o For the determination of the indicative service profile of the predominant/ indicative MoS link

o For the determination of the indicative service profile of the predominant/ indicative MoS link, and

o For the economic viability assessment of the predominant/ indicative MoS link.

2.2.1 Determination/ detection of the MoS potential corridors – Identification of the predominant/ indicative MoS link The term MoS path is employed to describe trips with either combined maritime and road transport segments or purely maritime transport segments within the study area that are of in the context of the analyses conducted. These MOS paths are distinct from Road paths, a term used to describe trips carried out using road-only transport segments. During this procedure focus was placed on selecting only these OD pairs comprising of at least one MOS path under the criteria of minimum cost paths.

In order to identify OD pairs of interest within the EMR study area, tools of transport modeling in VISUM and statistical analyses in ACCESS have been used. The East- Med-MoS model that was developed in prior stages of the project was also utilized for analyzing potential MoS corridors. The traffic assignment used for this analysis ran with all the possible maritime connections being “open” within the EMR i.e. in the specific assignment the maritime network considered comprised of all potential connections between the ports of the study area (existing and non-existing). The assigned matrix was set up to the forecasted 2015 trade demand in the study area, displaying a total of flows of approximately 236 million tons.

Deliverable 5.2 2-19 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Next, all OD pairs, in which road-only segment paths were one-way solutions for the completion of a trip, were identified and excluded. As a result out of the total of 4.626 OD pairs, almost 60% of them were excluded and the remaining number of OD pairs for further examination was reduced to 2.006 pairs with a total demand of approximately 126 million tons.

The assignment was used in order to provide an indication of the corridors of interest in the context of the East Med MoS1. The links for each of the MoS paths, identified in the previous stage of the analysis, were grouped at cluster to cluster level in detailed segmentation (a, b, c where applicable, e.g. cluster 8a and 8b) and their potential volumes were summed up to the cluster level. Grouping the maritime connection on a cluster basis and summing up the assigned flows between a cluster pair provided a clear indication of the connections that canalize potential critical masses. The connections accumulating high cargo volumes were further examined and distinguished between existing and non-existing maritime links. Those which were non-existing and involved at least one of the five EMR MoS countries as origin/destination where further selected to comprise the potential new MoS links. Furthermore, already existing connections on a cluster-to-cluster basis were also identified, on the basis that they appeared to accumulate potentially higher volumes than those served at present and at the same time shift ton/kms off the road. These connections also constituted potential MoS cases for further investigation that need to be supplemented with additional new services that could be characterized by features such as higher frequency or greater speed.

Finally, all the above cases where subjected to logical tests and the expert opinion of the members of the consortium in order to be corrected and refined.

The specification and the corresponding justification/ validation of the goal of each proposed MoS corridor connection, in conjunction to the specification of the type of proposed service to be provided, are founded on a two level approach:

ƒ The first five proposed MoS corridors connections concur with those proposed by the industry, in accordance to the proposals submitted in the relevant call,

1 It is important to mention that according to the ToR, The contents of the study, article 5.2,: “the geographical coverage of the study shall include the five countries of the study area (Greece, Italy, Slovenia, Cyprus and Malta) as well as the wider East-Mediterranean region”. Therefore, even though by no means are other external, to the defined study area, med potential MoS corridors underestimated in the study the integration and analysis of the total of potential MoS connections covering the whole of the is considered as being well beyond the scope of the present study and could possibly constitute the main subject of a future study concerning the elaboration of the MoS Master Plan for the whole Mediterranean Sea.

Deliverable 5.2 2-20 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

ƒ The remaining four proposed MoS corridor connections are based on the general estimation of the existing services between the involved port clusters, but also of their neighboring ones, which in the existing situation serve the trade flows of the catchment areas of each proposed MoS potential connection.

By taking into account the total number of paths using maritime links (existing & non existing) between clusters i & j (separately for both directions) a table was produced that showed the existing and non maritime connections between the examined clusters. In the same table the average tariff, the average length and average time of the specific paths were recorded in order to provide the required information on which the selection of the best indicative link, which should not be an existing one. Especially for the MoS corridors proposed, which were based upon the results of the relevant call for proposals, the indicative link was determined on the basis of the industry’s propositions. The above analytical tables used for determining of the predominant/ indicative links for each MoS potential corridor separately2 are presented in Annex 1.

2.2.2 Estimation of the potential future trade flows (2015) of the MoS potential corridors – Identification of the corridor catchment area This estimation was carried out following the elaboration of the assignment results of the model for the total of paths using the maritime links (existing & non existing) between clusters i & j (separately for both directions), to each of the proposed potential MoS corridors, in order to create a table with the sum of the potential demand (total demand) for each of the corresponding O-D pairs (separately for both directions).

From this table the O-D pairs were selected, whose potential demand summed up was equal to approximately 90% of the total demand between the clusters i & j (separately for both directions). The potential demand between the selected O-D pairs (separately for both directions) constitutes the potential demand of the examined MoS corridor connections per direction between clusters i & j.

The selected O-D pairs (separately for both directions) constitute the catchment area of the examined clusters. In the case in which the zones, that define the catchment area of each cluster, as resulting from the examination of the potential demand

2 Ports belonging to the same cluster are considered as of the same weight in regards to their selection for determining the predominant/ indicative link. The grey shaded parts in these specific tables indicate the cases of maritime connections between two clusters where at least one of them does not belong to one of the five core area countries and as such can not be selected as potential MoS corridor connections.

Deliverable 5.2 2-21 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study separately per direction, display difference between the two directions, as catchment area for each cluster is considered the total of zones independent of direction.

The principle of 90% was not followed for some of the cases in which the application of this principle leads to the definition of a very limited catchment area (one or two zones) of the involved port clusters. In these cases 5 ktns3 are set as the minimum (Example, MoS corridor 6) limit of selection of the O-D pairs that define the potential demand of the proposed MoS corridor connections, and as such also the catchment area of the involved port clusters.

In accordance to the above the maximum values of the potential demand per O-D pair were set.

The minimum values were calculated up to 60% of the maximum values, this estimate was drawn as an average value from the relevant feedback received from industry actors as well as from the study team’s experts, based on which an estimation is made that the future MoS corridor connections to be operational will attract around 60% of the demand that is currently being served by existing maritime connections between the catchment areas of the ports involved.

For each proposed MoS potential connection examined the interconnection with the road transport network at the level of the relevant ports as nodes on the wider transport network is analysed. The interconnection with the inland road network was examined and presented at two levels:

ƒ At the level of connection with the TEN-T road network taking into account the MoS flows as resulted from the model, and the general knowledge concerning the network, as resulted from the relevant data collection conducted at a prior stage of the study (WP1 – Deliverable 1/ Volume II)

ƒ At the accessibility level of the actors involved in the ports of the indicative MoS links, in relation to their connection with the national (primary/ secondary) road networks of the region and the TEN-T road network (in case of direct access), taking into consideration the general knowledge of the network and the neighbouring regions.

Finally, it is important to clarify that in relation to the MoS corridors’ hinterland examination, the identification and analysis concerning types of cargo, main industry and consumption centres constitutes a detailed market analysis which should be performed and presented by the actors in the context of their proposal submission for

3 It should be noted that the demand that cumulatively corresponds to those OD pairs with demand equal or greater than 5ktns is equal to approximately 124 million tons i.e. approximately 98% of 126 million tons

Deliverable 5.2 2-22 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study a specific service to be provided as well as the supply chain set-up they foresee to achieve. As such, a detailed profiling of the demand by MoS corridor that would also include such issues to be examined is beyond the scope of a strategic Master Plan study. Similarly, while five of the nine in total proposed MoS corridors in this study were primarily based upon the expressions of interest and the specific proposals for MoS service set-up along the specific corridors submitted by the industry following the relevant call for proposals, it is beyond the scope of the study to identify potential operators for the rest of the proposed MoS corridors, whose viability and profiling was justified on the basis of the study’s applied methodology. Furthermore, it should be noted that the identification of certain potential operators may also be easily and wrongfully misperceived as favouritism towards certain actors which the study team strongly wants to avoid at all costs since it would create a cloud of potential uncertainty in the industry that in extremes could even lead the study’s results to be wrongfully tainted as biased and ill-directed.

2.2.3 Estimation of the potential future trade flows (2015) of the predominant/indicative MoS link – Competition overview This estimation was carried out following the elaboration of the assignment results of the model, which ran with all the existing maritime connections in EMR and the predominant/ indicative MoS links being “open” as existing (Master Plan Run).

The specific run provided all the required data in order to determine the potential trade flows of the predominant/ indicative MoS links in the future (2015), but also to examine these flows in relation to the existing maritime competition.

Specifically, for the catchment area of each respective MoS corridor, and taking into account the competition from the existing maritime connections, not only between the examined each time clusters (the MoS corridor clusters), but also of neighbouring ones that potentially serve the specific catchment area, the trade flows per O-D pair were examined and estimated which “make use” of both the examined predominant/ indicative MoS link, as well as of their competitive ones. The criteria/ parameters that were examined in parallel to the competition , in addition to the assigned volumes of the aforementioned maritime links (MoS and existing), were the travel distance and tariff.

The maritime competition analysis, combined with the findings of the recording of the existing situation in regards to the conditions that at present “impose” the allocation of the trade flows that are generated and attracted to/ from the zones of the study area, and in particular from those that determine the catchment area of the proposed MoS corridors, has led to an indicative estimation of the evolution of the trade flows over the first years of operation of the MoS links (articulation of demand). This evolution of the trade flows clearly depends upon the conditions of the competition, i.e. a strong or less intense competition environment in which each of the MoS links will be

Deliverable 5.2 2-23 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study introduced to operate. Relevant references are made in the descriptions of each proposed potential MoS corridors, as well as in Annex 2 where parallel to the articulation of the MoS indicative links’ demand, the articulation of the existing competitive maritime links demand separately for each MoS corridor is additionally presented. Additionally, in the same Annex the analytical tables are included which present demand of the existing competitive maritime links per O-D pair, each time for the last year of the time period for which it is estimated that the demand of the indicative MoS link will have reached the levels of the respective demand estimated values for 2015 (separately for each MoS corridor).

The competition analysis was not confined in the examination of competition concerning the maritime part of the intermodal freight transport chain in the study area via the potential MoS corridors, but also included the land surface transport part by carrying out a corresponding competition investigation between the road and rail transport modes.

More specifically, an investigation of those conditions and parameters that determine both at present, as well as expected in the future (time horizon 2015), the conditions of competition between road and rail in the catchment area of each proposed MoS corridor was also conducted. Thus, an expert opinion concerning the estimation of the percentage of rail currently being and/or expected to be in the future competitive against road was formulated, for the most of the cases4. Relevant references are made in the descriptions of each proposed potential MoS corridors, which are presented in Section 2.3. Furthermore, estimations were made, where possible, concerning the extent to which the rail could induce the alleviation of road bottlenecks (where and if they exist) in the future as well as the degree to which the possible modal shift from road to rail could create a bottleneck to rail.

2.2.4 Unimodal road competition transport flows overview The competition overview concerning unimodal road transport flows which appear to constitute an alternative for some of the cases of the potential MoS corridors in EMR was examined and commented upon in terms of the alternative competitive road only paths, which appear in the model (Master Plan run) between the catchment areas of the involved port clusters.

More specific, for the examination of the competition from road transport between clusters i & j (separately for both directions) a table was created for the selected O-D

4 The lack of systematic and organized data concerning freight flows to/ from the ports of the study area to/ from their hinterlands per transport mode, led to the ad valorem estimation of the competition percentage of the two transport modes, road and rail.

Deliverable 5.2 2-24 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study pairs, where all the competitive unimodal road paths were recorded with the corresponding summed up demand (of the different paths), the average tariff and distance of the particular paths that use alternative/ competitive road links, in order to provide the required data to describe the competition from unimodal road transport.

In addition to the above, the comparative assessment of the impacts on these flows by the operation of the indicative MoS links, which was based on comparing the results of the model’s assignment of the do-nothing scenario against the Master Plan run. Relevant references are made in the descriptions of each proposed potential MoS corridors, which are presented in Section 2.3. The analytical tables that were produced as a result of this analysis are presented in Annex 3.

2.2.5 Estimation of modal shift The estimation of the modal shift was conducted only in those cases in which competition from road transport is identified, where the percentage of trade flows that each particular MoS potential corridor will attract from road transport (as percentage of the potential demand that has been estimated) in order to lead to the expected extra benefit. The modal shift was estimated by taking into account the potential future trade flows of the predominant/ indicative MoS link.

No modal shift from rail transport was considered, taking into account that for the MoS demand forecasting activity it was assumed that the total share of both modes (maritime & road) will not change in the future i.e. rail mode will keep in the future in the area the share of the 2006 in serving future trade volumes (refer to chapter 2.5 of the Deliverable 1/ Volume II).

2.2.6 Determination of the indicative service profile of the predominant/ indicative MoS link Given the indicative estimation of the evolution of the annual trade flows over the first years of operation of the MoS links (articulation of demand), a search for an indicative existing vessel was initiated for each of the MoS links, which could possibly serve each one of the lines examined.

The estimated demand was converted into the equivalent number of trailers or TEUs (depending on the service) per week, in accordance to the assumptions:

ƒ The demand is equally distributed during the duration of one year (there is no seasonal fluctuation) ƒ One (1) trailer is equal to 18 tons of cargo, while one (1) TEU is equal to 10 tons of cargo.

Deliverable 5.2 2-25 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Given the number of units (trailers/ TEUs) estimated that would be transported per week and the capacity of the indicative ship selected, the required frequency per direction was calculated. The final frequency value was the average value of the frequencies of both directions. The minimum frequency required by the MoS legislative framework of 2 departures per week per direction was adopted also for lines in which the demand was not justifying such a frequency. It is noted that the average capacity occupation rate of the ship adopted was at the level of 80%.

Finally, the total travel time required for a roundtrip was calculated, in order to check whether with the given frequency estimated the employment of an additional ship is required. It was assumed that a Lo-Lo ship travels on average with a speed of 13 knots, while a Ro-Ro or Ro-Pax ship with a speed of 20 knots.

The above calculations were conducted separately for each of the first years of the lines’ operation. The service profile characteristics provided per MoS link represent the final year of operation of the time period examined. The corresponding data for each year of operation per MoS link examined are provided in Annex 4.

2.2.7 Economic viability assessment of the predominant/ indicative MoS link operation The methodology followed for performing the economic viability assessment of the predominant/indicative MoS services to operate along the proposed MoS corridors, involves estimation of the annual operating costs and revenues from the operation of the lines, and on the basis of these main attributes the indication of profits & losses in case they are incurred.

The basic parameters of the vessels operating costs are cost of fuels, lubricants, crew payroll, vessel leasing/depreciation cost and general expenses. The basic revenues parameters considered are revenues from passenger tickets and charges of trailers in the case of Ro-Pax lines, charges for the transportation of trailers in the case of Ro-Ro lines, and charges for the transportation of TEUs in the case of Lo-Lo lines.

The total annual costs and revenues calculations were made based on indicative vessels types considered appropriate (as a result of the service profile determination methodology) for serving the individual connections and on traffic flows estimations by year as resulted from the potential future flow estimation methodology applied for each one of the considered links.

The basic vessel costs and the tariffs by transported unit were concluded after a desk research performed and on the basis of industry interviews that were conducted during the course of the project. The following tables show operating costs and revenues for the start-up of a MoS service that have been estimated for existing Ro-Ro and Lo-Lo

Deliverable 5.2 2-26 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study links on the basis of a desk research performed and the industry interviews that have been executed during the project duration :

Table 2-1 Operating costs for a Ro-Ro/ Lo-Lo link

Unit of Cost Max Min Average measure

Fuel 70,5 60,0 65,3 € / nm

Crew 66.000 58.043 62.022 € / week

Repairs and maintenance 40.000 20.490 30.245 € / week

Depreciation / Leasing 45.739 40.000 45.739 € / week

Overheads5 20% 16% 18% %

Source: Deliverable 5 Table 2-2 Operating revenues for a Ro-Ro link

Unit of Revenue Max Min Average measure

Tariff per linear meter per nautical 0,26 0,12 0,19 € / ml nm mile

Source: Deliverable 5

Table 2-3 Operating revenues for a Lo-Lo link

Unit of Revenue Max Min Average measure

Tariff per linear meter per nautical 0,284 0,302 0,293 € / FEU nm mile

Source: Deliverable 5 In the majority of the cases an average scenario of traffic generation and articulation along the first years of the operation was applied. The results of the demand forecasting model of the study were used as primary data in the form of Ktns. The

5 Calculated in percentage on the other costs.

Deliverable 5.2 2-27 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study demand profile generated was transformed in transported units mainly for facilitating calculation of the vessel’s operating costs and revenues associated to the service of the potential demand of the link. This conversion used as major assumptions the following:

• Each trailer is equivalent to 18 tns of cargo and 14.8 lane meters

• Each TEU is equivalent to 10 tns of cargo

• Each trailer is equivalent to 2 TEUS or 1 FEU

The estimation of passenger traffic for those proposed potential MoS corridors where the service to be provided is Ro-Pax (MoS 1, 6 & 8), apart from MoS corridor 6 for which a specific study was elaborated (Deliverable 1, Vol. III), was based on the passenger traffic forecasting data on the main existing maritime connections, which were presented in detail in Del. 1, Vol. III under the specific assumptions made in order to be on the side.

The cost and revenues calculation by link was firstly conducted per week and the weekly costs and revenues were generalized at an annual level. The form of calculation used is presented in the figure that follows. The results of the MoS services economic viability assessment are presented separately for each of the nine services to operate along the potential MoS corridors examined in chapter 2.3. Furthermore, in Annex 5 of this report the analytical tables displaying calculations per year and per link are presented as well as the characteristics of the vessels that were assumed as typical vessels for the operation of each line examined.

Deliverable 5.2 2-28 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-1 Example of the calculation form used for the economic viability assessment of the indicative/ predominant MoS links

Deliverable 5.2 2-29 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

2.3 Description of MoS potential corridors

2.3.1 Introduction By applying the methodology, which was previously thoroughly presented in Chapter 2.2, Section 2.2.1, the results led to the proposal of nine potential MoS corridors, which comprise of:

a) MoS corridor connections based upon the proposals which were submitted by the industry during the call procedure, at a previous stage of the study, and were examined at this stage in terms of their viability and feasibility in order to be included in the EMR MoS Master Plan; and,

b) new/ alternative cases of MoS corridor connections which resulted by applying the above methodology as significant cases appearing to satisfy both the requirements of adequate demand in terms of guaranteeing critical masses, as well as filling in market “gaps” in EMR areas, where despite the demand being adequate it is not accompanied with the provision of the necessary service to meet this demand satisfactorily (either none at all, or in a different form than the one proposed).

Followings, an overview of all nine potential MoS potential corridors is presented, including also:

ƒ The relevant codification used to simplify the reference to each of the potential MoS corridors in the course of the report,

ƒ the pairs of port clusters to be linked by the potential MoS corridors,

ƒ the indicative MoS link which was selected as a potential maritime connection between the specific (each time) clusters along the proposed MoS corridors, taking into account the total of all potential combinations of maritime connections of the ports belonging to each of the port clusters involved.

ƒ the typology of each of the potential MoS corridor connections.

ƒ the type of service of each of the potential MoS corridor connections

Deliverable 5.2 2-30 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Table 2-4 Overview of Nine potential MoS Corridors

Potential Indicative Link Typology, Type of MoS cluster-to-cluster Comments Service Corridor (port-to-port)

South Adriatic- Italian Igoumenitsa – Adriatic Overseas MOS 1 ports & Ionian Sea/ Taranto Connection RO-PAX West Greece ports

East-Med Over Sea EMR-Middle East ports Kavala – MOS 2 connection of & North Aegean ports Limassol LO-LO international coasts

Ionian Sea/ west Greece ports & the Igoumenitsa- Adriatic same coast RO-RO MOS 3 eastern segment of the Koper Connection North Adriatic ports cluster

North Adriatic ports - Venice- RO-RO Adriatic Overseas MOS 4 Ionian Sea/ West (Igoumenitsa)- Connection Greece ports Patra-(Korinthos)

The eastern segment of the North Adriatic ports West-East Med Igoumenitsa- RO-RO MOS 5 cluster & the western MoS Ancona-Koper segment of the North Two seas Adriatic ports cluster

EMR – Middle East East-Med Over Sea MOS 6 ports & Central/ South Limassol-Pireas connection of RO-PAX Aegean ports international coasts

The eastern segment of the North Adriatic ports cluster & the central East-Med Over Sea segment of the North Venice-(Koper)- RO-RO MOS 7 connection of Adriatic ports cluster & Ploce international coasts the northern segment of the South Adriatic - Balkan ports cluster

Ionian Sea/ West Greece ports & the Adriatic Overseas RO-PAX MOS 8 Italian ports of the Patra-Catania Connection Central Mediterranean ports cluster

The western segment of Over feeder the North Adriatic ports LO-LO cluster & the southern services MOS 9 Malta-Venice segment of the Central (chain with Black Mediterranean ports Sea) cluster

Deliverable 5.2 2-31 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

All nine proposed MoS corridors are graphically displayed in the map that follows. The map also provides for each MoS corridor the min and max values of the estimated trade flows in ktns for the 2015 time horizon to be served per direction while the differentiation in trade volume potential is also graphically depicted by the line width of each respective MoS corridor presented. Each of the potential MoS corridors is individually presented in the following sections 2.3.2 – 2.3.10.

Deliverable 5.2 2-32 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-2 MoS corridors potential demand per direction for 2015

Deliverable 5.2 2-33 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

2.3.2 MoS potential corridor 1: South Adriatic - Italian ports cluster & Ionian Sea/ West Greece ports cluster, including their respective catchment areas (Indicative MoS link Igoumenitsa – Taranto)6

The ports of Bari, Brindisi and Taranto (South Adriatic- Italian ports cluster) represent the gateway of Southern Italy to the East Mediterranean and, then, to . Bari, primarily and Brindisi secondarily have several Ro-Ro connections to/ from Greece and , while the port of Taranto is more specialized in container traffic. Approximately 70% of the total cargo at the port of Bari concerns Ro-Ro traffic (75% to/from Greek destinations) and in 2007 there was a 14% increase in traffic flows between the port of Bari and Greece. In the port of Brindisi the majority of cargo throughput involves bulk cargo with containers and Ro-Ro traffic being secondary in importance. Ferry cargo traffic in particular has experienced a decline over the past few years mainly due to strong competition faced from the port of Bari.

The ports of Patra and Igoumenitsa (Ionian Sea/ West Greece ports cluster) are very well located for serving freight and passenger traffic from/ to ports in southern Italy and along the Adriatic Sea destined for Italy and other Central and Western European countries. These ports act as the western gateways of Greece, they primarily serve Ro- Ro freight as well as a substantial volume of international passenger transport. The port of Igoumenitsa is better located in comparison to the port of Patra in regards to also serving transport flows from/to the countries of the Balkan Peninsula.

The objective of the proposed connection to be operated along this MoS corridor is the provision of a new service connection between Greece and Italy that would serve the Adriatic and Ionian Sea in order to alleviate mainly the highly congested port of Bari providing an alternative maritime connection through the Port of Taranto with service focus on Ro-Pax.

2.3.2.1 Potential trade flows of the MoS corridor – Catchment Area identification – Interconnection with road transport network

For the examined MoS corridor, the forecasts show the potential for a total volume of 500 – 900 ktons per year (both directions) by 2015 to be transported by sea between the two port clusters. This amount is equivalent to approximately 30.000 – 50.000 units (trucks/ trailers) for the same year.

6 Proposal “New Ro-Pax link Taranto (Italy) – Igoumenitsa (Greece)” submitted by the industry following the relevant call for proposals

Deliverable 5.2 2-34 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

In the following figure, the maritime link Igoumenitsa – Taranto is presented as an indicative link of the proposed MoS corridor, serving the potential volumes estimated to form the future demand (2015) between the examined clusters. In the same figure, the flows of the particular indicative MoS link are also presented to/ from the source origins/ final destinations of the volumes.

Figure 2-3 The MoS flows of the indicative MoS link Igoumenitsa – Taranto on the potential MoS 1 corridor (South Adriatic- Italian & Ionian Sea/ West Greece ports clusters )

The above presentation of the MoS flows on the indicative MoS link Igoumenitsa- Taranto to be operated along the examined potential MoS corridor between the two clusters, also identifies the routes which are likely to be followed for the transportation of the cargo to be moved along this particular corridor connection.

The particular pairs of zones between the catchment areas of the South Adriatic- Italian ports cluster (cluster no. 11) and the Ionian Sea/ West Greece ports cluster (cluster no. 7) with their respective values of the potential estimated demand for the year 2015 are presented in detail in the following table.

Deliverable 5.2 2-35 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Table 2-5 Estimated potential demand in 2015 between the South Adriatic- Italian & Ionian Sea/ West Greece port clusters

MoS 1 MIN MAX (from Potential Potential ORIGIN ZONE DESTINATION ZONE cluster - to Demand Demand cluster) 2015 (ktns) 2015 (ktns)

Puglia Attiki 90 145 Puglia Kentriki Makedonia 40 65 Abruzzo Attiki 35 60

Lazio Kentriki Makedonia 30 50 Campania Kentriki Makedonia 20 35 from 11 to 7 Lazio Attiki 20 30

Abruzzo Kentriki Makedonia 15 30 Campania Attiki 10 20 Molise Attiki 6 10

Puglia Thessalia 5 10 REST 50 85 11-7 total 320 540

MIN MAX Potential Potential ORIGIN_ZONE DESTINATION_ZONE Demand Demand 2015 (ktns) 2015 (ktns)

Attiki Puglia 90 145 Attiki Abruzzo 30 45

Kentriki Makedonia Puglia 15 20 from 7 to 11 Attiki Campania 10 20 Attiki Lazio 10 20 Kentriki Makedonia Lazio 10 15 Kentriki Makedonia Campania 10 15 Thessalia Puglia 5 10 Dytiki Ellada Puglia 5 10 Kentriki Makedonia Abruzzo 5 10 REST 50 80

7-11 total 240 390 Grand Total 560 930

Deliverable 5.2 2-36 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

According to the estimated future demand (2015), the strongest pair in terms of volume in both directions is that between the regions of Puglia (Italy) and Attiki (Greece), with a total volume of 180 - 290 ktns.

The percentage split by direction is estimated to be 58% eastbound and 42% westbound. Thus, it appears that there is reasonably good balance in terms of direction which provides a sound base for the operation of the service.

In the following figure, the graphic depiction of the specific potential MoS corridor linking the two port clusters and their north/ southbound hinterlands (catchment area) is presented. In the case of the South Adriatic - Italian ports cluster and more specifically, concerning the port of Taranto, the catchment area comprises of the Italian regions of Puglia, Abruzzo, Lazio, Campania, Molise, Sardegna and Calabria. In the case of the Ionian Sea/ West Greece ports cluster and of the port of Igoumenitsa in particular, the catchment area consists of the Greek regions of Dytiki Ellada, Thessalia, Kentriki Makedonia, Anatoliki Makedonia, Thraki, Sterea Ellada and Attiki.

Figure 2-4 Map of the MoS potential corridor 1 (South Adriatic- Italian & Ionian Sea/ West Greece port clusters)

Deliverable 5.2 2-37 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

The interrelationship between the MoS potential corridor 1 and the relevant intermodal corridors within the study area as previously defined at an earlier stage of the study (Deliverable 1, Vol. II, Chapter 4) is illustrated in the figure that follows.

Figure 2-5 Map of the MoS potential corridor 1 in relation to the Adriatic-Ionian intermodal corridor

From the above map, it can be seen that the MoS potential corridor 1 lies primarily along the Adriatic-Ionian intermodal corridor which is amongst the most highly utilized intermodal corridors identified within the wider study area of the Eastern Mediterranean and is characterized primarily by the extensive and long standing provision of Ro-Ro and Ro-Pax services linking the ports of West Greece (port cluster no. 7) and the South and North Adriatic port clusters of Italy (ports clusters 11 and 10 respectively). These connections serve primarily the trade between Italy and Greece with the majority of the goods (64%) transported from Italy to Greece being manufactured goods, machinery and transport equipment and chemicals. On the oher hand, concerning trade from Greece to Italy, the most common types of products transported from Greece to Italy are crude materials, manufactured goods, food and live animals that constitute 84% of the total trade.

Concerning the South Adriatic Italian ports, most Ro-Ro connections between Greece and Italy are served by the port of Bari which is experiencing considerable growth in Ro-Ro traffic which has led to an increase in road traffic congestion around the port with the adverse effects to be expected with such a development. The potential Ro-

Deliverable 5.2 2-38 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Pax serice on MoS corridor 1 linking the ports of Igoumenitsa and Taranto provides the possibility of a new alternative connection along the Adriatic-Ionian intermodal corridor that would assist in alleviating the road traffic congestion problem experienced at the port of Bari whilst also providing a new destination for passengers coming from Greece. Furthermore, Taranto also plays the role of a transhipment port that is growing in importance in this respect and is connected to a far greater number of ports in the wider Mediterranean area than the other ports of its cluster (Bari and Brindisi) thus providing a much wider range of potential destinations served for the cargo originating from the port of Igoumenitsa and its catchment areas.

A future maritime connection between Igoumenitsa and Taranto would also benefit from the development project under construction in the port of Taranto, named PLIT (Integrated Logistic Platform of Taranto), which will create a new port logistics area with efficient and modern road and rail connections that will also strongly reinforce the port’s role as a transhipment hub in the East Mediterranean region. The possibility of the development of a freight centre in proximity to the port of Igoumenitsa is also currently under examination in collaboration with the port and local authorities. These development prospects are expected to further boost intermodality and facilitate the transport of the cargo flows between the ports and their catchment areas.

Concerning existing road connections, the map that follows presents the road network to be used in the catchment area of the cluster ports to/ from initial origins/final destinations of the cargo flows to the zones (countries/ regions) within this area. On the same map emphasis is placed on the display of the road TEN-T network in order to illustrate the interconnection of the examined potential MoS corridor with these networks.

An additional significant parameter in examining a potential MoS corridor is the examination of the accessibility of the ports involved. Given the identification of the specific indicative MoS link as previously defined it should be noted that:

ƒ The port of Igoumenitsa has direct access to road network infrastructure. It has one post entrance with eight lanes connecting the port with “Egnatia” highway and two lanes connecting the port with the city of Igoumenitsa. Further to the port having direct access to Egnatia highway, it is also connected with the National road network of Igoumenitsa – Preveza (0.1 km distance).

ƒ The port of Taranto is connected to the major national road and rail network of Italy. The distance between the highway A14 (Taranto-Bari-Bologna) and the port area is 15 km, allowing for the connection to northern Italy and . Secondary roads (SS100 Taranto-Bari, SS106 Taranto-Reggio Calabria, SS7 Taranto-Lecce and superstrada Taranto-Brindisi) are also accessible to/from the port. The new North Gate (“Varco Nord”) for accessing the commercial port guarantees efficient direct access to the port areas from major road arteries.

Deliverable 5.2 2-39 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-6 MoS potential corridor 1 (South Adriatic- Italian & Ionian Sea/ West Greece port clusters) and interconnection with TEN-T road network

Deliverable 5.2 2-40 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

2.3.2.2 Articulation of the indicative MoS Link demand

In accordance to the methodology that was developed and applied for the estimation of the potential future trade flows (2015) of the predominant/ indicative MoS link, in the case of the MoS 1 corridor, the total demand that this specific line may serve in the year 2015 for both directions will range from 250 ktns/year (pessimistic scenario) to 600 ktns/year (optimistic scenario) with the moderate scenario at the level of 400 ktns/year. Taking into account the strong competition of the existing services the pessimistic scenario is considered the most likely for implementation. This demand is expected to gradually reach the above mentioned level within a period of approximately six (6) years with an annual average increase rate of 40%, estimating that during the 1st year of operation the line will manage to attract flows at the level of 120 ktns in both directions. In the table that follows the estimation of the evolution of demand for this particular case is presented. This estimation is directly related to the findings of the competition analysis which is being presented in the next section.

Table 2-6 Evolution of demand on the indicative link of the MoS potential corridor 1

Estimated AVG Estimated Link Demand (“Master Plan” Corridor Estimated run*) Cluster - Indicative Demand Corridor Cluster link (run "all Demand open"*) (run "all MIN MAX open"*) YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 YEAR 5 YEAR 6 Taranto - from 11 to 7 320 540 430 67 96 110 131 179 242 Igoumenitsa Igoumenitsa - from 7 to 11 240 390 315 56 86 106 235 292 355 Taranto 560 930 745 123 182 216 367 471 597 48% 19% 70% 28% 27% * refer to Chapter 2 The analytical tables presenting the demand of the indicative MoS link per O-D pair, for the 6th year, during which it is estimated that the demand for the MoS indicative link will have reached the levels of the expected values for 2015 are displayed in Annex 3.

2.3.2.3 Competition overview

The competition analysis which is presented next involves only the competitive intermodal maritime transport flows between the O-D pairs of the catchment area of the specific MoS corridor, and not the unimodal road transport flows, since the road only transport mode for trade exchange between the catchment areas of the corridor is not a feasible choice - the distance to be covered is irrationally extensive to consist a competitive choice against the maritime corridor.

Deliverable 5.2 2-41 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Concerning the maritime part of the intermodal transport flows between the O-D pairs of the catchment area of the specific MoS corridor, the existing maritime links between the examined port clusters are depicted in the following figure.

Figure 2-7 Existing maritime links between the catchment areas of the South Adriatic- Italian & Ionian Sea/ West Greece port clusters

The South Adriatic - Italian & Ionian Sea/ West Greece port clusters are currently well-connected with Ro-Ro services with average frequency almost nine (9) voyages per week. In the case of connections between the South Adriatic - Italian and North Aegean/ Central/ South Aegean Sea port clusters the existing services are Lo-Lo with average frequency of one (1) voyage per week, while in the case of connections between the Ionian Sea and the western segment of the South Adriatic - Italian port the existing Ro-Ro services are very frequent with twenty (20) voyages per week Finally, the connection between Piraeus and Ravenna belonging the Central/ South Aegean Sea and the western segment of the South Adriatic - Italian port clusters respectively is accomplished with both a Ro-Ro and a Lo-Lo service with a weekly frequency of one (2) and one (1) voyages.

Given the catchment area of the specific MoS corridor, and the particularly competitive environment in which the new line will have to operate in, where the long-standing lines connecting Greece – Italy via Bari and Brindisi play a dominating role and serve the greatest proportion of the existing demand of the corridor, the following assumptions are made in regards to the attractiveness of the new line (in relation to maritime competition):

Deliverable 5.2 2-42 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

In the 1st year of operation, the line will manage to attract most of the cargo with origin/ destination the pairs Kentriki Makedonia, Anatoliki Makedonia & Thraki and Thessalia with Puglia, Lazio, Campania, Abruzzo, Molise and Sardenia. During the time period between the 2nd and 5th year of operation, when the profile of the line will have been established within the specific market, in addition to the above cargo flows the line will gradually within this four year period be in a position to also attract a significant proportion of the freight traffic with origin/ destination from other regions of Greece and Italy and more specifically, the pairs of Attiki, Peloponnisos, Ipeiros, Dytiki and Sterea Ellada with the above mentioned regions of Italy plus Calabria.

During the 6th year of operation of the line it is estimated that a substantial percentage of transit flows will be added to the freight traffic served by the line with origin/ destination third countries such as Turkey7. In the first six year period of the new line’s operation it is estimated that the line will gradually achieve the attraction of cargo traffic with origin/ destination the catchment area of the MoS corridor at a percentage of around 15% on average from existing competitive lines involving primarily, the connections from Bari, Brindisi and Ancona with Patra and Igoumenitsa and secondarily, the connections from Ravenna and Taranto with Piraeus.

In the table that follows, in conjunction to the evolution of demand on the indicative link, the estimation of the evolution of demand for the total of the existing maritime links being competitive to this link is also presented.

7 The entire analysis was completed with the estimation of the potential trade flows per O-D pair of the predominant/ indicative MoS link, not only narrowly within the limits of the catchment area, but for the whole of the study area, aiming firstly, to determine the highest value of the trade flows potentially to be served by the predominant/ indicative MoS link in the future, and secondly, to examine the competition in relation to the flows in the total of the study area. This analysis was carried out primarily in this case, where the competition faced from the existing services is so strong, that it is estimated that the specific indicative MoS link must also attract flows from the wider study area and not solely from the defined catchment area.

Deliverable 5.2 2-43 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Table 2-7 Evolution of demand in the competitive existing maritime links on the MoS potential corridor 1

Estimated AVG Estimated Existing Maritime Links Demand Corridor Estimated ("Master Plan" run*) Cluster - Indicative Demand Corridor Cluster link (run "all Demand open"*) (run "all MIN MAX open"*) YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 YEAR 5 YEAR 6 Taranto - from 11 to 7 320 540 430 240 211 197 176 128 128 Igoumenitsa Igoumenitsa - from 7 to 11 240 390 315 301 270 251 121 65 65 Taranto 560 930 745 541 482 448 297 193 193 -11% -7% -34% -35% 0% * refer to Chapter 2 The analytical tables presenting the demand of the competitive existing maritime links per O-D pair, for the 6th year, during which it is estimated that the demand for the MoS indicative link will have reached the levels of the expected values for 2015 are displayed in Annex 3. Concerning competition on the land surface part of the intermodal transport flows between the O-D pairs of the catchment area of the specific MoS corridor, and specifically for competition between the road and rail transport modes, the current situation as recorded as well as the future situation (2015) as estimated is being described in the following paragraphs for each of the port clusters involved in the MoS 1 corridor. The main railway networks serving the catchment areas of this indicative MoS link are depicted in the figure that follows.

Road – Rail competition in South Adriatic – Italian ports cluster

The main Italian ports included in this particular cluster are Bari, Brindisi and Taranto. Port inland access remains a key problem for the majority of the Italian Adriatic city-ports regarding both road and rail connections. Taking into account the current situation of the ports, but also their potential future prospects, in accordance to the strategic development goals they have set, it can be claimed that in regards to:

• the port of Bari, in order to better exploit the presence of several neighbouring ports and logistics platforms, several interventions are foreseen at regional level, focusing on the port’s accessibility.

A number of intermodal rail connections exist, such as on the Bari-Piacenza link, but the services are operated from an inland terminal in proximity to the port and mainly consist of: direct shuttle train; booking and customer service; offices located within terminal area; trucking & tracing; data management; etc.;

• the port of Brindisi, is not directly connected to the railway network and shipments can be forwarded by rail only through the Brindisi train station that links the city of Brindisi to the Bari - Bologna – Milano axis;

Deliverable 5.2 2-44 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

• the port of Taranto, the port areas are not directly connected to the national rail network, apart from the container terminal which has 5 sidings of 1,200 meters long. A foreseen development project, named PLIT (Integrated Logistic Platform of Taranto), will create a new port logistics area that will be served by efficient, modern road and rail connections.

From the above and based upon the current planning for the course of the upgrading and constructing the foreseen rail and road transport infrastructures in the catchment area of the South-Adriatic Italian ports cluster, it is apparent that until 2015 the competition between road and rail transport modes will virtually remain “non- existent”, apart from the case of the port of Bari that shows effective intermodal services. Some improvements in terms of rail competition can be expected, according to the foreseen interventions (up to 2015), from the development of the Integrated Logistic Platform of Taranto.

Figure 2-8 MoS potential corridor 1 (South Adriatic- Italian & Ionian Sea/ West Greece port clusters) and interconnection with the main railway network s

Road – Rail competition in the Ionian Sea/ West Greece ports cluster

The Ionian Sea/ West Greece port cluster consists of the ports of Igoumenitsa and Patra. Currently, neither of these two ports are connected to the national railway network and as a result competition between road and rail is non-existent. However, in the future given the catchment area of this specific cluster within the Greek territory– which is slightly differentiated depending on the potential MoS

Deliverable 5.2 2-45 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study corridor proposed, that includes the total or the greatest part of the foreseen upgrading works – the following planned rail infrastructure projects must be taken into account: • The upgrading/ modernization works of the existing axes of the national railway network such as the axis Patra – – Thessaloniki – / Promahonas, aim at the development of a high speed double line along the core line (Patra – Athens – Thessaloniki), signalling and electrification covering the whole Axis, but also new alignments, such as the construction of the Egnatia Railway (connection between the ports of Alexandroupolis and Igoumenitsa) and the remaining segments of the Western Railway Axis, such as the construction of the sections Patra – Pyrgos – Kalamata, Ioannina – Antirio, Kalabaka – Ioannina – Igoumenitsa, Kalabaka - Kozani and Siatista - Kastoria, that will guarantee a railway connection of high standards between north – south and east -west firstly within the Greek and secondly the connection of the country with neighbouring countries via its ports and stations (expected average time horizon for the completion of these projects being 2020), • the local projects planned for the improvement/ facilitation of the rail connection of the above ports with the main railway network of Greece and more specifically, the connection of the new port of Patra with the railway network of the Hellenic Railways Organisation following the construction of a double electrified line and the port of Igoumenitsa through the West Railway Axis project works (expected average time horizon for the completion of these projects being 2018), • the supporting – promoting of the ports of Igoumenitsa and Patra (including also the other main national ports) through the new national land-use plan into becoming primary sea gates of the country • the comparatively higher cost of road transport, • the new charging policy that the Greek Railways Organisation (OSE) is expected to implement in order to make rail transport more competitive, as well as its market development policy aiming at striking agreements with “new clients”, a differentiation of some degree is expected to occur concerning the current situation characterized by the almost total domination of the road transport mode regarding freight transportation to/ from the ports of this specific cluster. In regards to road transport, an important upgrading/ construction plan constituting of significant infrastructure projects for the enhancement of the quality of road connections in Greece is similarly being executed. The projects which dominate in the catchment area of this specific cluster within the Greek territory include the completion of the Egnatia Highway (Ε90) and its vertical axes, and the upgrading of the existing road axis Ε75, the construction of the Ionian Highway (Ioannina – Antirio), the construction of the Central Greece Axis Ε65, the undergoing upgrading

Deliverable 5.2 2-46 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study of the Korinthos – Patra - Pyrgos – Tsakona Axis and the construction of the Eastern Highway of the Peloponnese Korinthos – Tripoli – Kalamata and Lefktro - Sparti (expected average time horizon for the completion of these projects being 2015). Based on the above overview some general estimations can be made in regards to the shape and form of the competition between road and rail freight transport in the catchment area of this particular cluster in the future and specifically until the time horizon used for the projections conducted in the context of this study (2015). In addition, taking into account the current situation of the ports, but also their potential future prospects, in accordance to the strategic development goals they have set, it can be claimed that in regards to: • the port of Igoumenitsa, the prospects for its connection to the main railway network via the West Railway Axis and the Egnatia Railway, leads to the estimation that rail can become an important competitive mode for freight transportation against road transport (attraction from road transport at the level of 30% - 40%), which, however, is expected to take place at a time horizon greater than the current study’s (2015) and • to the port of Patra, similarly, the implementation of the planned projects concerning its connection to the main railway network, as well as the development of rail infrastructure within its entire catchment area, with main objective the creation of a satisfactory grid of connections with important gates and freight transport attraction poles, is estimated that will substantially delay the emergence of competition between the two transport modes, which is expected to take place beyond 2015. From the above it is evident than until 2015 and based upon the current planning for the course of the upgrading and constructing the foreseen rail and road transport infrastructures in the catchment area of the West Greece/ Ionian port cluster, the improvement and construction of large scale road infrastructure projects and the road connections of these two ports with the road network of their catchment area, is expected to be realized in a shorter time period in relation to the corresponding improvement/ construction of the rail infrastructure, thus initially strengthening even more the monopolistic role of road transport as the sole option for inland transportation since the competition between the two modes will remain “idle” for the specific time horizon (2015) in question.

2.3.2.4 Indicative estimation of modal shift

Although there is no actual modal shift, since the South Adriatic - Italian & Ionian Sea/ West Greece port clusters are well connected at present and the port distances between Taranto, Bari and Brindisi are relatively short, through the proposed MoS link better utilization of the transport network is facilitated.

Deliverable 5.2 2-47 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

2.3.2.5 Indicative service profile of the MoS link

A relevant search in regards to the characteristics of the existing vessels operating on the Adriatic-Ionian corridor and which could potentially handle the serving of the expected trade flows of the specific line, led to the selection of a Ro-Pax vessel with capacity 105 trailers and 1.850 passengers. The typical commercial speed (service speed) for this vessel would be about 20 knots given a maximum vessel speed of 28 knots. Following the elaboration of the relevant data, on the basis of the assumptions previously presented in the chapter that discussed the methodological approach for determining the indicative service profile, it can be deduced that a ship with this capacity travelling with the specified speed, could serve the expected demand of the line with two (2) sailings per week, for a one direction trip of length approximately 160 nautical miles in about 9 hours. For two roundtrips per week the total sailing time of the ship is approximately 1.5 days. The above calculations were conducted separately for each of the first six (6) years of the line’s operation. The above service profile characteristics concern the 6th year of the line’s operation. The corresponding data for each year of operation examined are provided in Annex 4.

2.3.2.6 Economic viability assessment of the MoS link

The economic viability assessment of the service of this particular indicative MoS link was carried out in line with the methodology that was presented in chapter 2.2.7 and the indicative service profile that was described in Annex 4 for each of the first six (6) years of the line’s operation.. The average scenario of traffic flow articulation during the time period up to the year 2015 was considered though it is noted that in all cases a negative balance of service exploitation resulted. The assessment findings show that the balance of revenues over expenses of the service will only become marginally positive during the sixth year (2015) of operation of the service following five years during which considerable losses will be incurred. The calculation form regarding this sixth year of operation is presented in the figure that follows. The detailed results of the economic viability assessment of the service produced on an annual basis are presented in Annex 5.

Deliverable 5.2 2-48 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-9 MoS link economic viability assessment results- Year 6

Deliverable 5.2 2-49 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

2.3.3 MoS potential corridor 2: EMR-Middle East ports cluster & North Aegean ports cluster, including their respective catchment areas (Indicative MoS link Limassol – Kavala)8

The EMR-Middle East ports consists of the ports of Limassol, Alexandria/Dekheila, Port Said, Damietta, , Ashdod, , Lattakia, Tartous, Mersin/Tasucu and Iskenderun while the North Aegean ports comprises of the ports of Thessaloniki, Kavala, Alexandroupolis and Volos.

The is the main national sea–gate of all imported and exported products of Cyprus and due to its strategic geographical position it also has the potential to serve container transhipment volumes for countries of the Middle East.

The Egyptian cluster ports include Alexandria, which is the biggest port in , (with Dekheila port being its natural extension), Damietta port which has the largest container terminal and Port Said strategically located at the end of the as a gateway for intercontinental flows into and out of the Mediterranean area (, , , Pacific, etc.) through the canal. The port of Alexandria is primarily an import/export gateway while at Damietta and Port Said transshipment traffic is predominant.

The Syrian ports of Tartous and Lattakia handle both general and containerized cargo traffic and are well placed geographically to serve transit traffic for , and .

Beirut is the primary port of displaying significant container throughput and apart from being a national import/export gateway, it serves transit traffic to Iraq as well as transhipment traffic to/from , , Egypt and other eastern Mediterranean countries.

The two most important ports of are Haifa and Ashdod which are the country’s maritime gateways and display significant container throughput volumes.

The Turkish ports of Mersin and Iskenderun mainly serve the country’s south eastern regions and play a rather secondary role in the national port system.

The North Aegean cluster ports of Thessaloniki, Kavala, Alexandroupolis and Volos apart from serving their respective regional catchment area they (or could) attract cargo volumes destined to other countries located in the Balkan peninsula or the Black Sea as transit or transhipment ports. At present, the ports of Kavala and

8 Proposal “Kavala – Limassol container Ship Transport Initiation- KALISTI” submitted by the industry following the relevant call for proposals

Deliverable 5.2 2-50 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Alexandroupolis mainly handle general and bulk cargo but can also serve containerized cargo. The port of Thessaloniki is the second busiest port in Greece in terms of total cargo volumes moved as well as annual container throughput. It is a significant import/export national gateway as well as a transit port primarily for FYROM and Bulgaria and to a lesser degree for the southern parts of Serbia and Albania. The port of Volos, which is ranked fourth nationally in terms of total annual cargo turnover, also handles container traffic and is ideally located to provide services for the Thessaly region, which is the largest and most productive agricultural region of the country.

The scope of the proposed service will be to provide a regular good quality shipping connection, between EMR-Middle East countries (mainly Cyprus) and Greece (mainly Central and North Greece) & Balkan Area countries (mainly Bulgaria and Serbia) via the North Aegean Greek ports, in order alleviate the congestion firstly in the port of Pireaus and secondly (most importantly) along the E75 road network by means of the modal shift to be created from the road network to maritime transport (see section 2.3.3.4). The service focus of the proposed connection will be on Lo - Lo. The current picture of trade exchanges and the forecasts of this study provide sufficient basis to justify such a connection for a container maritime transport service.

2.3.3.1 Potential trade flows of the MoS corridor – Catchment Area identification – Interrelation to EMR intermodal corridors - Interconnection with road transport network At the potential MoS connection, the forecasts show the potential for a total volume of about 600 – 1.000 ktns per year (both directions) by 2015 between the EMR-Middle East & North Aegean ports clusters. This amount is equivalent to approximately 30.000 – 55.000 TEUs for the same year.

At the following figure, along the MoS corridor the maritime connection Limassol – Kavala is presented as an indicative MoS link, serving the potential volumes estimated to form the future demand (2015) between the examined clusters.

Deliverable 5.2 2-51 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-10 The MoS flows in the indicative MoS link Limassol – Kavala (MoS potential corridor 2 (EMR-Middle East & North Aegean ports clusters)

In the same figure, the flows of the particular indicative MoS link are also presented to/from the source origins/final destinations of the volumes. The above presentation of the MoS flows on the indicative MoS link Limassol-Kavala to be operated along the examined potential MoS corridor between the two clusters, also identifies the routes which are likely to be followed for the transportation of the cargo to be moved along this particular corridor connection.

The particular pairs of zones between the catchment areas of the EMR-Middle East port cluster (cluster no. 1) and North Aegean port cluster (cluster no. 5) with their respective values of the potential estimated demand for the year 2015 are presented in detail in the following table.

Deliverable 5.2 2-52 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Table 2-8 Estimated potential demand in 2015 between the EMR-Middle East and North Aegean ports clusters

MoS 2 MIN MAX (from Potential Potential ORIGIN_ZONE DESTINATION_ZONE cluster - to Demand Demand cluster) 2015 (ktns) 2015 (ktns)

Egypt Kentriki Makedonia 140 230

Syria Kentriki Makedonia 45 75

Israel Kentriki Makedonia 25 40

Cyprus Kentriki Makedonia 20 35 from 1 to 5 Egypt Thessalia 20 30

Lebanon Kentriki Makedonia 15 20

Egypt Anatoliki Makedonia, Thraki 10 20

REST 23 38

1-5 total 300 490

MIN MAX Potential Potential ORIGIN_ZONE DESTINATION_ZONE Demand Demand 2015 (ktns) 2015 (ktns)

Serbia Cyprus 85 140

Kentriki Makedonia Cyprus 65 110

Bulgaria Cyprus 60 100

Anatoliki Makedonia, Thraki Cyprus 45 70

Kentriki Makedonia Israel 25 40

from 5 to 1 Thessalia Cyprus 15 20 Anatoliki Makedonia, Thraki Israel 10 20

Kentriki Makedonia Syria 10 15

Kentriki Makedonia Egypt 10 15

Thessalia Israel 10 15

Kentriki Makedonia Lebanon 5 10

REST 20 35

5-1 total 360 590

Grand Total 660 1080

Deliverable 5.2 2-53 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

According to the estimated future demand (2015), the strongest pair in terms of volume from the EMR-Middle East port cluster to the North Aegean port cluster is that from Egypt to the Greek region of Kentriki Makedonia with a total volume of approximately of 140 - 230 ktns. At the opposite direction and from the North Aegean port cluster to the EMR-Middle East port cluster, the pair Serbia - Cyprus is the strongest one with an estimated volume of approximately of 85 - 140 ktns. At the same direction, the pairs of Kentriki Makedonia - Cyprus and Bulgaria - Cyprus are also dominant with maximum volumes of 110 ktns respectively.

The analysis of the trade flows between the EMR-Middle East and North Aegean port clusters gives an indication of a possibility of a future extension of the examined MoS connection to/ from Turkey that would supplement the connection with a maximum estimated demand in both directions of approximately of 80 ktns (60 ktns on the cluster EMR-Middle East to North Aegean port cluster direction & 20 ktns on the opposite direction).

The percentage split by direction estimated to be 45% northbound and 55% southbound appears to be quite well balanced per direction and provides a sound basis for the operation of the service.

The diagrammatic depiction of the specific potential MoS corridor between the EMR- Middle East and North Aegean port clusters and their north/southbound hinterlands are presented in the following figure. In the case of the North Aegean port clusters and of the port of Kavala in particular, the catchment area consists of the Greek regions of Anatoliki Makedonia-Thraki, Kentriki Makedonia and Thessalia, as well as of the Balkan countries of Bulgaria and Serbia. In the case of the ports of the EMR- Middle East cluster and of the port of Limassol in particular, the catchment area is located at the countries of Syria, Lebanon, Israel and Egypt.

Deliverable 5.2 2-54 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-11 Map of the MoS 2 potential corridor (EMR-Middle East & North Aegean ports clusters)

The interrelationship between the MoS potential corridor 2 and the relevant maritime- based intermodal corridors within the study area as previously defined at an earlier stage of the study (Deliverable 1, Vol. II, Chapter 4) is depicted in the figure that follows.

Deliverable 5.2 2-55 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-12 Map of the MoS potential corridor 2 in relation to the Middle East-Europe intermodal corridor

From the above map, it can be seen that the MoS potential corridor 2 can be viewed as part of the wider Middle East-Europe intermodal maritime-based corridor which is characterized primarily by Lo-Lo services.

This potential MoS connection could serve as a link between the south eastern part of the Balkan Peninsula and the region of the Middle East as well as Egypt with Cyprus playing the role of the regional hub attracting and consolidating flows from its neighbouring region. Its should be noted that in terms of the trade and types of goods exchanged from Greece in relation to the southbound direction of this potential connection the most significant destinations include Cyrpus, Israel and Syria with the primary products exported being manufactured goods, crude materials, food and live animals respectively. On its northbound direction, the lion share of the trade flows is expected to originate primarily from the countries of Egypt, Cyrpus and Syria with crude materials being the most dominant type of product imported to Greece from these countries.

The proposed Lo-Lo connection linking Northern Greece and the island of Cyrpus presents the possibility of a new connection which could produce a positive impace to the Middle East-Europe intermodal corridor. Firstly, by supporting the alleviation of congestion of Pireaus which is the Greek port already connected to Cyprus by means

Deliverable 5.2 2-56 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study of services (see figure 2.12) and secondly, and most importantly, by attracting flows from the catchment area of the North Aegean port cluster previously directed to other alternative more distant nodal points and thus creating modal shift, which is analysed and discussed in section 2.3.3.4.

The map that follows presents the road network to be used in the catchment area of the North Aegean port cluster cluster ports to/ from initial origins/final destinations of the cargo flows to the zones (countries/ regions) within this area. On the same map road TEN-T network is displayed in order to illustrate the interconnection of the examined potential MoS corridor with these networks.

Deliverable 5.2 2-57 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-13 MoS potential corridor 2 (EMR-Middle East & North Aegean ports clusters) and interconnection with TEN-T road network

Deliverable 5.2 2-58 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

An additional significant parameter in examining a potential MoS corridor is the examination of the accessibility of the ports involved. Given the identification of the specific indicative MoS link as previously defined it should be noted that:

ƒ The port of Kavala has direct access to road network infrastructure, while it has one port entrance with one lane per direction. The distance from the national highway network is 5 km (Egnatia Odos highway), while the distance from the secondary national road network is 0.5 km (National road Kavala – Xanthi).

ƒ The port of Limassol has direct access to road network infrastructure, while it has two entrances with one lane per direction. The distance between the national highway network (Highway connecting all major cities) and the port is 3 km.

2.3.3.2 Articulation of the indicative MoS Link demand In the MoS 2 corridor case and in accordance to the methodology developed and applied for the estimation of the potential future trade flows (2015) of the predominant/indicative MoS link, the total demand that this specific line may serve in the year 2015 for both directions will range from 450 ktns/year (pessimistic scenario) to 1.400 ktns/year (optimistic scenario) with the moderate scenario at the level of 800 ktns/year. This potential demand is expected to reach to the above levels within three years (3) roughly with an average annual increase rate of 75%, assuming that in the 1st year of operation the new service will attract flows of approximately 310 ktns in both directions. In the table that follows the estimation of the evolution of demand for this particular case is presented. This estimation is directly related to the findings of the competition analysis which is being presented in the next section.

Table 2-9 Evolution of demand on the indicative link of the MoS potential corridor 2

AVG Estimated MoS Link Demand Estimated ("Master Plan" run*) Corridor Estimated Cluster - Corridor Indicative link Demand Cluster (run "all open"*) Demand (run "all

open"*) YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 MIN MAX from 1 to 5 Limassol - Kavala 300 490 395 104 209 313 from 5 to 1 Kavala - Limassol 360 590 475 162 325 487 660 1.080 870 267 533 800 100% 50% * refer to Chapter 2 The analytical tables presenting the demand of the indicative MoS link per O-D pair, for the 3rd year, during which it is estimated that the demand for the MoS indicative

Deliverable 5.2 2-59 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study link will have reached the levels of the expected values for 2015 are displayed in Annex 3.

2.3.3.3 Competition overview The competition analysis which is presented next involves only the competitive intermodal maritime transport flows between the O-D pairs of the catchment area of the specific MoS corridor, and not the unimodal road transport flows, since the road only transport mode option for trade exchange between the catchment areas of the corridor is not feasible. Concerning the maritime part of the intermodal transport flows between the O-D pairs of the catchment area of the specific MoS corridor, the current trade flows between the EMR-Middle East & North Aegean ports clusters are served by Lo – Lo and Ro – Ro maritime links, with the port of Piraeus being the intermediary/ transshipment station, which is the origin/ destination port of all the maritime connections between Greece and the Med Area countries (EMR-Middle East cluster). More specifically, the existing maritime links between the examined port clusters are depicted in the following figure.

Figure 2-14 Existing maritime links between the EMR-Middle East & North Aegean ports clusters

Deliverable 5.2 2-60 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

More specifically, there are several maritime connections (mainly Lo-Lo) linking Cyprus with neighbouring countries (Syria, Lebanon, Israel, Egypt) through the port of Limassol, with frequency one (1) or two (2) voyages per week, that mainly serve the inter-country trade between these countries and Cyprus, and secondarily the inter- country trade of the same countries with Greece and Balkan countries. This observation is reinforced by the operation of direct Lo-Lo connections of ports of Mersin (Turkey), Haifa (Israel) and Alexandria (Egypt) with the port of Piraeus, with frequency one (1) voyage per week. The connection between Cyprus and Greece is served by direct Lo-Lo and Ro-Ro maritime links both with a frequency of one (1) voyage per week. Finally, the connection of the port of Piraeus with the North Aegean cluster is mainly served via the road transport infrastructure (E75, E90).

The origin/ destination of the cargo flows served by the above described system of maritime links between the EMR-Middle East & North Aegean ports clusters, is characterized by the dominant role of the Attika Region (Greece) as the most significant pole of attraction and production of the cargo exchange between Greece and the EMR-Middle East cluster countries. Nevertheless, the cargo volumes that are attracted/ generated by the Regions of Thessalia, Central Macedonia and East Macedonia & Thraki (Greece) as well as by the Balkan countries of Bulgaria and Serbia are significant. As mentioned previously, the transportation of the bulk of these volumes is carried out by road transport to/ from Piraeus to/from their final destination/ origin.

Given the catchment area of the specific MoS corridor, and the particularly competitive environment in which the new line will have to operate in, the following assumptions are made in regards to the attractiveness of the new line (in relation to maritime competition): In the first three year period of the new line’s operation it is estimated that the line will gradually achieve the attraction of cargo traffic with origin/ destination the catchment area of the MoS corridor at a percentage of around 45% on average from existing competitive lines involving mainly the connections from Piraeus with Alexandria, Haifa and Limassol. In the table that follows, in conjunction to the evolution of demand on the indicative link, the estimation of the evolution of demand for the total of the existing maritime links being competitive to this link is also presented.

Deliverable 5.2 2-61 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Table 2-10 Evolution of demand on the competitive existing maritime links of the MoS potential corridor 2

AVG Estimated Existing Maritime Links Estimated Demand ("Master Plan" run*) Corridor Estimated Cluster - Corridor Indicative link Demand Cluster (run "all open"*) Demand (run "all open"*) MIN MAX YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 from 1 to 5 Limassol - Kavala 300 490 395 337 232 128 from 5 to 1 Kavala - Limassol 360 590 475 386 223 61 660 1.080 870 722 456 189 -37% -59% * refer to Chapter 2 The analytical tables presenting the demand of the competitive existing maritime links per O-D pair, for the 3rd year, during which it is estimated that the demand for the MoS indicative link will have reached the levels of the expected values for 2015 are displayed in Annex 3. Concerning competition on the inland part of the intermodal transport flows between the O-D pairs of the catchment area of the specific MoS corridor, and specifically for competition between the road and rail transport modes, the current situation as recorded as well as the future situation (2015) as estimated is being described in the following paragraphs for the North Aegean ports cluster.

Road – Rail competition in the North Aegean ports cluster

Apart from the port of Kavala, all the other main ports of the cluster (Alexandroupolis, Thessaloniki and Volos) have a railway connection to the main railway network of Greece. However, the connections of the ports of Alexandroupolis and Volos remain idle and only the one connecting the port of Thessaloniki is in operation. More specifically, for these two ports the characteristics of these connections and their infrastructure in general requires significant improvements which results in this particular mode not constituting an option for the port users, who in their overwhelming majority use only road transport. Therefore, it can be claimed that competition between the two transport modes is actually non-existent. The main railway network serving the catchment area of the North Aegean port cluster is depicted in the figure that follows.

Deliverable 5.2 2-62 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-15 MoS potential corridor 2 (EMR-Middle East & North Aegean ports clusters) and interconnection with the main railway network

However, in the future given the catchment area of this particular cluster within the Greek territory and taking into consideration: • the upgrading projects of the existing axes of the national railway network, such as the Thessaloniki – Athens axis, but also the new lines designed, such as the Egnatia Railway (connection between the ports of Alexandroupolis and Igoumenitsa) and its vertical axes, that will facilitate the high standards railway connection of Greece with its neighboring Balkan countries and the TransEuropean Railway Axes (expected average time horizon for the completion of these works being 2018), • the local projects planned for the improvement/ facilitation of the rail connection of the above ports with the primary railway network of Greece (expected average time horizon for the completion of these works being 2016), • the comparatively higher cost of road transport, • the new charging policy that the Greek Railways Organisation (OSE) is expected to implement in order to make rail transport more competitive, as

Deliverable 5.2 2-63 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

well as its market development policy aiming at striking agreements with “new clients”, a differentiation of some degree is expected to occur concerning the current situation characterized by the almost total domination of the road transport mode regarding freight transportation to/ from the ports of this specific cluster. Of course, on the other hand the development work taking place for upgrading the quality of the road connections in Greece is not negligible. The most important projects/ works taking place in the catchment area of this cluster within the Greek borders include the completion of the Egnatia Highway (Ε90) and its vertical axes, and the upgrading of the existing road axis Ε75 (expected average time horizon for the completion of these works being 2014). Regarding the neighboring Balkan countries which constitute part of the catchment area of this cluster, the current situation of the railway network is generally characterized by poor operational and technical characteristics and low investments for its modernization over the past years. However, on the medium-term time horizon in general rehabilitation and modernization works of the railway network are expected, albeit at local level (not covering the total of an axis), as well as the implementation of rail transport development programmes (expected average time horizon for the completion of these projects being 2013), but it is foreseen that these projects will not fundamentally change the current situation. Similarly, the road axes in the same countries require substantial improvements/ upgrading per sections, with emphasis on road sections that pass through or in proximity to large urban centres which are already saturated. The foreseen works aim primarily at the upgrading of the primary road network (especially of the cross border axes and the axes connecting large urban centres) or /and the construction of new axes and alternative alignments per sections (expected average time horizon for the completion of these projects being 2015). Based on the above overview some general estimations can be made in regards to the shape and form of the competition between road and rail freight transport in the catchment area of this particular cluster in the future and specifically until the time horizon used for the projections conducted in the context of this study (2015). In addition, taking into account the current situation of the ports, but also their potential future prospects, in accordance to the strategic development goals they have set, it can be claimed that in regards to: • the port of Alexandroupolis, the prospects for improving the railway network in the port’s surrounding but also its wider area, leads to the estimation that rail can potentially become an important competitive mode against road transport for the movement of freight (attraction from road transport at the level of 30% - 40%), which, however, is expected to take place at a time horizon greater than 2015

Deliverable 5.2 2-64 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

• the port of Kavala, on the basis of the current absence of rail infrastructure, the satisfactory existing road connection of the port and the expectance for the completion of the road transport projects in the catchment area within a short/ medium-term time horizon, it is estimated that will substantially delay the emergence of competition between the two transport modes, which is expected to take place beyond 2015 • the port of Thessaloniki, the upgrading works of the current rail connection of the port with the rest of the network (connection to the 6th pier), the connection of the freight centre of Thessaloniki with the port, as well as the priority given in the advancement of the planned upgrading works of the large- scale railway infrastructure projects around the area of Thessaloniki, are expected to be completed, at least for their greatest part, until 2015. Based on this fact, and taking into consideration the concurrent development of the road infrastructure in the area, it can be claimed that until 2015 a percentage of around 25% of the total share of road freight transport will be diverted towards rail. • the port of Volos, for the time horizon until 2015, the upgrading of the road infrastructure in the area of reference is expected to have advanced to a greater extent than the corresponding construction – upgrading of the railway infrastructure, a fact that indicates that the firm preponderance of road freight transportation to and from the port against rail transport is to be maintained for this time period. From the above and based upon the current planning for the course of the upgrading and constructing the foreseen rail and road transport infrastructures in the catchment area of the North Aegean ports cluster, it is apparent that until 2015 the competition between the two transport modes will virtually remain “non-existent”, apart from the case of the port of Thessaloniki. Despite the fact that the under progress and planned road transport projects in the wider area of the accesses to/from the port of Thessaloniki, are being designed with high traffic capacity, quality and safety characteristics it is probable that cases of traffic speed reduction (even in some cases saturation) will appear in the future (2015), due to the expected traffic increase over time and the positioning of the port in proximity to the main entrance – exit gates of the city. The estimated increase in the use of railway infrastructure for the movement of cargo consignments in the same time period (2015) is expected to bring about significant positive impacts to the flow of road traffic, due to the reduction in the percentage of heavy goods vehicles on the road network. On the other hand, it is noted that there is a need to carefully design the rail infrastructure and the operational characteristics of the port’s railway connection, so as to avoid the creation of a bottleneck in this particular connection, as a result of the shift of transported consignments from the road to the railway network.

Deliverable 5.2 2-65 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

2.3.3.4 Indicative estimation of modal shift As mentioned before, the main objective of the proposed MoS corridor between the EMR-Middle East & North Aegean ports clusters, and indicatively between Limassol and Kavala, is to alleviate the congestion firstly in the port of Pireaus and secondly (most importantly) along the E75 road network by means of the modal shift to be created from the road network to maritime transport. In addition, this MoS corridor is expected to increase the accessibility from/ to northern Greece (Macedonia and Thrace), Bulgaria and FYROM to/ from Cyprus and the Middle East.

More specifically, in terms of modal shift creation, it has to be noted that freight from northern Greece frequently has to travel via road transport (500-800 km) to Piraeus due to the absence of a regular container line between this region of Greece and Cyprus. Moreover, through the operationalisation of this MoS corridor the port of Limassol via its existing maritime connections can act as a hub for cargo from the Middle East and North destined to the Balkan countries. A number of Balkan countries such as Serbia, FYROM, Bulgaria and Romania do not have access to the Mediterranean Sea with the latter two having to transport freight through their Black Sea ports thus increasing traffic in the Bosphorus Straits, which is a well-known bottleneck which significantly increases total transport time and cost. Furthermore, in many cases the road transport distances involved for freight transportation from/to many regions of Bulgaria to/from the Black Sea ports is longer than the proposed route. The port of Kavala has directly access to the E90 motorway (Egnatia) thus travel times from the port to Thessaloniki, Bulgaria, FYROM and Turkey is approximately 1.5, 1.5-2, 2.5 and 2.40 hours, respectively.

A first indicative estimation of the modal shift is carried out by using the model by the comparative analysis of two indicative shortest paths displaying the two alternative ways of connection (MoS corridor or combination of maritime and road connection) of the EMR-Middle East & North Aegean ports cluster, and in particular between Cyprus and Bulgaria. The graphic display of the shortest paths examined is provided in the figure that follows.

Deliverable 5.2 2-66 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-16 Indicative shortest paths displaying the two alternative ways of connection between the EMR-Middle East & North Aegean ports clusters

The volume of ton/kms that could be shifted from the road to sea for this indicative MoS corridor mainly involves the total ton/kms travelled between Athens – Thessaloniki (PATHE highway part of E75 from Athens to Thessaloniki) on a journey of approximately 530 kms. Given the potential cargo volume of 800 thousand tons estimated that could be transported on the indicative MoS link examined, and the above mentioned travel distance, the total of maximum travelled ton/kms that could be annually shifted off the road amount to 420 million ton/kms.

2.3.3.5 Indicative service profile of the MoS link Following a relevant search in regards to the characteristics of the existing vessels operating in the East Med Area which could potentially undertake the service of the estimated trade flows in the particular line, it was concluded that Lo-Lo vessel with capacity of approximately 580 containers (TEUs) would be most appropriate. The typical commercial speed (service speed) for this vessel would be about 13 knots given a maximum vessel speed of 18 knots. After processing the relative data, on the basis of the assumptions presented in detail in the chapter that discussed the methodological approach for determining the indicative service profile, it can be concluded that a vessel of this capacity and of the particular service, could serve the estimated demand on the link with two (2) departures per week, travelling the distance of 650 nautical miles in 50 hours roughly. For two (2) roundtrips per week the total travel time amounts to roughly 8,5 days, which means that for a service of twice per week two vessels would be needed.

Deliverable 5.2 2-67 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Nevertheless, a more modest approach would be for the first two years of operation to employ one vessel since it would sufficiently cover the estimated demand with one weekly departure, while for the following years another vessel should be added in order to cover the proposed service frequency of two departures per week. The above calculations were conducted separately for each of the first three (3) years of the line’s operation. The corresponding data for each year of operation examined are provided in Annex 4.

2.3.3.6 Economic viability assessment of the MoS link The economic viability assessment of the service of this particular indicative MoS link was carried out in line with the methodology that was presented in chapter 2.2.7 and the indicative service profile that was described in Annex 4 for each of the first three (3) years of the line’s operation. The assessment findings show that this MoS link does not display a potential for positive economic results even after the first 5 years of operation despite the estimation that during the third year (2012) of operation the demand for the particular service would have reached the levels of the forecasted demand for 2015. The calculation form outcome regarding this third year of operation is presented in the figure that follows. A major influencing parameter for this negative outcome is the fact that the large distances of the connection and the low speed of the vessels result to the need to operate the specific lines with the use of two vessels from the first year of the operation during which the bundling of the demand over the service is low. The service may have positive exploitation results in case the line attracts traffic volumes exceeding 2.500 ktns, which is not expected to occur up to the 2015 time horizon.

Therefore, in order for the service to become viable either supplementary financial support would be required e.g. in the form of state aid or substantial relevant changes in the market conditions would have to occur that would significantly act favorably towards the operation of the service.

The detailed results of the economic viability assessment of the service produced on an annual basis are presented in Annex 5.

Deliverable 5.2 2-68 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-17 MoS link economic viability assessment results- Year 3

Deliverable 5.2 2-69 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

2.3.4 MoS potential corridor 3: Ionian Sea/ West Greece ports cluster & the eastern segment of the North Adriatic ports cluster, including their respective catchment areas (Indicative MoS link Igoumenitsa – Koper)9

The two port clusters connected by this MoS corridor are the Ionian Sea/ West Greece ports cluster (ports of Igoumenitsa and Patra) and the eastern segment of the North Adriatic ports cluster comprising of the ports of Koper, , , Trieste and Monfalcone.

The ports of Patra and Igoumenitsa are very well located for serving freight and passenger traffic from/to ports in southern Italy and along the Adriatic Sea destined for Italy and other Central and Western European countries. These ports act as the western gateways of Greece, they primarily serve Ro-Ro freight as well as a substantial volume of international passenger transport. The port of Igoumenitsa is better located in comparison to the port of Patra in regards to also serving transport flows from/to the countries of the Balkan Peninsula.

The port of Koper, the only Slovenian port, is well situated in the heart of Europe, at the junction of the international trade routes with direct international land transport connections. It is a multi-purpose port sufficiently equipped to accommodate and serve all types of cargoes and acts as an important transit port for Central and Eastern Europe.

Rijeka is the largest Croatian port displaying a significant annual increase in container throughput over the past few years and seeking to re-establish the its former role as a gateway for Central Europe and in particular for Hungary’s sea trade, a role lost to Germany and Slovenia as a result of the Yugoslav war. The port of Zadar specializes mostly in serving liquid and bulk cargo as well as passenger transport.

The port of Trieste handles significant volumes of container traffic, Ro-Ro (especially toward Turkey and Greece) and general cargo. The port of Monfalcone is currently characterised by sea cargo flows different from Ro-Ro traffic, albeit it has a great potential to develop also Ro-Ro traffic if supported by strong infrastructural interventions.

The main advantage of the ports belonging to this cluster is that in comparison to the northern European ports, they lie on the shortest transport route, linking commercial centres in Central and Eastern Europe with Mediterranean countries and the .

9 Proposal “New Ro-Pax link Koper (Slovenia) – Igoumenitsa (Greece)” submitted by the industry following the relevant call for proposals

Deliverable 5.2 2-70 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Sea routes through these ports are in excess of 2.000 nautical miles closer to these waterways than northern European ports. Land routes to the main Central European market centres can be reached through these ports in substantially shorter time allowing faster receipt of goods coupled with lower transport costs.

The aim of this MoS corridor is the provision of a new connection between western Greece and the eastern segment of the North Adriatic ports since such a connection does not currently exist. This MoS corridor would serve the Adriatic and Ionian Sea and operate as a maritime gateway for Central and Eastern Europe. The service focus of this proposed connection would be on Ro-Ro.

2.3.4.1 Potential trade flows of the MoS corridor – Catchment Area identification – Interrelation to EMR intermodal corridors - Interconnection with road transport network At the potential MoS corridor, the forecasts show the potential for a total volume of about 1.500 – 2.500 ktns per year (both directions) by 2015 between the clusters 7 and 10a. This amount is equivalent to approximately 80.000 - 140.000 units (trucks/ trailers) for the same year.

In the following figure, the maritime MoS corridor connection Igoumenitsa – Koper is presented as an indicative link, serving the potential volumes estimated to form the future demand (2015) between the examined clusters. In the same figure, the flows of the particular indicative MoS corridor are also presented to/ from the source origins/ final destinations of the volumes.

Deliverable 5.2 2-71 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-18 MoS flows in the indicative MoS link Igoumenitsa – Koper (MoS potential corridor 3 (Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the eastern segment of the North Adriatic ports clusters)

The above presentation of the MoS flows on the indicative MoS link Igoumenitsa- Koper to be operated along the examined potential MoS corridor between the two clusters, also identifies the routes which are likely to be followed for the transportation of the cargo to be moved along this particular corridor connection.

The particular pairs of zones between the catchment areas of the Ionian Sea/ West Greece port cluster (cluster no. 7) & the eastern segment of the North Adriatic ports cluster (cluster no. 10a) with their respective values of the potential estimated demand for the year 2015 are presented in detail in the following table.

Deliverable 5.2 2-72 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Table 2-11 Estimated potential demand in 2015 between the Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the eastern segment of the North Adriatic ports clusters

MIN MAX MoS 3 Potential Potential (from cluster ORIGIN_ZONE DESTINATION_ZONE Demand Demand - to cluster) 2015 2015 (ktns) (ktns) Hungary Attiki 135 230 Austria Attiki 35 60 FriuliVenezia Giulia Kentriki Makedonia 35 60 Attiki 20 35 FriuliVenezia Giulia Attiki 20 30 Germany Thessalia 20 30 Hungary Dytiki Ellada 15 30 Czech Republic Attiki 15 30 Slovakia Attiki 15 30 Austria Kentriki Makedonia 15 30 REST 75 124 10a - 7 total 380 650 MIN MAX Potential Potential ORIGIN_ZONE DESTINATION_ZONE Demand Demand 2015 2015 (ktns) (ktns) Attiki Slovenia 100 170 Attiki Poland 70 115 Attiki Hungary 25 45 Attiki Czech Republic 25 40 Attiki Austria 20 40 Kentriki Makedonia Slovenia 15 25

Attiki 10 20 Dytiki Ellada Poland 10 20 Attiki Slovakia 10 15 Peloponnisos Poland 10 10 Attiki FriuliVenezia Giulia 5 10 REST 60 100 7 - 10a total 360 610 Grand Total 740 1.260

According to the estimated future demand (2015), the strongest pair in terms of volume from the eastern segment of the North Adriatic ports cluster to the Ionian Sea/ West Greece port cluster is that from Hungary to the region of Attiki (Greece), with a total volume of approximately of 135 - 230 ktns. At the same direction, the pairs of Austria – Attiki (Greece) and FriuliVenezia Giulia (Italy) – Kentriki Makedonia

Deliverable 5.2 2-73 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

(Greece) are also dominant with maximum volumes of approximately of 60 ktns each. At the opposite direction and from the Ionian Sea/ West Greece port cluster to the eastern segment of the North Adriatic ports cluster, the pair Attiki (Greece) - Slovenia is the strongest one with an estimated volume of approximately of 100 - 1780 ktns, while the pair Attiki (Greece) – Poland is also dominant with maximum volumes of approximately of 115.

The percentage split by direction is estimated to be 48% northbound and 52% southbound.

The diagrammatic depiction of the specific potential MoS corridor connection between the two port clusters and their north/southbound hinterlands are presented in the following figure.

Figure 2-19 Map of the MoS potential corridor 3 (Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the eastern segment of the North Adriatic ports clusters)

In the case of the Ionian Sea/ West Greece ports cluster and of the port of Igoumenitsa in particular, the catchment area consists of the Greek regions of Attiki, Dytiki Ellada, Kentriki Makedonia, Sterea Ellada, Peloponnissos and Thessalia. In the case of the ports of the eastern segment of the North Adriatic ports cluster and of the port of Koper in particular, the catchment area is located at the countries of Germany, Hungary, Austria, Poland, Czech Republic and Slovakia, including also the region of Friuli Venezia Giulia in Italy.

Deliverable 5.2 2-74 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

The interrelationship between the MoS potential corridor 3 and the relevant maritime- based intermodal corridors within the wider study area as previously defined at an earlier stage of the study (Deliverable 1, Vol. II, Chapter 4) is presented in the figure that follows.

Figure 2-20 Map of the MoS potential corridor 3 in relation to the Adriatic-Ionian intermodal corridor

From the above map, it is evident that the MoS potential corridor 3 lies directly upon the Adriatic-Ionian intermodal corridor which is amongst the most highly utilized intermodal corridors identified within the wider study area of the Eastern Mediterranean and is characterized primarily by the extensive and long standing provision of Ro-Ro and Ro-Pax services. Most of these services connect Greece with Italy but the Ro-Ro service proposed along the MoS potential corridor 3 provides a new connection linking West Greece with Slovenia, a connection that does not exist currently, and thus it can be claimed that the intermodal corridor would be enhanced with the provision of another strong alternative travel destination. This is particularly true due to the fact that Slovenia is ideally located on the intersection between two very important European transport corridors, corridor V and X to act as major logistics platform serving flows to/from Central and Eastern European countries. In this particular case, the proposed connection could serve primarily trade flows from Greece towards Italy (mainly crude materials, manufactured goods, food and live

Deliverable 5.2 2-75 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study animals) Slovenia (mainly crude materials) but also Germany (mainly chemicals, food and live animals, crude materials), Austria (chemicals, food and live animals, crude materials), Croatia (crude materials), Hungary (food and live animals) and to a lesser degree other Central European countries such as Slovakia, Poland and the Czech Republic. On the other direction from Slovenia towards Greece trade flows primarily from Italy (manufactured goods), Germany (food and live animals, manufactured goods), Austria (manufactured goods) and Hungary (food and live animals) can be served.

In view of further exploiting its strategic location in serving Central Europe and neighbouring regions, the construction of a new container terminal and distribution centre of 1 million TEUs capacity in the port of Koper is under way while the port is also involved in the construction of a new large-scale freight village in Sezana (close to the Italian border) aiming to constitute Sezana Freight Village as Central Europe’s major freight centre, which will serve both the ports of Koper, Trieste and Monfalcone as a hinterland dry port connected to the ports by both rail and road.

The possibility of the development of a freight centre in proximity to the port of Igoumenitsa is also currently under examination in collaboration with the port and local authorities. These development prospects are expected to further boost intermodality and facilitate the transport of the cargo flows between the ports and their catchment areas concerned in this particular MoS corridor.

Furthermore, through this proposed Ro-Ro service along MoS potential corridor 3 another positive impact to the Adriatic-Ionian intermodal corridor is to be expected to be brought about through the creation of modal shift from the road network to maritime transport along the Adriatic-Ionian intermodal corridor for those origin/ destination pairs between Greece and Central Europe that are currently primarily using the Axis Χ. This issue is further discussed and analysed in section 2.3.4.4.

The strategic location of Slovenia is illustrated in the map that follows which presents the road network to be used in the catchment area of the cluster ports to/ from initial origins/final destinations of the cargo flows to the zones (countries/ regions) within this area. On the same map emphasis is placed on the display of the road TEN-T network in order to illustrate the interconnection of the examined potential MoS corridor connection with these networks.

Deliverable 5.2 2-76 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-21 MoS potential corridor 3 (Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the eastern segment of the North Adriatic ports clusters) and interconnection with TEN-T road network

Deliverable 5.2 2-77 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

In terms of the accessibility of the ports involved in this MoS corridor and given the identification of the specific indicative MoS link as previously defined it should be noted that:

ƒ The port of Igoumenitsa has direct access to road network infrastructure. It has one post entrance with eight lanes connecting the port with “Egnatia” highway and two lanes connecting the port with the city of Igoumenitsa. Further to the port having direct access to Egnatia highway, it is also connected with the National road network of Igoumenitsa – Preveza (0.1 km distance).

ƒ The port of Koper has direct access to the motorway and railway network. The distance between the port and the motorway Koper – Ljubljana is 2 km (Pan European Corridor Va), while the distance between the port and the Pan European Corridor X is 100 km. Furthermore, the port of Koper is connected to the main road axes leading to Trieste and Rijeka (2 km away). The new main entrance to the port is under construction, which will directly connect the motorway to the port.

2.3.4.2 Articulation of the indicative MoS Link demand According to the methodology that has been developed and applied for the estimation of the potential future trade flows (2015) of the predominant/indicative MoS link, in the case of MoS 3 corridor, the total demand that this specific line may serve in the year 2015 for both directions will range from 300 ktns/year (pessimistic scenario) to 800 ktns/year (optimistic scenario) with the moderate scenario at the level of 660 ktns/year. This potential demand is expected to reach to the above levels within four years (4) roughly with an average annual increase rate of 30%, assuming that in the 1st year of operation the new service will attract flows of approximately 530 ktns in both directions. In the table that follows, the evolution of demand on this particular case is presented in detail. This estimation is directly related to the competition analysis presented in the next section.

Deliverable 5.2 2-78 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Table 2-12 Evolution of demand on the indicative link of the potential MoS corridor 3

Estimated AVG Estimated MoS Link Demand Corridor Estimated (Master Plan run*) Cluster - Demand Corridor Indicative link Cluster (run "all Demand open"*) (run "all

open"*) YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 MIN MAX from 10a to 7 Koper - Igoumenitsa 380 650 515 209 303 307 311 from 7 to 10a Igoumenitsa - Koper 360 610 485 102 136 245 354 740 1.260 1.000 312 439 552 665 41% 26% 20% * refer to Chapter 2 The analytical tables presenting the demand of the indicative MoS link per O-D pair, for the 4th year, during which it is estimated that the demand for the MoS indicative link will have reached the levels of the expected values for 2015 are displayed in Annex 3.

2.3.4.3 Competition overview The competition analysis which is presented next involves, both competitive intermodal maritime transport flows, as well as unimodal road transport flows, between the O-D pairs of the catchment area of the specific MoS corridor. A. Intermodal (maritime & road) transport flows competition Concerning the maritime part of the intermodal transport flows between the O-D pairs of the catchment area of this particular MoS corridor, there is no existing maritime connection between the ports of the Ionian Sea/ West Greece cluster and the eastern segment of the North Adriatic cluster.

On the one hand, the Ionian Sea/ West Greece cluster ports are connected with ports belonging to the central segment of the North Adriatic cluster (specifically Venice), while the ports of eastern segment of the North Adriatic cluster (in particular Monfalcone, Koper) are connected with the ports of the Central/ South Aegean Sea cluster (specifically Piraeus). Furthermore, due to the geographical proximity with the ports of the eastern segment of the North Adriatic cluster, it is noted that the ports of Venetia and Chioggia (western segment of the North Adriatic cluster) are also connected with Korinthos and Piraeus, respectively.

More specifically, the depiction of the existing maritime links between the catchment areas of the examined clusters is provided in the following figure.

Deliverable 5.2 2-79 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-22 Existing maritime links between the catchment areas of the Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the eastern segment of the North Adriatic ports clusters

The existing connections between the Ionian Sea/ West Greece & North Adriatic port clusters, similarly between the eastern and central segments of the North Adriatic & the Central/ South Aegean Sea ports clusters are the most competitive to the examined MoS indicative link of the potential MoS corridor between the examined clusters (Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the eastern segment of the North Adriatic ports clusters).

The above mentioned connections involve mainly Ro-Ro services with average frequency in the case of connections between the Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the central segments of the North Adriatic port clusters of almost two (2) voyages per day, while in the case of connections between the eastern segment of the North Adriatic and the Central/ South Aegean Sea port clusters, of one (1) or two (2) voyages per week. It should be also mentioned that the connections between the ports of the central segment of the North Adriatic ports clusters (Venetia & Chioggia) and Piraeus (Central/ South Aegean Sea ports cluster) involve Ro-Ro non-accompanied (Chioggia - Piraeus) and Lo-Lo services (Venetia – Piraeus) with frequency one (1) voyage per week.

These existing connections primarily serve neighbouring zones (countries/ regions) or have easy road access to the ports of the corresponding port clusters. Specifically, the trade flows per group of connections have as origin/ destination the following zones:

I. Group of maritime connections between the ports of the Ionian Sea/ West Greece (Igoumenitsa, Patra, Corfu) & central segment of the North Adriatic ports clusters (Venice)

Deliverable 5.2 2-80 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

In this case the zones (countries/ regions) that constitute the origin/ destination of the trade flows moved by using these connections are:

• from the side of Greece mainly the regions of Ipeiros, Dytiki Ellada, Kentriki Makedonia and partly Thessalia, and

• from the side of the Adriatic and Central Europe the countries of Austria, Germany, Slovenia and partly Croatia.

II. Group of maritime connections between the ports of the central and eastern segments of the North Adriatic clusters (Monfalcone, Koper, Chioggia) & the Central/ South Aegean Sea cluster (Piraeus).

In this case the zones (countries/ regions) that constitute the origin/ destination of the trade flows moved by using these connections are:

• from the side of Greece mainly the regions of Attiki, Sterea Ellada, Peloponnisos and partly Thessalia, and

• from the side of the Adriatic and Central Europe the countries of Austria, Germany, Slovenia and Croatia.

Given the catchment area of the specific MoS corridor, and the highly competitive environment in which the new line will have to operate in, where the long-standing lines connecting Greece – Italy via Venice, Koper and Trieste with Piraeus, Korinthos, Igoumenitsa and Patra play a dominating role and serve the greatest proportion of the existing demand of the corridor, the following assumptions are made in regards to the evolution of demand for the new line: In the period from the 1st up to the 2nd year of operation, the line will manage to attract most of the cargo with origin/ destination the pairs Kentriki Makedonia, Ipeiros and Thessalia with Germany, Slovenia and Austria. During the 3rd and 4th year of operation, when the profile of the line will have been established within the specific market, in addition to the above cargo flows the line will gradually within this two year period be in a position to also attract cargo with origin/ destination the pairs of Attiki and Sterea Ellada with Germany, Croatia and Slovenia. In the first four (4) year period of the new line’s operation it is estimated that the line will gradually achieve the attraction of cargo traffic with origin/ destination the catchment area of the MoS corridor at a percentage of around 5% on average from existing competitive lines involving mainly the connections from Venice with Piraeus, Korinthos, Patra and Igoumenitsa and also from Piraeus with Koper and Trieste. In the table that follows, in conjunction to the evolution of demand on the indicative link, the estimation of the evolution of demand for the total of the existing maritime links being competitive to this link is also presented.

Deliverable 5.2 2-81 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Table 2-13 Evolution of demand on the competitive existing maritime links of the MoS potential corridor 3

Estimated Existing Maritime Estimated AVG Links Demand ("Master Plan" Corridor Estimated run*) Cluster - Demand Corridor Indicative link Cluster (run "all Demand open"*) (run "all open"*) MIN MAX YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 from 10a to 7 Koper - Igoumenitsa 380 650 515 2.224 2.130 2.126 2.122 from 7 to 10a Igoumenitsa - Koper 360 610 485 2.171 2.137 2.028 1.919 740 1.260 1.000 4.395 4.267 4.154 4.041 -3% -3% -3% * refer to Chapter 2 The analytical tables presenting the demand of the competitive existing maritime links per O-D pair, for the 4th year, during which it is estimated that the demand for the MoS indicative link will have reached the levels of the expected values for 2015 are displayed in Annex 3.

Concerning competition on the inland part of the intermodal transport flows between the O-D pairs of the catchment area of the specific MoS corridor, and specifically for competition between the road and rail transport modes, the current situation as recorded as well as the future situation (2015) as estimated is being described in the following paragraphs for each of the port clusters of the MoS 3 corridor. The main railway networks of the catchment areas of this indicative MoS link are depicted in the figure that follows.

Road – Rail competition in the Ionian Sea/ West Greece ports cluster

The Ionian Sea/ West Greece port cluster consists of the ports of Igoumenitsa and Patra. Currently, neither of these two ports are connected to the national railway network and as a result competition between road and rail is non-existent. However, in the future given the catchment area of this specific cluster within the Greek territory– which is slightly differentiated depending on the potential MoS corridor proposed, that includes the total or the greatest part of the foreseen upgrading works – the following planned rail infrastructure projects must be taken into account: • The upgrading/ modernization works of the existing axes of the national railway network such as the axis Patra – Athens – Thessaloniki – Idomeni/ Promahonas, aim at the development of a high speed double line along the core line (Patra – Athens – Thessaloniki), signalling and electrification covering the whole Axis, but also new alignments, such as the construction of the Egnatia Railway (connection between the ports of Alexandroupolis and Igoumenitsa) and the remaining segments of the Western Railway Axis, such as the construction of the sections Patra – Pyrgos – Kalamata, Ioannina – Antirio, Kalabaka – Ioannina – Igoumenitsa, Kalabaka - Kozani and Siatista - Kastoria, that will guarantee a railway connection of high standards between

Deliverable 5.2 2-82 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

north – south and east -west firstly within the Greek borders and secondly the connection of the country with neighbouring countries via its ports and border stations (expected average time horizon for the completion of these projects being 2020), • the local projects planned for the improvement/ facilitation of the rail connection of the above ports with the main railway network of Greece and more specifically, the connection of the new port of Patra with the railway network of the Hellenic Railways Organisation following the construction of a double electrified line and the port of Igoumenitsa through the West Railway Axis project works (expected average time horizon for the completion of these projects being 2018), • the supporting – promoting of the ports of Igoumenitsa and Patra (including also the other main national ports) through the new national land-use plan into becoming primary sea gates of the country • the comparatively higher cost of road transport, • the new charging policy that the Greek Railways Organisation (OSE) is expected to implement in order to make rail transport more competitive, as well as its market development policy aiming at striking agreements with “new clients”, a differentiation of some degree is expected to occur concerning the current situation characterized by the almost total domination of the road transport mode regarding freight transportation to/ from the ports of this specific cluster.

Deliverable 5.2 2-83 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-23 MoS potential corridor 3 (Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the eastern segment of the North Adriatic ports clusters) and interconnection with the main railway networks

In regards to road transport, an important upgrading/ construction plan constituting of significant infrastructure projects for the enhancement of the quality of road connections in Greece is similarly being executed. The projects which dominate in the catchment area of this specific cluster within the Greek territory include the completion of the Egnatia Highway (Ε90) and its vertical axes, and the upgrading of the existing road axis Ε75, the construction of the Ionian Highway (Ioannina – Antirio), the construction of the Central Greece Axis Ε65, the undergoing upgrading of the Korinthos – Patra - Pyrgos – Tsakona Axis and the construction of the Eastern Highway of the Peloponnese Korinthos – Tripoli – Kalamata and Lefktro - Sparti (expected average time horizon for the completion of these projects being 2015). Based on the above overview some general estimations can be made in regards to the shape and form of the competition between road and rail freight transport in the catchment area of this particular cluster in the future and specifically until the time horizon used for the projections conducted in the context of this study (2015). In addition, taking into account the current situation of the ports, but also their potential

Deliverable 5.2 2-84 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study future prospects, in accordance to the strategic development goals they have set, it can be claimed that in regards to: • the port of Igoumenitsa, the prospects for its connection to the main railway network via the West Railway Axis and the Egnatia Railway, leads to the estimation that rail can become an important competitive mode for freight transportation against road transport (attraction from road transport at the level of 30% - 40%), which, however, is expected to take place at a time horizon greater than the current study’s (2015) and • to the port of Patra, similarly, the implementation of the planned projects concerning its connection to the main railway network, as well as the development of rail infrastructure within its entire catchment area, with main objective the creation of a satisfactory grid of connections with important gates and freight transport attraction poles, is estimated that will substantially delay the emergence of competition between the two transport modes, which is expected to take place beyond 2015. From the above it is evident than until 2015 and based upon the current planning for the course of the upgrading and constructing the foreseen rail and road transport infrastructures in the catchment area of the West Greece/ Ionian port cluster, the improvement and construction of large scale road infrastructure projects and the road connections of these two ports with the road network of their catchment area, is expected to be realized in a shorter time period in relation to the corresponding improvement/ construction of the rail infrastructure, thus initially strengthening even more the monopolistic role of road transport as the sole option for inland transportation since the competition between the two modes will remain “idle” for the specific time horizon (2015) in question. Road – Rail competition in the eastern segment of the North Adriatic ports cluster

The main ports included in this cluster are Monfalcone, Trieste, Rijeka, Zadar, and Koper. All of these ports have a railway connection to the main Italian, Croatian and Slovenian railway network and to important economic centres in their hinterland. The current rail lines that connect Rijeka, Zadar and Koper are characterized by poor operational and technical characteristics and are considered as a bottleneck which hinders port development. The rail infrastructure requires significant reconstructions and improvements in order to compete with road transport. The port of Monfalcone is directly connected to the Monfalcone railway station, where both Venice/Trieste and Udine/Treviso lines commence. The Trieste-Venice/ Udine-Tarvisio railway, with all its branch lines, is directly connected to the Port of Monfalcone. A new and modern railway connection to a simple non electrified track assures connections with the freight yard located 2 km away. The special ring structure and feeder line makes it easy to serve the wharfs and the yards, thus allowing companies to make use of complete and integrated transport services.

Deliverable 5.2 2-85 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

There are 70 km of rails serving all docks of the port of Trieste. More than 100 trains a week link Trieste by direct service to the productive and industrial areas of North- East Italy (Cervignano Transhipment Terminal, Padua Transhipment Terminal, Bologna Transhipment Terminal, Milan Certosa), the South of Germany (also connected to Northern Germany), Austria (also connected to Switzerland), Hungary, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Hungary (also connected to the border with Ukraine), serving an extremely varied economic hinterland with a growing development. To reach the reference markets in Central and Eastern Europe, highly specialised intermodal services in November 2008 have been developed, using direct trains from the port of Trieste to Prague-Lovisice. This new intermodal maritime service joins the other services offered by Trenitalia connecting Trieste to Villaco, Salzburg, Linz, Vienna, Budapest and to the 19 weekly couples of trains of rolling highway moving trucks from Turkey to Trieste and on to the markets of Central Europe. In 2007, more than 180,000 TEUs were carried by 3,271 trains, out of which 1,541 for containers only. Two railway lines connect the port of Rijeka with its hinterland and also to the European railway network: single railway line Rijeka – Zagreb is Vb Pan-European railway line and railway line Rijeka - Ljubljana. However, the rail connections are characterized by inadequate capacity and their upgrading is falling behind schedule. The port of Zadar is connected with his hinterland with two railroad tracks, those from Lika and Una, and from Zagreb with all european neighbour countries. Lika's railroad track stretches from Zadar, via Knin, Gospić and Karlovac to Zagreb (total length of track is 424 km). Una's railroad track stretches from Zadar, via Knin, Bihać and Sisak to Zagreb (total length of track is 418 km). The track is electrified. All terminals at the port of Koper are equipped with adequate railway infrastructure. In general, 470 wagons per day arrive or depart from port. Approximately 70% of the goods moving to or from the port are transported by train. Single track line up to Divača transport approximately 40% of all cargo that Slovenian railway transport and app. two third of all cargo, that is loaded and unloaded from ships in port of Koper. Just one third of cargo in Koper is destinated for Slovenian consumers, the greater part of it travels to Austria, Italia, East and Middle European markets. This creates a bottleneck along the single track up to Divača, that prevents the further growth of goods traffic on the entire Slovenian railway network. Thus, the creation of an efficiently railway connection up to Divača is needed. The current situation of the railway network is generally characterized by poor operational and technical characteristics. However, in terms of the expected rail infrastructure modernization and construction works at local and international level: • For many years the construction of a second track line or a new line between Divača and Koper has been under examination. The relevant project was included in the National Programme of Railway Infrastructure Development in the 1996, but it was never realized. The project was once again included in the National Development Programme up to 2023 and should be realized by the

Deliverable 5.2 2-86 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

end of 2010 or 2015 at the latest. Higher permeability (today just 78%) will definitely induce the alleviation of road and rail bottlenecks too.

• The first track from Zagreb to Rijeka will not be built upon the existing single railway line, but a completely new double railway line will be constructed on a new corridor. The second track from Karlovac to Zagreb and from Dugo selo to Botovo, will be built on the existing route, with the necessary reconstruction in terms of direction and altitude, which would make it possible to attain the speeds up to 160 km/h. With the freight train speeds, which would almost be doubled (55 km/h) and the maximum driving speed of 120 km/h, the leveled rail line will provide for a substantial increase of the annual capacity, from the actual 5 mil. to 25 mil. tons of cargo.

• It was envisaged that the modernization and recostruction of Lika line which connects port of Zadar would have been completed by 2004, but the Lika line reconstruction has not finished yet.

Based on the above mentioned data some estimations in regards to the competition between road and rail freight transport can be made: • The realization of the second railway line (at the end of 2010 or 2015 at the latest) that connects the port of Koper will definitely alter the existing situation in favor of rail transport. But also following the railway modernization the continuation of the unfavourable progress regarding increase volume and share of road traffic can still be expected to take place. Road transport is more competitive because of its speed, lower costs, reliability and greater flexibility than other transport modes. At the same time also production and trade of high value products that require road transport increases, but production and trade of bulk cargo, that is traditionaly transported by rail, decreases. Therefore it is not expected that modal shift from road to rail will produce a bottleneck to rail.

• It is the Vb leg Botovo – Zagreb –Rijeka where the largest growth of freight traffic is expected. The rail line which is to connect the port of Rijeka will provide for a substantial increase of the annual capacity, from the actual 5 mil. to 25 mil. tons of cargo, which means that rail can become an important and competitive mode in relation to road transport. Construction of the rail infrastructure is expected to take approximately five to six years, which means that it will not have been completed prior to 2015.

• Regarding the permanent oscillating of cargo transport, the future prospects of the port of Zadar are primarily related to serving passenger traffic and secondarily cargo traffic, which means that improving the railway network within a short term time horizon will not play such an important role as in the case of other ports of this cluster. In case cargo transportation increases to/from the port of Zadar, the modernization of the Lika railway line will

Deliverable 5.2 2-87 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

definitely make rail more competitive against the road transport mode and could alleviate road bottlenecks.

• The intermodal services and new railway connections to/from the port of Trieste responded to market requests, anticipating an increase in the next three years from the actual weekly couple of trains, to a daily connection (six weekly couples), guaranteeing a high quality service between the port of Trieste and Central Europe. It is estimated that rail can transport 30.000 wagons in 4 years and can contribute to reductions in externalities resulting from road transport as well as bottlenecks.

• Due to the construction and modernization of its railway infrastructure the port of Monfalcone can exploit its railway connection to a great extent, which prevent the creation of bottlenecks and alleviates traffic congestion on the road network.

Upon the current planning of the railway reconstruction it is apparent, that until 2015 the current situation regarding competition between the road and rail transport modes will not change, except from the case of the port of Koper. Meanwhile, the modernization of the Italian railway network allows the shifting of significant cargo volumes to rail via the ports of Trieste and Monfalcone.

B. Unimodal road transport flows competition Also significant is the percentage of the trade flows moved by means of road only (unimodal road transport flows) between the catchment areas of the examined port clusters with origin/ destination the regions Attiki, Kentriki Makedonia, Thessalia & Kentriki Ellada from Greece and the countries of Hungary, Germany, Poland, Austria and Slovakia from Central Europe, via Axis Χ. The flows between these regions/ countries per O-D pair are presented in detail in Annex 3.

In the same Annex the analytical data (per O-D pair) emerging from the change caused to the estimated unimodal road transport flows on the do-nothing scenario of 2015, by the operation of the proposed indicative MoS link are also included. The outcome from this comparative assessment is briefly presented in the table that follows.

Table 2-14 Difference in unimodal road transport flows following the operation of the indicative MoS link on the potential MoS corridor 3

Road Road Competition Competition Cluster - Indicative link (Do-Nothing (Master Plan Difference Difference (%) Cluster 2015) Assignment) 1000 tons 1000 tons from 10a to 7 Koper - Igoumenitsa 999 955 -44 -4% from 7 to 10a Igoumenitsa - Koper 489 478 -11 -2% 1.489 1.433 -56 -4%

Deliverable 5.2 2-88 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

2.3.4.4 Indicative estimation of modal shift As resulting from the analysis carried out in the previous section, the current trade flows between the catchment areas of the Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the eastern segment of the North Adriatic ports clusters are primarily served in two ways:

ƒ Either by means of road transport only, via Axis Χ,

ƒ Either by means of intermodal transport (road and maritime).

The main objective of the proposed MoS corridor between the Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the eastern segment of the North Adriatic ports clusters, and indicatively the service link between Igoumenitsa and Koper, is the modal shift to be created from the road network to maritime transport for those origin/ destination pairs between Greece and Central Europe that are currently primarily using the Axis Χ.

A first indicative estimation of the modal shift is carried out by using the model by the comparative analysis of two indicative shortest paths displaying the two alternative ways of connection (MoS corridor connection or road connection) of the Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the eastern segment of the North Adriatic ports clusters, and in particular between the region of Ipeiros (Greece) and Austria. The graphic display of the shortest paths examined is provided in the figure that follows.

Figure 2-24 Indicative shortest paths displaying the two alternative ways of connection between the catchment areas of the Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the eastern segment of the North Adriatic ports clusters

Deliverable 5.2 2-89 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

The benefit incurred from using the particular MoS corridor between the Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the eastern segment of the North Adriatic ports clusters (Igoumenitsa – Koper) in terms of volume of ton/kms that could be shifted from the road to the maritime network was calculated according the rationale that only a percentage of the total estimated potential demand corresponding to certain origin/destination regions is expected to use road only transport as explained in the above, since maritime transport is also an existing solution for the exchange of cargo flows between the catchment areas of the clusters under examination.

The indicative length of the journey from northern Greece to Slovenia via corridor X is approximately 1.450 kms. It is rather difficult to estimate potential modal shift for this particular MoS corridor connection. In this case it is calculated assuming a shift from the road to the level of about one third of the total potential flow, that is approximately 450 thousand tons and the above mentioned travel distance, the total of maximum travelled ton/kms that could be annually shifted off the road amount to 650 million ton/kms.

2.3.4.5 Indicative service profile of the MoS link A relevant search was conducted in regards to the vessel characteristics currently operating on the Adriatic-Ionian corridor and which could potentially handle the serving of the expected trade flows of the specific line, which directed towards the selection of a Ro-Ro vessel with capacity of 140 trailers. The typical commercial speed (service speed) for this vessel would be about 20 knots given a maximum vessel speed of 28 knots. Following the elaboration of the relevant data, on the basis of the assumptions previously presented in the chapter that discussed the methodological approach for determining the indicative service profile, it can be said that a ship with this capacity travelling with the specified speed, could serve the expected demand of the line with three (3) sailings per week, for a one direction trip of length approximately 515 nautical miles in about 26 hours. For three roundtrips per week the total sailing time of the ship is approximately 6,5 days while the total turnaround time is excluded. The above calculations were conducted separately for each of the first four (4) years of the line’s operation. The corresponding data for each year of operation examined are provided in Annex 4.

2.3.4.6 Economic viability assessment of the MoS link The economic viability assessment of the service of this particular indicative MoS link was carried out in line with the methodology that was presented in chapter 2.2.7 and the indicative service profile that was described in Annex 4 for each of the first four (4) years of the line’s operation.

Deliverable 5.2 2-90 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

The assessment findings show that this MoS link displays a positive balance of revenues over costs even from the first year of its operation with significant annual positive explotation results for the years to follow. Meanwhile, it is estimated that during the fourth year of operation (2013) the demand for the particular service would have reached the levels of the forecasted demand for 2015. The calculation form outcome regarding this fourth year of operation is presented in the figure that follows. The detailed results of the economic viability assessment of the service produced on an annual basis are presented in Annex 5.

2.3.4.7 MoS proposal under the 2nd call for proposals The potential of the proposed MoS Corridor 3, described in the above, is also proven by the fact that a relevant proposal for the development of the Adriatic Sea MoS corridor under the name ADRIAMOS (concering the MoS Koper-Igoumenitsa/Patra), was originally submitted under the 1st call for proposals ,and re-submitted in a revised version under the 2nd call. The proposed ADRIAMOS corridor includes the ports of Koper, Igoumenitsa and Patra, as per the proposed MoS Corridor 3. A brief outline of the ADRIAMOS project proposal is presented in Section 2.5, while the proposal is described in detail in Annex IX.

Deliverable 5.2 2-91 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-25 MoS link economic viability assessment results- Year 4

Deliverable 5.2 2-92 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

2.3.5 MoS potential corridor 4: The central segment of the North Adriatic ports cluster & the Ionian Sea/ West Greece ports cluster, including their respective catchment areas (Indicative MoS link Venice – (Igoumenitsa) – Patra – (Korinthos))10

The three port clusters connected by this MoS corridor are : the central segment of the North Adriatic ports cluster (ports of Venice and Chioggia), the Ionian Sea/ West Greece ports cluster (ports of Igoumenitsa and Patra) and the Central/South Aegean ports cluster (ports of Piraeus, Korinthos, Lavrio, Rafina, Chania, Heraklion, Eleysina, Chalkida and a number of smaller island ports).

The geographical position of the port of Venice, north on the Adriatic Sea allows it to act as a gateway of commercial trade between Europe and Asia in the and also to serve the highly industrialized northern Italian regions. The port handles almost all types of cargo but it should be noted that Ro-Ro traffic served is substantial- approximately 2 million tons in terms of freight carried on trailers and trucks for the year 2006. Most traffic is concentrated on Greek routes (about 94%), with balanced freight flows per direction.

At present the port of Chioggia does not serve significant Ro-Ro and container traffic volumes.

The ports of Patra and Igoumenitsa are very well located for serving freight and passenger traffic from/to ports in southern Italy and along the Adriatic Sea destined for Italy and other Central and Western European countries. These ports act as the western gateways of Greece, they primarily serve Ro-Ro freight as well as a substantial volume of international passenger transport. The port of Igoumenitsa is better located in comparison to the port of Patra in regards to also serving transport flows from/to the countries of the Balkan Peninsula.

Within the Central/South Aegean ports cluster, the dominant port is the port of Piraeus, which is largest and busiest port in Greece. It is a major commercial port handling a variety of cargoes (general cargo, containers, Ro-Ro, cars etc.) and also serving growing transhipment container traffic. The port is an international centre of transit and regional trade; it is the second container handling port in Eastern Mediterranean region and placed among the first 10 ports in container traffic in Europe.

Other ports of the cluster act complementarily to Piraeus and in a way partly alleviate the congested port of Piraeus mainly in terms of passenger flows (Rafina) but also for

10 Proposal “ADRIAMOS” submitted by the industry following the relevant call for proposals

Deliverable 5.2 2-93 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study freight (Eleysina, Lavrio) especially for certain types of cargo such as dry bulk, general cargo and Ro-Ro traffic. In this regard, the port of Korinthos in particular can play a significant complementary role as a sea gate for the region especially for international Ro-Ro traffic since it is located close to the Attica industrial zone and it allows vessels to avoid the sea route detouring the Peloponnese in reaching this zone.

The remaining island ports of the cluster on the Aegean Sea serve mainly passenger transport and the demand for cargo services are quite limited and are mostly centered around the serving the needs of their local communities.

The aim of this link along the proposed MoS corridor is the enhancement of the connections provided between Greece and the central segment of the North Adriatic ports. This link would serve the Adriatic, Ionian and Aegean and Sea and connect Southeastern Europe with Central and Northeast Europe. The service focus of this proposed corridor connection would be on Ro-Ro.

2.3.5.1 Potential trade flows of the MoS corridor – Catchment Area identification – Interrelation to EMR intermodal corridors - Interconnection with road transport network At the potential MoS corridor, the forecasts show the potential for a total volume of about 1.650 - 2.750 ktns year (both directions) by 2015 between the Ionian Sea/ West Greece ports cluster and the central segment of the North Adriatic ports cluster. This amount is equivalent to approximately 90.000 - 150.000 units (trucks/ trailers) for the same year.

In the following figure, Venice - Patra is presented as an indicative maritime link along this MoS corridor, serving the potential volumes estimated to form the future demand (2015) between the examined clusters. In the same figure, the flows of the particular indicative MoS corridor are also presented to/ from the source origins/ final destinations of the volumes.

Deliverable 5.2 2-94 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-26 MoS flows in the indicative MoS link Venice - Igoumenitsa – Patra - Korinthos (MoS potential corridor 4 (Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the central segment of the North Adriatic ports clusters)

The above presentation of the MoS flows on the indicative MoS link Venice - Patra to be operated along the examined potential MoS corridor between the two clusters, also identifies the routes which are likely to be followed for the transportation of the cargo to be moved along this particular corridor connection.

The particular pairs of zones between the catchment areas of the Ionian Sea/ West Greece port cluster (cluster no. 7) and the central segment of the North Adriatic port cluster (cluster no. 10b) with their respective values of the potential estimated demand for the year 2015 are presented in detail in the following table.

Table 2-15 Estimated potential demand in 2015 between the Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the central segment of the North Adriatic ports clusters

MIN MAX MoS 4 Potential Potential (from cluster ORIGIN_ZONE DESTINATION_ZONE Demand Demand - to cluster) 2015 2015 (ktns) (ktns) from 10b to 7 West Europe Kentriki Makedonia 200 335 Germany Kentriki Makedonia 180 300 West Europe Attiki 135 225

Deliverable 5.2 2-95 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

MIN MAX MoS 4 Potential Potential (from cluster ORIGIN_ZONE DESTINATION_ZONE Demand Demand - to cluster) 2015 2015 (ktns) (ktns) Germany Attiki 120 200 Lombardia Kentriki Makedonia 105 180 Veneto Kentriki Makedonia 90 150 Lombardia Attiki 60 100 Veneto Attiki 50 80 Piemonte Kentriki Makedonia 20 30 West Europe Dytiki Ellada 15 30 West Europe Thessalia 15 30 Germany Dytiki Ellada 15 25 Germany Thessalia 15 25 West Europe Ipeiros 10 20 West Europe Sterea Ellada 10 20 West Europe Peloponnisos 10 15 Provincia Autonoma Trento Kentriki Makedonia 10 15 Germany Ipeiros 5 10 Germany Sterea Ellada 5 10 Lombardia Dytiki Ellada 5 10 Germany Peloponnisos 5 10 Lombardia Thessalia 5 10 Veneto Dytiki Ellada 5 10 Veneto Thessalia 5 10 REST 40 70 10b - 7 total 1.135 1.920 MIN MAX Potential Potential ORIGIN_ZONE DESTINATION_ZONE Demand Demand 2015 2015 (ktns) (ktns) from 7 to 10b Attiki West Europe 105 175 Attiki Germany 100 165 Kentriki Makedonia West Europe 50 85 Kentriki Makedonia Germany 50 80 Attiki Lombardia 25 40 Attiki Veneto 20 30 Kentriki Makedonia Lombardia 20 30 Dytiki Ellada West Europe 15 25

Deliverable 5.2 2-96 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

MIN MAX MoS 4 Potential Potential (from cluster ORIGIN_ZONE DESTINATION_ZONE Demand Demand - to cluster) 2015 2015 (ktns) (ktns) Dytiki Ellada Germany 15 25 Kentriki Makedonia Veneto 15 25 Thessalia West Europe 15 20 Thessalia Germany 15 20 Peloponnisos West Europe 10 15 Peloponnisos Germany 10 15 Sterea Ellada West Europe 10 15 Thessalia Lombardia 5 10 REST 45 75 7 - 10b total 525 845 Grand Total 1.690 2.765

According to the estimated future demand (2015), the strongest pair in terms of volume from the central segment of the North Adriatic port cluster to the Ionian Sea/ West Greece port cluster is that from West Europe to the region of Kentriki Makedonia (Greece), with a total volume of approximately of 200 - 335 ktns. At the same direction, the pair Germany – Kentriki Makedonia is also dominant with volumes of approximately of 180 - 300 ktns, followed by the pairs of West Europe – Attiki (Greece), Germany – Attiki (Greece), Lombardia (Italy) - Kentriki Makedonia (Greece) and Veneto (Italy) - Kentriki Makedonia (Greece), with maximum volumes of approximately of 225, 200, 180 and 150 ktns respectively. At the opposite direction and from the Ionian Sea/ West Greece port cluster to the central segment of the North Adriatic port cluster, the pair Attiki (Greece) – West Europe is the strongest one with an estimated volume of approximately of 105 - 175 ktns, while the pair Attiki (Greece) – Germany is also dominant with 100 - 165 ktns.

From the above forecasted demand for 2015 it is estimated that 1200 ktns will constitute the demand to be served by the existing maritime links.

The percentage split by direction is estimated to be 31% northbound and 69% southbound.

Possible extensions to this connection could be formed by exploring potential (current or future) MoS corridor connections of the ports (Venice) with destinations in the western Mediterranean basin such as Barcelona, , Tunis etc. thus giving

Deliverable 5.2 2-97 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study access to westbound traffic.11 Through the efficient interconnection of these services the creation of an integrated MoS network that would cover the both eastern and western Mediterranean regions could be achieved.

The diagrammatic depiction of the specific potential MoS corridor between the Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the central segment of the North Adriatic ports clusters and their respective hinterlands are presented in the following figure.

Figure 2-27 Map of the MoS 4 potential corridor (Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the central segment of the North Adriatic ports clusters & Central/ South Aegean Sea ports clusters)

In the case of the Ionian Sea/ West Greece ports cluster and of the port of Patra in particular, the catchment area consists of the Greek regions of Attiki, Dytiki Ellada, Kentriki Makedonia, Sterea Ellada, Peloponnissos and Thessalia. In the case of the ports of the central segment of the North Adriatic cluster and of the port of Venice in

11 According to the ADRIAMOS proposal submitted by the industry in regards to this specific MoS corridor, the Adriatic Ionian Sea connections between Venice and Patra/ Igoumenitsa/ Korinthos which are proposed to be enhanced are also foreseen to be operationally interconnected to the existing Venice- - Barcelona- Tangiers- service thus connecting the east and west med.

Deliverable 5.2 2-98 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study particular, the catchment area is located at the Italian regions Lombardia, Veneto, Piemonde and Provincia Autonoma Trento and the West Europe and Germany.

The interrelationship between the MoS potential corridor 4 and the relevant intermodal maritime-based corridors within the study area as previously defined at an earlier stage of the study (Deliverable 1, Vol. II, Chapter 4) is illustrated in the figure that follows.

Figure 2-28 Map of the MoS potential corridor 4 in relation to the Adriatic-Ionian intermodal corridor

From the above map, it can be seen that the MoS potential corridor 4 lies upon the Adriatic-Ionian intermodal corridor which is amongst the most highly utilized intermodal corridors identified within the wider study area of the Eastern Mediterranean and is characterized primarily by the extensive and long standing provision of Ro-Ro and Ro-Pax services linking the ports of West Greece (port cluster no. 7) and the South and North Adriatic port clusters of Italy (ports clusters 11 and 10 respectively).

In terms of trade, this service is expected to serve flows destined to Greece primarily originating from Germany (food and live animals, manufactured goods, chemicals), Italy (manufactured goods, machinery and transport equipment) and West Europe

Deliverable 5.2 2-99 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

(miscellaneous manufactured articles, food and live animals). On the opposite direction exports from Greece that could be served involve the countries of Switzerland (food and live animals), Germany (chemicals, food and live animals, crude materials), Italy (crude materials, manufactured goods, food and live animals) and West Europe (manufactured goods and crude materials).

The port of Venice foresees the development and re-qualification of parts of the Marghera area to be assigned to the Motorways of the Sea’s traffics with the provision of direct connections to rail and main road networks as well as the the development of logistic services and infrastructures which can support MoS traffics. The possibility of developing a freight centres in proximity to the port of Patra is also under examination in collaboration with the port and local authorities while construction works are taking place for the relocation of the main port in proximity to its original location but with much better access to the road network avoiding the previous route via the city centre.

Therefore, this maritime Ro-Ro service proposed along the MoS corridor 4 is expected to increase the efficiency of flows to be transported along the Adriatic- Ionian intermodal corridor as well as the creation of modal shift from the road network involving the distance traveled (820 kms) between the ports of Bari and Venice which is being discussed and analysed in section 2.3.5.4.

The map that follows presents the road network to be used in the catchment area of the cluster ports to/ from initial origins/ final destinations of the cargo flows to the zones (countries/ regions) within this area. On the same map the road TEN-T network is included so as to illustrate the interconnection between the examined potential MoS corridor and these land transport system networks.

Deliverable 5.2 2-100 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-29 MoS potential corridor 4 (Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the central segment of the North Adriatic ports clusters) and interconnection with TEN-T road network

Deliverable 5.2 2-101 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

It is particularly important when investigating the prospects of a potential MoS corridor to examine the accessibility of the ports involved. Given the identification of the specific indicative MoS link as previously defined it should be noted that:

ƒ The Port of Venice is situated on a strategic crossroads position for traffic flows between Corridor V -Kiev (road and rail) and Corridor I -Palermo. The port has direct access to international corridors with regard to Pan European Corridor n. 5 (road and rail) Lisbon – Kiev - EU TEN – T (east – west) project n. 6 intersecting EU TEN T (north south) and project n. 1 in Verona (Italy). The distance between the port and the primary national road network A4, which links Turin to Trieste is about 5 km.

ƒ The port of Patra has direct access to road network infrastructure, while it has two post entrances with one lane per direction. The distance between the port and the national highway network is 2 km (Patra – Athens Highway E65). Furthermore, the port has also direct access to the secondary road network “Patra – Pirgos” highway (E55).

ƒ The port of Igoumenitsa has direct access to the national road network infrastructure. It has one post entrance with eight lanes connecting the port with “Egnatia” highway and two lanes connecting the port with the city of Igoumenitsa. Further to the port having direct access to Egnatia highway, it is also connected with the National road network of Igoumenitsa – Preveza (0.1 km distance).

ƒ The port of Korinthos has direct access to road network infrastructure, while it has one entrance/exit to the municipal road network with one lane (4 m width) per direction. The port is connected to the international road network, through the National Highway Athens – Patra (E65) and the National Highway Athens – Korinthos (E65) (4 km away). Furhermore, the port is also connected to the primary national network (National Highway Athens – Korinthos – Patra in a distance of 4 kms and National Highway Korinthos – Tripoli in a distance of 5 kms) and the secondary national network (Old National Highway Athens – Korinthos – Patra) in a distance of 100 m.

2.3.5.2 Articulation of the indicative MoS Link demand In accordance to the methodology that was developed and applied for the estimation of the potential future trade flows (2015) of the predominant/ indicative MoS link, in the case of the MoS 4 corridor, the total demand that this specific line may serve in the year 2015 for both directions will range from 900 ktns/year (pessimistic scenario) to 1.450 ktns/year (optimistic scenario) with the moderate scenario at the level of 1.200 ktns/year. This demand is expected to gradually reach the above mentioned level within a period of approximately four (4) years with an annual average increase rate of about 35%,

Deliverable 5.2 2-102 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study estimating that during the 1st year of operation the line will manage to attract flows at the level of 530 ktns in both directions. In the table that follows, the evolution of demand on this particular case is analytically presented. This estimation is directly related to the competition analysis presented in the next section. Table 2-16 Evolution of demand on the indicative link of the MoS potential corridor 4

Estimated AVG Estimated MoS Link Demand Corridor Estimated (Master Plan run*) Cluster - Demand Corridor Indicative link Cluster (run “all Demand open”*) (run “all

open”*) YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 MIN MAX from 7 to 10b Patra - Venice 525 845 685 210 363 436 509 from 10b to 7 Venice - Patra 1.135 1.920 1.528 325 531 631 731 1.660 2.765 2.213 535 894 1.067 1.240 67% 19% 16% * refer to Chapter 2

The analytical tables presenting the demand of the indicative MoS link per O-D pair, for the 4th year, during which it is estimated that the demand of this link will have reached the levels of the expected values for 2015, are provided in Annex 3.

2.3.5.3 Competition overview The competition analysis which is presented next involves, both competitive intermodal maritime transport flows, as well as unimodal road transport flows, between the O-D pairs of the catchment area of the specific MoS corridor. A. Intermodal (maritime & road) transport flows competition Concerning the maritime part of the intermodal transport flows between the O-D pairs of the catchment area of this specific MoS corridor, the existing maritime connections which currently serve the trade flows between the catchment areas of the involved in the investigated MoS connection clusters, with indicative MoS link the Venice – Igoumenitsa – Patra – Korinthos, concerns the maritime connections between the port clusters, from the side of Italy, the central segment of the North Adriatic ports clusters (Venetia, Chioggia) and the western segment of the North Adriatic ports cluster (Ravenna, Ancona), and from the side of Greece, the Ionian Sea/West Greece ports cluster (Patra, Igoumenitsa, Corfu) and the Central/ South Aegean Sea ports cluster (Piraeus, Korinthos).

A dense network of maritime connections graphically presented in the following figure, with services Ro-Ro as well as Lo-Lo, with average frequencies,

Deliverable 5.2 2-103 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

ƒ in the case of Ro-Ro services, almost three (3) per day from/ to Patra & Igoumenitsa or two (2) or three (3) voyages per week from/ to Piraeus, and

ƒ in the case of Lo-Lo services one (1) voyage per week.

Figure 2-30 Existing maritime links between the catchment areas of Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the central segment of the North Adriatic ports clusters

It should be mentioned that despite the high service frequencies provided by the above described maritime connections, a significant percentage of the existing trade flows between the particular catchment areas is served by the existing maritime connections between of the ports of Patra/ Igoumenitsa and Bari/ Brindisi. These trade flows with initial origin/ final destination the North Italian regions or the countries of the Central- West Europe, follow the main Italian north-south, east-west highways (such as A14, A13, A4, A27), some of which are already significantly congested.

Given the catchment area of the specific MoS corridor, and the highly competitive environment in which the new line will have to operate in, where the long-standing lines connecting Greece – Italy via the connections of Venice with Patra and Igoumenitsa, but also with Bari and Brindisi, play a dominating role and serve the greatest proportion of the existing demand of the corridor, the following assumptions are made in regards to the evolution of demand for the new line: In the time period from the 1st and 2nd year of operation the line will manage to attract the greatest percentage of the cargo flows with origin/ destination the

Deliverable 5.2 2-104 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

pairs Attiki, Thessalia, Peloponnisos, Sterea and Dytiki Ellada with Germany, West Europe, Switzerland, Lombardia, Provincia Autonoma Trento and Veneto, that until then were served either by existing competitive maritime connections (Piraeus – Venice & Ravenna, Korinthos – Venice, Patra – Ancona, Igoumenitsa & Patra – Venice, etc.), or by road transport. Competition from road transport is mainly centred on the pairs of Germany with Kentriki Makedonia and Thessalia. During the 3rd and 4th year of operation, when the profile of the line will have been established within the specific market, in addition to the above cargo flows the line will gradually within this two year period be in a position to also attract an additional, but smaller, percentage of the cargo flows with origin/ destination the same regions mentioned above that until then were served mainly by competitive maritime connections. In the first four (4) year period of the new line’s operation it is estimated that the line will gradually achieve the attraction of cargo traffic with origin/ destination the catchment areas of the MoS corridor at a percentage of around 25% on average from existing competitive lines involving mainly the connections from Venice with Piraeus, Korinthos, Patra and Igoumenitsa; from Bari, Ancona and Brindisi with Patra and Igoumenitsa; and also from Piraeus with Ravenna. In the table that follows, in conjunction to the evolution of demand on the indicative link, the estimation of the evolution of demand for the total of the existing maritime links being competitive to this link is also presented. Table 2-17 Evolution of demand on the competitive existing maritime links of the MoS potential corridor 4

Estimated Existing Maritime Estimated AVG Links Demand ("Master Plan" Corridor Estimated run*) Cluster - Demand Corridor Indicative link Cluster (run "all Demand open"*) (run "all open"*) MIN MAX YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 from 7 to 10b Patra - Venice 525 845 685 3.854 3.701 3.628 3.555 from 10b to 7 Venice - Patra 1.135 1.920 1.528 6.448 6.242 6.142 6.042 1.660 2.765 2.213 10.302 9.943 9.770 9.597 -3% -2% -2% * refer to Chapter 2 The analytical tables presenting the demand of the competitive existing maritime links per O-D pair, for the 4th year, during which it is estimated that the demand for the MoS indicative link will have reached the levels of the expected values for 2015 are displayed in Annex 3.

Concerning competition on the inland part of the intermodal transport flows between the O-D pairs of the catchment area of the specific MoS corridor, and specifically for competition between the road and rail transport modes, the current situation as recorded as well as the future situation (2015) as estimated is being described in the

Deliverable 5.2 2-105 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study following paragraphs for the each of the port clusters involved in the MoS 4 corridor. The main railway networks of the catchment areas of this indicative MoS link are displayed in the figure that follows.

Road – Rail competition in the central segment of the North Adriatic ports cluster

The main Italian ports included in this particular cluster are Venice and Chioggia. The Port of Venice is situated on a strategic crossroads position for traffic flows between Corridor V Lisbon-Kiev (road and rail) and Corridor I Berlin-Palermo. The port has direct access to international corridors with regard to Pan European Corridor n. 5 (road and rail) Lisbon – Kiev - EU TEN – T (east – west) project n. 6 intersecting EU TEN T (north south) project n. 1 in Verona (Italy) and EU TEN T (Short Sea Shipping and Motorways of the Sea) project n. 21 in Venice. The distance between the port and the primary national road network A4, which links Turin to Trieste is about 5 km.

Taking into account the current situation of the ports, but also their potential future prospects, in accordance to the strategic development goals they have set, it can be claimed that in regards to:

• the port of Venice, the Operative Plan forecasts the development of a specific terminal dedicated to the MoS and Short Sea Shipping localized in the Fusina (ex Alumix) Area of Marghera that is located in a strategic positioning for the MoS thanks to the availability of direct connections to rail and mainly road networks. • the port of Chioggia, the railway connections are developed through the node of Chioggia train station that links the city to the Trieste-Venice/Udine-Tarvisio axis.

Deliverable 5.2 2-106 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-31 MoS potential corridor 4 (Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the central segment of the North Adriatic ports clusters) and interconnection with main railway networks

From the above and based upon the development of Corridor I Berlin - Palermo (Railway axis Berlin-Verona-Milan-Bologna--Messina-Palermo) and Corridor V Lisbon Kiev (Railway axis Lyon - Turin - Milan - Venice -Trieste/Koper - Ljubljana -Budapest), an increase in the use of railway infrastructure for the movement of cargo consignments is expected to bring about significant positive impacts to the flow of road traffic, due to the reduction in the percentage of heavy goods vehicles on the road network.

Road – Rail competition in the Ionian Sea/ West Greece ports cluster

The Ionian Sea/ West Greece port cluster consists of the ports of Igoumenitsa and Patra. Currently, neither of these two ports are connected to the national railway network and as a result competition between road and rail is non-existent. However, in the future given the catchment area of this specific cluster within the Greek territory– which is slightly differentiated depending on the potential MoS corridor proposed, that includes the total or the greatest part of the foreseen upgrading works – the following planned rail infrastructure projects must be taken into account:

Deliverable 5.2 2-107 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

• The upgrading/ modernization works of the existing axes of the national railway network such as the axis Patra – Athens – Thessaloniki – Idomeni/ Promahonas, aim at the development of a high speed double line along the core line (Patra – Athens – Thessaloniki), signalling and electrification covering the whole Axis, but also new alignments, such as the construction of the Egnatia Railway (connection between the ports of Alexandroupolis and Igoumenitsa) and the remaining segments of the Western Railway Axis, such as the construction of the sections Patra – Pyrgos – Kalamata, Ioannina – Antirio, Kalabaka – Ioannina – Igoumenitsa, Kalabaka - Kozani and Siatista - Kastoria, that will guarantee a railway connection of high standards between north – south and east -west firstly within the Greek borders and secondly the connection of the country with neighbouring countries via its ports and border stations (expected average time horizon for the completion of these projects being 2020), • the local projects planned for the improvement/ facilitation of the rail connection of the above ports with the main railway network of Greece and more specifically, the connection of the new port of Patra with the railway network of the Hellenic Railways Organisation following the construction of a double electrified line and the port of Igoumenitsa through the West Railway Axis project works (expected average time horizon for the completion of these projects being 2018), • the supporting – promoting of the ports of Igoumenitsa and Patra (including also the other main national ports) through the new national land-use plan into becoming primary sea gates of the country • the comparatively higher cost of road transport, • the new charging policy that the Greek Railways Organisation (OSE) is expected to implement in order to make rail transport more competitive, as well as its market development policy aiming at striking agreements with “new clients”, a differentiation of some degree is expected to occur concerning the current situation characterized by the almost total domination of the road transport mode regarding freight transportation to/ from the ports of this specific cluster. In regards to road transport, an important upgrading/ construction plan constituting of significant infrastructure projects for the enhancement of the quality of road connections in Greece is similarly being executed. The projects which dominate in the catchment area of this specific cluster within the Greek territory include the completion of the Egnatia Highway (Ε90) and its vertical axes, and the upgrading of the existing road axis Ε75, the construction of the Ionian Highway (Ioannina – Antirio), the construction of the Central Greece Axis Ε65, the undergoing upgrading of the Korinthos – Patra - Pyrgos – Tsakona Axis and the construction of the Eastern

Deliverable 5.2 2-108 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Highway of the Peloponnese Korinthos – Tripoli – Kalamata and Lefktro - Sparti (expected average time horizon for the completion of these projects being 2015). Based on the above overview some general estimations can be made in regards to the shape and form of the competition between road and rail freight transport in the catchment area of this particular cluster in the future and specifically until the time horizon used for the projections conducted in the context of this study (2015). In addition, taking into account the current situation of the ports, but also their potential future prospects, in accordance to the strategic development goals they have set, it can be claimed that in regards to: • the port of Igoumenitsa, the prospects for its connection to the main railway network via the West Railway Axis and the Egnatia Railway, leads to the estimation that rail can become an important competitive mode for freight transportation against road transport (attraction from road transport at the level of 30% - 40%), which, however, is expected to take place at a time horizon greater than the current study’s (2015) and • to the port of Patra, similarly, the implementation of the planned projects concerning its connection to the main railway network, as well as the development of rail infrastructure within its entire catchment area, with main objective the creation of a satisfactory grid of connections with important gates and freight transport attraction poles, is estimated that will substantially delay the emergence of competition between the two transport modes, which is expected to take place beyond 2015. From the above it is evident than until 2015 and based upon the current planning for the course of the upgrading and constructing the foreseen rail and road transport infrastructures in the catchment area of the West Greece/ Ionian port cluster, the improvement and construction of large scale road infrastructure projects and the road connections of these two ports with the road network of their catchment area, is expected to be realized in a shorter time period in relation to the corresponding improvement/ construction of the rail infrastructure, thus initially strengthening even more the monopolistic role of road transport as the sole option for inland transportation since the competition between the two modes will remain “idle” for the specific time horizon (2015) in question. B. Unimodal road transport flows competition Also significant is the percentage of the trade flows moved by means of road only (unimodal road transport flows) between the catchment areas of the examined port clusters with origin/ destination the regions Kentriki Makedonia & Thessalia (Greece) and Germany via Axis Χ. The analytical presentation of these flows per O-D pair is displayed in Annex 3.

In the same Annex the analytical data (per O-D pair) emerging from the change caused to the estimated unimodal road transport flows on the do-nothing scenario of 2015, by the operation of the proposed indicative MoS link are also included. The

Deliverable 5.2 2-109 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study outcome from this comparative assessment is briefly presented in the table that follows.

Table 2-18 Difference in unimodal road transport flows following the operation of the indicative MoS link on the MoS potential corridor 4

Road Road Competition Competition Cluster - Indicative link (Do-Nothing (Master Plan Difference Difference (%) Cluster 2015) Assignment) 1000 tons 1000 tons from 7 to 10b Patra - Venice 56 55 -1 -2% from 10b to 7 Venice - Patra 282 246 -36 -13% 338 301 -37 -11%

2.3.5.4 Indicative estimation of modal shift As resulting from the analysis conducted in the previous section, the current trade flows between the catchment areas of the Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the central segment of the North Adriatic ports clusters are primarily served in two ways:

ƒ Either by means of road transport only, via Axis Χ,

ƒ Either by means of intermodal transport (road/ via the main Italian north-south and east-west highways, such as A14, A13, A4, A27 and maritime).

The main objective of the proposed MoS corridor between the Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the central segment of the North Adriatic ports clusters, and indicatively between Venice and Patra, is the modal shift to be created from the road network to maritime transport for those origin/ destination pairs between Greece and North Italy/ Central-West Europe that are currently primarily using the above mentioned highways. A first indicative estimation of the modal shift is carried out by using the model by the comparative analysis of two indicative shortest paths displaying the two alternative ways of connection (MoS corridor or combination of maritime and road connection) between the Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the central segment of the North Adriatic ports clusters, and in particular between region of Dytiki Ellada (Greece) and region of Veneto (Italy). The shortest paths examined are depicted in the figure that follows.

Deliverable 5.2 2-110 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-32 Indicative shortest paths displaying the two alternative ways of connection between the catchment areas of the Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the central segment of the North Adriatic ports clusters & Central/ South Aegean Sea ports clusters

The greatest benefit by using this MoS corridor concerns the volume of ton/kms that could be shifted from the road to the maritime network, which mainly involve flows travelled between Bari and Venice via Autostrada Adriatica A14 also part of A13, a journey of approximately 820 kms, and secondarily flows that solely use the road network (Corridor X). Given the potential cargo volume of approximately 1.000.000 tons estimated that could be transported on the indicative MoS corridor examined, and the above mentioned travel distance, the total of travelled ton/kms that could be shifted off the road amount to 820 million ton/kms.

2.3.5.5 Indicative service profile of the MoS link A relevant search in regards to the characteristics of the existing vessels operating on the Adriatic-Ionian corridor and which could potentially handle the serving of the expected trade flows of the specific line, led to the selection of a Ro-Ro vessel with capacity 240 trailers. The typical commercial speed (service speed) for this vessel would be about 20 knots (theoretic speed of approximately 22 knots). Following the elaboration of the relevant data, on the basis of the assumptions previously presented in the chapter that discussed the methodological approach for

Deliverable 5.2 2-111 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study determining the indicative service profile, it can be concluded that two (2) vessels with this capacity travelling with the specified speed, could serve the expected demand of the line with four (4) sailings per week, for a one direction trip of length approximately 160 nautical miles in about 33 hours. For four (4) roundtrips per week the total sailing time of the ship is approximately 11 days, a fact that justifies the need to employ two (2) ships on the line. Nevertheless, a more modest approach would be to employ one vessel for the first two years of operation to sufficiently to cover the estimated demand with two weekly departure, while for the rest years another vessel should be added in order to cover the proposed service frequency of four departures per week. The above calculations were conducted separately for each of the first four (4) years of the line’s operation. The corresponding data for each year of operation examined are provided in Annex 4.

2.3.5.6 Economic viability assessment of the MoS link The economic viability assessment of the service of this particular indicative MoS link was carried out in line with the methodology that was presented in chapter 2.2.7 and the indicative service profile that was described in Annex for each of the first four (4) years of the line’s operation. The assessment findings show that this MoS link displays a positive balance of revenues over costs even from the first year of its operation with substantial annual positive explotation results for the years to follow despite the fact that the employment of an additional vessel is introduced in the service during its third year of operation. Meanwhile, it is estimated that during the fourth year of operation (2013) the demand for the particular service would have reached the levels of the forecasted demand for 2015. The calculation form outcome regarding this fourth year of operation is presented in the figure that follows. The findings of the economic viability assessment of the service produced on an annual basis are presented in Annex 5.

Deliverable 5.2 2-112 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-33 MoS link economic viability assessment results- Year 4

Deliverable 5.2 2-113 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

2.3.5.7 MoS proposal under the 2nd call for proposals The potential of the proposed MoS Corridor 4, described in the above, is also proven by the fact that a relevant proposal for the development of the Adriatic Sea MoS corridor under the name ADRIAMOS (concering the MoS Venice- Igoumenitsa/Patra), was originally submitted under the 1st call for proposals ,and re- submitted in a revised version under the 2nd call. The proposed ADRIAMOS corridor includes the ports of Venice, Igoumenitsa and Patra, as per the proposed MoS Corridor 4. A brief outline of the ADRIAMOS project proposal is presented in Section 2.5, while the proposal is described in detail in Annex IX.

2.3.6 MoS potential corridor 5: The eastern segment of the North Adriatic ports cluster & the western segment of the North Adriatic ports cluster, including their respective catchment areas (Indicative MoS link (Igoumenitsa) – Ancona – Koper)12

This MoS corridor connects the following two port clusters: the eastern segment of the North Adriatic ports cluster (ports of Koper, Rijeka, Zadar, Trieste and Monfalcone); and the western segment of the North Adriatic ports cluster (ports of Ancona and Ravenna).

The port of Ancona currently has several maritime Ro-Ro connections to/from the Adriatic Sea, in particular with Greece with particular regard both to passenger and freight flows. The traffic is characterized by the prevalence of accompanied traffic (trucks) (94%) with balanced the freight flows in terms of direction. The port of Ravenna also serves Ro-Ro traffic but also container traffic of greater volumes than Ancona.

The port of Koper, the only Slovenian port, is well situated in the heart of Europe, at the junction of the international trade routes with direct international land transport connections. It is a multi-purpose port sufficiently equipped to accommodate and serve all types of cargoes and acts as an important transit port for Central and Eastern Europe.

Rijeka is the largest Croatian port displaying a significant annual increase in container throughput over the past few years and seeking to re-establish the its former role as a gateway for Central Europe and in particular for Hungary’s sea trade, a role lost to

12 Proposal “Two Seas” submitted by the industry following the relevant call for proposals

Deliverable 5.2 2-114 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Germany and Slovenia as a result of the Yugoslav war. The port of Zadar specializes mostly in serving liquid and bulk cargo as well as passenger transport.

The port of Trieste handles significant volumes of container traffic, Ro-Ro (especially toward Turkey and Greece) and general cargo. The port of Monfalcone is currently characterised by sea cargo flows different from Ro-Ro traffic, albeit it has a great potential to develop also Ro-Ro traffic if supported by strong infrastructural interventions.

The main advantage of the ports belonging to this cluster is that in comparison to the northern European ports, they lie on the shortest transport route, linking commercial centres in Central and Eastern Europe with Mediterranean countries and the Far East. Sea routes through these ports are in excess of 2.000 nautical miles closer to these waterways than northern European ports. Land routes to the main Central European market centres can be reached through these ports in substantially shorter time allowing faster receipt of goods coupled with lower transport costs. The aim of this MoS corridor is the provision of a new service connection between the western and the eastern segment of the North Adriatic ports. This link would serve the Adriatic Sea, enhance the connections between Italy and Slovenia and facilitate the movement of traffic flows with Balkan and Central European countries. The service focus of this proposed connection would be on Ro-Ro.

2.3.6.1 Potential trade flows of the MoS corridor – Catchment Area identification – Interrelation to EMR intermodal corridors - Interconnection with road transport network On the potential MoS corridor, the forecasts show the potential for a total volume of about 1.100 - 1.900 ktns year (both directions) by 2015 between the eastern and western segments of the North Adriatic port cluster. This amount is equivalent to approximately 60.000 - 100.000 units (trucks/ trailers) for the same year.

In the following figure, the indicative MoS maritime link Ancona – Koper along the proposed MoS corridor is presented, serving the potential volumes estimated to form the future demand (2015) between the examined clusters. In the same figure, the flows of the particular indicative MoS corridor are also presented to/ from the source origins/ final destinations of the volumes.

Figure 2-34 MoS flows in the indicative MoS link Ancona - Koper (MoS potential corridor 5) (The eastern & western segments of the North Adriatic ports cluster)

Deliverable 5.2 2-115 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

The above presentation of the MoS flows on the indicative MoS link Koper-Ancona for the examined potential MoS corridor between the eastern & western segments of the North Adriatic ports cluster, also identifies the routes which are likely to be followed for the transportation of the cargo to be moved along the particular connection.

The particular pairs of zones between the catchment areas of the eastern & western segments of the North Adriatic ports cluster with their respective values of the potential estimated demand for the year 2015 are presented in detail in the following table.

Table 2-19 Estimated potential demand in 2015 between the eastern & western segments of the North Adriatic ports cluster

MIN MAX MoS 5 Potential Potential (from cluster ORIGIN_ZONE DESTINATION_ZONE Demand Demand - to cluster) 2015 2015 (ktns) (ktns) from 10a to Croatia Lazio 135 225 10c Austria Marche 85 130 Croatia EmiliaRomagna 80 125 Croatia Toscana 70 105 Hungary Lazio 60 95 Croatia Marche 60 90 Austria Abruzzo 55 85

Deliverable 5.2 2-116 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

MIN MAX MoS 5 Potential Potential (from cluster ORIGIN_ZONE DESTINATION_ZONE Demand Demand - to cluster) 2015 2015 (ktns) (ktns) Croatia Umbria 45 75 Slovenia Abruzzo 40 65 Croatia Abruzzo 40 60 Romania Marche 30 50 Romania Lazio 30 50 Romania Umbria 25 40 Slovenia Marche 25 40 Hungary Marche 30 40 Croatia Sardegna 20 35 Romania Abruzzo 20 35 Hungary Umbria 20 30 Slovakia Lazio 15 30 Hungary Abruzzo 15 25 Czech Republic Marche 15 25 Serbia Marche 15 20 Slovakia Marche 15 20 REST 95 160 10c - 10a total 1.040 1.655

from 10c to 10a Abruzzo Slovenia 80 130 Lazio Romania 75 120 Sardegna Croatia 70 120 Lazio Croatia 65 105 Lazio Hungary 50 85 EmiliaRomagna Croatia 35 55 Marche Austria 30 50 Toscana Croatia 35 50 Abruzzo Austria 30 45 Abruzzo Romania 20 35 Marche Romania 25 30 Marche Slovenia 20 30 Abruzzo Croatia 20 30 Marche Croatia 20 30

Deliverable 5.2 2-117 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

MIN MAX MoS 5 Potential Potential (from cluster ORIGIN_ZONE DESTINATION_ZONE Demand Demand - to cluster) 2015 2015 (ktns) (ktns) Abruzzo Hungary 15 25 Abruzzo Czech Republic 15 25 Lazio Serbia 15 25 Lazio Slovakia 15 20 Marche Hungary 15 20 Marche Czech Republic 15 20 Umbria Romania 15 20 Umbria Croatia 10 20 Liguria Croatia 10 15 Umbria Hungary 10 15 REST 55 85 10a - 10c total 765 1.205 Grand Total 1.805 2.860

In the creation of the above table an assumption was made according to which this specific MoS service will constitute a choice for the transportation of cargo shipments from/ to EU or EU Candidate Countries and not for transporting shipments from/ to non-EU Countries. For this reason, the pairs from/ to Italy from/ to Russia and Poland were excluded, even though they emerged from the assignment of the model. However, in the case trade that flows originating/ destined from Russia and Poland were to be included in the estimation for potential use of this connection, then it could result to an increase in the potential demand by approximately 30%.

According to the estimated future demand (2015) and in the case of the minimum potential demand, the strongest pair in terms of volume from the eastern segment to the western segment of the North Adriatic ports cluster, is that from Croatia to the region of Lazio (Italy), with a total volume of approximately of 135 ktns. At the opposite direction and from the western segment to the eastern segment of the North Adriatic ports cluster, the pairs Abruzzo (Italy) – Slovenia and Lazio (Italy) – Romania are the strongest ones with an estimated volume of approximately of 80 and 75 ktns respectively.

In the case of the maximum potential demand, the strongest pair in terms of volumes from the eastern segment to the western segment of the North Adriatic ports cluster, is that from Croatia to the region of Lazio (Italy), with a total volume of approximately of 225 ktns. At the opposite direction and from the western segment to the eastern segment of the North Adriatic ports cluster, the pairs Abruzzo (Italy) – Slovenia and Lazio (Italy) – Romania are the strongest ones with an estimated volume of approximately of 130 and 120 ktns respectively.

Deliverable 5.2 2-118 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

The percentage split by direction is estimated to be 58% northbound and 42% southbound.

The diagrammatic depiction of the specific potential MoS connection between the eastern & western segments of the North Adriatic ports cluster and the respective hinterland are presented in the figure that follows.

Deliverable 5.2 2-119 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-35 Map of the MoS 5 potential corridor (The eastern & western segments of the North Adriatic ports cluster)

In the case of the eastern segment of the North Adriatic ports cluster and of the port of Koper in particular, the catchment area consists of the countries Slovenia, Croatia, Austria, Hungary, Slovakia, Czech Republic, Romania and Poland. In regards to the ports belonging to the western segment of the North Adriatic cluster and of the port of Ancona in particular, the catchment area consists of West Europe and Germany, and the Italian regions of Abruzzo, Emilia Romagna, Lazio, Liguria, Marche, Molise, Piemonte, Puglia, Sardegna, Toscana and Umbria.

The interrelationship between the MoS potential corridor 5 and the relevant intermodal corridors within the study area as previously defined at an earlier stage of the study (Deliverable 1, Vol. II, Chapter 4) is illustrated in the figure that follows.

Deliverable 5.2 2-120 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-36 Map of the MoS potential corridor 5 in relation to the Adriatic-Ionian intermodal corridor

From the above map, it is evident that the MoS potential corridor 5 lies upon along the Adriatic-Ionian intermodal corridor which is amongst the most highly utilized intermodal corridors identified within the wider study area of the Eastern Mediterranean and is characterized primarily by the extensive and long standing provision of Ro-Ro and Ro-Pax services between Greece and Italy and to a lesser degree between Italy and western Balkan countries with access to the Adriatic Sea.

In terms of trade, it is expected that flows from Italy primarily towards Austria (crude materials, manufactured goods), Croatia (crude materials), Slovenia (crude materials, manufactured goods, beverages and tobacco) and Hungary (food and live animals, crude materials) will be served. Whilst, on the other direction flows directed to Italy mainly from Austria (manufactured goods), Slovenia (manufactured goods, crude materials), Poland (manufactured goods, machinery and transport equipment) and Croatia (manufactured goods, crude materials) will be served.

In terms of logistics and intermodal initiatives taken by the ports of Ancona and Koper :

Deliverable 5.2 2-121 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

The Ancona Port Authority is currently enhancing its intermodal operability by expanding its existing rail connections in order to connect the internal rail network which reaches several berths to the national network while another planned action concerns the move of freight traffic from the train terminal of Falconara to the intermodal freight terminal of Jesi so as to enhance the flow of freight to and from the port via rail.

In view of further exploiting its strategic location in serving Central Europe and neighbouring regions, the construction of a new container terminal and distribution centre of 1 million TEUs capacity in the port of Koper is under way while the port is also involved in the construction of a new large-scale freight village in Sezana (close to the Italian border) aiming to constitute Sezana Freight Village as Central Europe’s major freight centre, which will serve both the ports of Koper, Trieste and Monfalcone as a hinterland dry port connected to the ports by both rail and road.

Therefore, apart from the modal shift to be created by the operation of this MoS corridor mainly involving flows traveled between Ancona and Koper (distance of approximately 530 km), which is being discussed in greater detail in section 2.3.6.4 the proposed Ro-Ro service is expected to strengthen the intermodal prospects of the corridor with the provision of an additional service that would link the eastern and western coasts of the Adriatic Sea, a market segment which is relatively underdeveloped in the Adriatic-Ionian Sea intermodal corridor and also provide the opportunity through the relevant upgrading and modernization works taking place at both nodal points of the connection for greater use of rail for the remaining part of the cargo consignments journey until they reach their final destination either at a Balkan or Central European location as well as within Italy.

The following map presents the road network to be used in the catchment area of the cluster ports to/ from initial origins/final destinations of the cargo flows to the zones (countries/ regions) within this area. On the same map the display of the road TEN-T network illustrates the interconnection of the examined potential MoS corridor with these networks.

Deliverable 5.2 2-122 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-37 MoS potential corridor 5 (The eastern & western segments of the North Adriatic ports cluster) and interconnection with TEN-T road network

Deliverable 5.2 2-123 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

It is very important when examining a potential MoS corridor also to consider the issue of land transport accessibility of the ports involved. Given the identification of the specific indicative MoS link as previously defined it should be noted that :

ƒ The port of Ancona has direct access to the primary national road network (motorways and A14) which connects the city of Ancona to the rest of Europe, via Milan and Bologna. The distance between the port and the highway network is 15,4 km. The most important secondary networks via Adriatica are accessible through the S.S.16 highway (21km away) and the S.S.76 which links Ancona to Rome and is 11,4km away.

ƒ The port of Koper has direct access to the motorway and railway network. The distance between the port and the motorway Koper – Ljubljana is 2 km (Pan European Corridor Va), while the distance between the port and the Pan European Corridor X is 100 km. Furthermore, the port of Koper is connected to the main road axes leading to Trieste and Rijeka (2 km away). The new main entrance to the port is under construction, which will directly connect the motorway to the port.

2.3.6.2 Articulation of the indicative MoS Link demand According to the methodology that has been developed and applied for the estimation of the potential future trade flows (2015) of the predominant/indicative MoS link, in the case of the MoS 5 corridor, the total demand that this specific line may serve in the year 2015 for both directions will range from 750 ktns/year (pessimistic scenario) to 1.300 ktns/year (optimistic scenario) with the moderate scenario at the level of 950 ktns/year. This potential demand is expected to reach to the above levels within five years (5) roughly with an average annual increase rate of 45%, assuming that in the 1st year of operation the new service will attract flows of approximately 190 ktns in both directions. However, it should be noted that during the first year of operation of the line there will be considerable risk in financial terms. In the table that follows, the evolution of demand on this particular case is presented in detail. This estimation is directly related to the competition analysis presented in the next section.

Deliverable 5.2 2-124 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Table 2-20 Evolution of demand on the indicative link του MoS potential corridor 5

Estimated AVG Estimated MoS Link Demand Corridor Estimated ("Master Plan" run*) Cluster - Demand Corridor Indicative link Cluster (run "all Demand open"*) (run "all MIN MAX open"*) YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 YEAR 5 from 10c to 10a Ancona - Koper 765 1.205 985 117 201 334 432 530 from 10a to 10c Koper - Ancona 1.040 1.655 1.348 134 230 383 486 588 1.805 2.860 2.333 251 431 718 918 1.118 71% 67% 28% 22% * refer to Chapter 2 The detailed tables presenting the demand of the indicative MoS link per O-D pair, for the 5th year, during which it is estimated that the demand for the MoS indicative link will have reached the levels of the expected values for 2015 are displayed in Annex 3.

2.3.6.3 Competition overview The competition analysis which is presented next involves, both competitive intermodal maritime transport flows, as well as unimodal road transport flows, between the O-D pairs of the catchment area of the specific MoS corridor. A. A. Intermodal (maritime & road) transport flows competition In regards to the maritime section of the intermodal transport flows between the O-D pairs of the catchment area of this particular MoS corridor, the existing maritime connections, which are depicted in the following figure, comprise of both Ro-Ro and Lo-Lo services, connecting the ports of the eastern segment of the North Adriatic cluster (in particular Koper, Trieste, Zadar and Split) with the ports of the western segment of the North Adriatic cluster (in particular Ancona and Ravenna). Moreover, the northern segment of the South Adriatic - Balkan cluster and the western segment of the North Adriatic cluster (in particular the ports of Split and Ancona respectively) are also connected with a Ro-Ro maritime service.

Deliverable 5.2 2-125 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-38 Existing maritime links between the catchment areas of the eastern & western segments of the North Adriatic ports cluster

More specifically, the Lo-Lo services connecting Koper-Ancona, Koper-Ravenna and Trieste-Ravenna with an average frequency of one or two (1-2) voyages per week, and the Ro-Ro services linking Koper-Ravenna and Zadar-Ancona with an average weekly frequency of two (2) voyages. The Ro-Ro maritime service between Split and Ancona (the northern segment of the South Adriatic - Balkan ports cluster and the western segment of the North Adriatic ports cluster) is a very frequent one with a weekly frequency of 20 voyages.

The existing connections between the eastern & western segments of the North Adriatic ports cluster are estimated to be the most competitive to the examined MoS indicative link of the potential MoS corridor and in particular, the existing Lo-Lo service between the ports of Ancona and Koper. However, the examined MoS corridor connection is proposed to focus on Ro-Ro thus the potential service in comparison with the existing Lo-Lo service, is expected to be characterised by higher service frequency, reduced delays at ports and overall shorter trip duration also due to the higher travel speed of the Ro-Ro vessels.

Moreover, amongst the ports of the eastern segment of the North Adriatic cluster and the southern segment of the South Adriatic - Balkan cluster, the port of Koper which belongs to the eastern segment of the North Adriatic ports cluster is considered to be more suitably located in order to serve the trade demand of the entire catchment area of its cluster due to the existing road network. The port of Koper is well connected to major road axes connecting Slovenia with Austria, Hungary and Croatia and with the rest of the catchment area. On the other hand, the ports of Zadar and Split are more

Deliverable 5.2 2-126 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study distant in regards to the counties of the catchment area of the eastern segment of the North Adriatic ports cluster. Likewise, in the western segment of the North Adriatic ports cluster the port of Ancona is better located in terms of its geographical position, than the port of Ravenna, in order to serve the entire catchment area of this cluster.

Given the catchment area of the specific MoS corridor, and the competitive maritime market environment of the North Adriatic Sea in which the new line will have to operate in, where the long-standing lines connecting Italy with Slovenia and Croatia via Ancona and Ravenna play a dominating role and serve the greatest proportion of the existing demand of the corridor, and the competition from road transport is equally strong due to the relatively short distance by road between the two ports (Ancona, Koper), the following assumptions are made in regards to the evolution of demand for the new line: In the period from the 1st up to the 3rd year of operation, the line will manage to attract most of the cargo with origin/ destination the pairs Abruzo, Marche and Umbria with Slovenia, Slovakia, Croatia, Austria, and the Czech Republic, that until that time will have been served either by the existing competitive maritime connections or at a greater extent by road transport. The competition from road transport is focused primarily on the pairs of the above mentioned regions of Italy with Austria, Croatia and Slovenia. During the 4th and 5th year of operation, when the profile of the line will have been established within the specific market, in addition to the above cargo flows the line will gradually within this two year period be in a position to also attract cargo with origin/ destination the pairs Lazio, Abruzo, Marche and Umbria with Poland, Hungary and Romania, that until that time will have been served either by the existing competitive maritime connections or at a greater extent by road transport. The competition from road transport is focused primarily on the pairs of Lazio with Poland and Hungary. In the first five (5) year period of the new line’s operation it is estimated that the line will gradually achieve the attraction of cargo traffic with origin/ destination the catchment area of the MoS corridor at a percentage of around 10% on average from existing competitive lines involving mainly the connections from Ancona with Zadar and Split and from Ravenna with Koper. In the table that follows, in conjunction to the evolution of demand on the indicative link, the estimation of the evolution of demand for the total of the existing maritime links being competitive to this link is also presented

Deliverable 5.2 2-127 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Table 2-21 Evolution of demand on the competitive existing maritime links of the MoS potential corridor 5

Estimated AVG Estimated Existing Maritime Links Corridor Estimated Demand ("Master Plan" run*) Cluster - Demand Corridor Indicative link Cluster (run "all Demand open"*) (run "all

open"*) YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 YEAR 5 MIN MAX from 10c to 10a Ancona - Koper 765 1.205 985 1.107 1.023 890 792 695 from 10a to 10c Koper - Ancona 1.040 1.655 1.348 1.612 1.516 1.363 1.261 1.158 1.805 2.860 2.333 2.719 2.540 2.252 2.053 1.853 -7% -11% -9% -10% * refer to Chapter 2 The analytical tables presenting the demand of the competitive existing maritime links per O-D pair, for the 5th year, during which it is estimated that the demand for the MoS indicative link will have reached the levels of the expected values for 2015 are displayed in Annex 3.

Concerning competition on the inland part of the intermodal transport flows between the O-D pairs of the catchment area of the specific MoS corridor, and specifically for competition between the road and rail transport modes, the current situation as recorded as well as the future situation (2015) as estimated is being described in the following paragraphs for the each of the port clusters involved in the MoS 5 corridor. The main railway networks of the catchment areas of this indicative MoS link are displayed in the figure that follows.

Road – Rail competition in the eastern segment of the North Adriatic ports cluster

The main ports included in this cluster are Monfalcone, Trieste, Rijeka, Zadar, and Koper. All of these ports have a railway connection to the main Italian, Croatian and Slovenian railway network and to important economic centres in their hinterland. The current rail lines that connect Rijeka, Zadar and Koper are characterized by poor operational and technical characteristics and are considered as a bottleneck which hinders port development. The rail infrastructure requires significant reconstructions and improvements in order to compete with road transport.

The port of Monfalcone is directly connected to the Monfalcone railway station, where both Venice/Trieste and Udine/Treviso lines commence. The Trieste-Venice/ Udine-Tarvisio railway, with all its branch lines, is directly connected to the Port of Monfalcone. A new and modern railway connection to a simple non electrified track assures connections with the freight yard located 2 km away. The special ring structure and feeder line makes it easy to serve the wharfs and the yards, thus allowing companies to make use of complete and integrated transport services.

There are 70 km of rails serving all docks of the port of Trieste. More than 100 trains a week link Trieste by direct service to the productive and industrial areas of North- East Italy (Cervignano Transhipment Terminal, Padua Transhipment Terminal,

Deliverable 5.2 2-128 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Bologna Transhipment Terminal, Milan Certosa), the South of Germany (also connected to Northern Germany), Austria (also connected to Switzerland), Hungary, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Hungary (also connected to the border with Ukraine), serving an extremely varied economic hinterland with a growing development. To reach the reference markets in Central and Eastern Europe, highly specialised intermodal services in November 2008 have been developed, using direct trains from the port of Trieste to Prague-Lovisice. This new intermodal maritime service joins the other services offered by Trenitalia connecting Trieste to Villaco, Salzburg, Linz, Vienna, Budapest and to the 19 weekly couples of trains of rolling highway moving trucks from Turkey to Trieste and on to the markets of Central Europe. In 2007, more than 180,000 TEUs were carried by 3,271 trains, out of which 1,541 for containers only.

Figure 2-39 MoS potential corridor 5 (The eastern & western segments of the North Adriatic ports cluster) and interconnection with the main railway networks

Two railway lines connect the port of Rijeka with its hinterland and also to the European railway network: single railway line Rijeka – Zagreb is Vb Pan-European railway line and railway line Rijeka - Ljubljana. However, the rail connections are characterized by inadequate capacity and their upgrading is falling behind schedule.

The port of Zadar is connected with his hinterland with two railroad tracks, those from Lika and Una, and from Zagreb with all european neighbour countries. Lika's

Deliverable 5.2 2-129 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study railroad track stretches from Zadar, via Knin, Gospić and Karlovac to Zagreb (total length of track is 424 km). Una's railroad track stretches from Zadar, via Knin, Bihać and Sisak to Zagreb (total length of track is 418 km). The track is electrified.

All terminals at the port of Koper are equipped with adequate railway infrastructure. In general, 470 wagons per day arrive or depart from port. Approximately 70% of the goods moving to or from the port are transported by train. Single track line up to Divača transport app. 40% of all cargo that Slovenian railway transport and app. two third of all cargo, that is loaded and unloaded from ships in port of Koper. Just one third of cargo in Koper is destinated for Slovenian consumers, the greater part of it travels to Austria, Italia, East and Middle European markets. This creates a bottleneck along the single track up to Divača, that prevents the further growth of goods traffic on the whole of the Slovenian railway network. Thus, the creation of an efficiently railway connection up to Divača is needed.

The current situation of the railway network is generally characterized by poor operational and technical characteristics. However, in terms of the expected rail infrastructure modernization and construction works at local and international level:

• For many years the construction of a second track line or a new line between Divača and Koper has been under examination. The relevant project was included in the National Programme of Railway Infrastructure Development in the 1996, but it was never realized. The project was once again included in the National Development Programme up to 2023 and should be realized by the end of 2010 or 2015 at the latest. Higher permeability (today just 78%) will for sure induce the alleviation of road bottlenecks and rail bottlenecks too.

• The first track from Zagreb to Rijeka will not be built upon the existing single railway line, but a completely new double railway line will be constructed on a new corridor. The second track from Karlovac to Zagreb and from Dugo selo to Botovo, will be built on the existing route, with the necessary reconstruction in terms of direction and altitude, which would make it possible to attain the speeds up to 160 km/h. With the freight train speeds, which would almost be doubled (55 km/h) and the maximum driving speed of 120 km/h, the leveled rail line will provide for a substantial increase of the annual capacity, from the actual 5 mil. to 25 mil. tons of cargo.

• It was envisaged that the modernization and recostruction of Lika line which be connected to the port of Zadar would have been completed by 2004, but the Lika line reconstruction has not finished yet.

Based on the above mentioned data some estimations in regards to the competition between road and rail freight transport can be made:

• The realization of the second railway line (at the end of 2010 or 2015 at the latest) that connects the port of Koper will definitely alter the existing

Deliverable 5.2 2-130 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

situation in favor of rail transport. But also following the railway modernization the continuation of the unfavourable progress regarding increase volume and share of road traffic can still be expected to take place. Road transport is more competitive because of its speed, lower costs, reliability and greater flexibility than other transport modes. At the same time also production and trade of high value products that require road transport increases, but production and trade of bulk cargo, that is traditionaly transported by rail, decreases. Therefore it is not expected that modal shift from road to rail will produce a bottleneck to rail.

• It is the Vb leg Botovo – Zagreb –Rijeka where the largest growth of freight traffic is expected. The rail line which is to connect the port of Rijeka will provide for a substantial increase of the annual capacity, from the actual 5 mil. to 25 mil. ton of cargo, which means that rail can become an important competitive mode against road transport. Construction of the rail infrastructure will take approximately five to six years, which means that it will not have been completed prior to 2015.

• Regarding the permanent oscillating of cargo transport, the future prospects of the port of Zadar are primarily related to serving passenger traffic and secondarily cargo traffic, which means that improving the railway network within a short term time horizon will not play such an important role as in the case of other ports of this cluster. In case cargo transport increases to/from the port of Zadar, the modernization of the Lika railway line will definitely make rail more competitive against the road transport mode and could alleviate road bottlenecks.

• The intermodal services and new railway connections to/from the port of Trieste responded to market requests, anticipating an increase in the next three years from the actual weekly couple of trains, to a daily connection (six weekly couples), guaranteeing a high quality service between the port of Trieste and Central Europe. It is estimated that rail can transport 30.000 wagons in 4 years and can contribute to reductions in externalities resulting from road transport as well as bottlenecks. • Due to the construction and modernization of its railway infrastructure the port of Monfalcone can exploit its railway connection to a great extent, which prevent the creation of bottlenecks and alleviates traffic congestion on the road network.

Upon the current planning of the railway reconstruction it is apparent, that until 2015 the current situation regarding competition between the road and rail transport modes will not change, except from the case of the port of Koper. Meanwhile, the modernization of the Italian railway network allows the shifting of significant cargo volumes to rail via the ports of Trieste and Monfalcone.

Deliverable 5.2 2-131 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Road – Rail competition in the western segment of the North Adriatic ports cluster

The main Italian ports included in this particular cluster are Ancona and Ravenna. Taking into account the current situation of the ports, but also their potential future prospects, in accordance to the strategic development goals they have set, it can be claimed that in regards to: • the port of Ancona, the port has an internal rail network which reaches several berths but is not connected to the national network. As for passengers, the city’s central station is 3 km away from the port and within proximity to the Passengers Terminal; • the port of Ravenna, the port is directly connected to the main transport networks of Italy, and can be easily reached from the main Italian and European centres. The Port's potential is strengthened due to the fact that it is part of the European Freeways Network and in the "Adriatic Corridor" project. From the above and based upon the current planning for the course of the upgrading and constructing the foreseen rail and road transport infrastructures in the catchment area of the western segment of the North Adriatic Italian ports cluster, it is apparent that until 2015 the competition between the two transport modes will virtually remain “non-existent” in the case of the port of Ancona but could increase in the case of the port of Ravenna according to the development of Corridor V Lisbon Kiev (Railway axis Lyon - Turin - Milan - Venice -Trieste/Koper - Ljubljana -Budapest). B. Unimodal road transport flows competition Significant is also the percentage of the trade flows moved by means of road only (unimodal road transport flows) between the catchment areas of the examined port clusters with origin/ destination most of the North and Central regions of Italy and the countries of Croatia, Poland Hungary Austria and of course Slovenia via the primary road axes of the region. These flows are presented in detail per O-D pair in Annex 3.

In the same Annex the analytical data (per O-D pair) emerging from the change caused to the estimated unimodal road transport flows on the do-nothing scenario of 2015, by the operation of the proposed indicative MoS link are also included. The outcome from this comparative assessment is briefly presented in the table that follows.

Table 2-22 Difference in unimodal road transport flows following the operation of the indicative MoS link on the MoS potential corridor 5

Road Road Competition Competition Cluster - Indicative link (Do-Nothing (Master Plan Difference Difference (%) Cluster 2015) Assignment) 1000 tons 1000 tons from 10c to 10a Ancona - Koper 734 418 -316 -43% from 10a to 10c Koper - Ancona 903 594 -309 -34% 1.637 1.012 -625 -38%

Deliverable 5.2 2-132 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

2.3.6.4 Indicative estimation of modal shift The current trade flows between the eastern & western segments of the North Adriatic ports clusters are currently served both by: ƒ Road only transport through the existing road network (such as A14, A13, E70), and

ƒ The existing maritime services.

The modal shift estimations for this MoS corridor is based on excess freight flows additional to the ones served today by existing maritime services, that could be shifted from the road to the maritime network, which mainly involve flows traveled between Ancona and Koper using part of autostrada Adriatica A14 also part of A13 part of E70, a journey of approximately 530 km. The shortest paths examined are displayed in the figure that follows. Given the potential excess freight volume of approximately 1.100 ktns, estimated that could be transported on the indicative MoS link examined, and the above mentioned travel distance, the total of travelled ton/kms that could be shifted off the road amount to approximately 550 million ton/kms.

Figure 2-40 Indicative shortest paths displaying the two alternative ways of connection between the catchment areas of the eastern & western segments of the North Adriatic ports cluster

Regarding the improvement of the existing connection Igoumenitsa – Ancona in the context of the specific proposal which was submitted by the industry for feeding freight volumes in the “Two Seas” service concept towards the port of Koper (and

Deliverable 5.2 2-133 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study vice versa) the analysis presented in the MoS 3 corridor shows good potential for justifying the improvement of the existing service, as suggested.

2.3.6.5 Indicative service profile of the MoS link A relevant search in regards to the characteristics of the existing vessels operating on the Adriatic-Ionian corridor and which could potentially handle the serving of the expected trade flows of the specific line, led to the selection of a Ro-Ro vessel with capacity 140 trailers. The typical commercial speed (service speed) for this vessel would be about 20 knots given a maximum vessel speed of 28 knots. Following the elaboration of the relevant data, on the basis of the assumptions previously presented in the chapter that discussed the methodological approach for determining the indicative service profile, it can be said that a ship with this capacity travelling with the specified speed, could serve the expected demand of the line with two (2) sailings per week for the first two years of operation. The service frequency will be increased to four (4) and five (5) sailings per week for the 3rd & 4th year and 5th year of operation of the line respectively. The travel time for a one direction trip of length approximately 165 nautical miles is about 9 hours. For five roundtrips per week the total sailing time of the ship is approximately 3,8 days while the total turnaround time is excluded. Thus, it is estimated that a single vessel would be sufficient for the proposed service. The above calculations were conducted separately for each of the first five (5) years of the line’s operation. The corresponding data for each year of operation examined are provided in Annex 4.

2.3.6.6 Economic viability assessment of the MoS link The economic viability assessment of the service of this particular indicative MoS link was carried out in line with the methodology that was presented in chapter 2.2.7 and the indicative service profile that was described in Annex 4 for each of the first five (5) years of the line’s operation. The assessment findings show that this MoS link displays a slightly negative balance of revenues over cost and are stabilized in positive exploitation results after the second year of its operation. Meanwhile, it is estimated that during the fifth year of operation (2014) the demand for the particular service would have reached the levels of the forecasted demand for 2015. The calculation form outcome regarding this fifth year of operation is presented in the figure that follows. The findings of the economic viability assessment of the service produced on an annual basis are presented in Annex 5.

Deliverable 5.2 2-134 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-41 MoS link economic viability assessment results- Year 5

Deliverable 5.2 2-135 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

2.3.7 MoS potential corridor 6: EMR – Middle East ports cluster & Central/ South Aegean ports cluster, including their respective catchment areas (Indicative MoS link Piraeus - Limassol)

The two port clusters connected by this MoS corridor are the EMR – Middle East ports cluster and the Central/ South Aegean ports cluster. More specifically, the ports involved in the Central/ South Aegean cluster comprise of Piraeus, Lavrio, Rafina, Eleysina, Korinthos, Chania, Heraklion, Chalkida and a number of smaller island ports. The EMR-Middle East ports cluster includes the port of Limassol from Cyprus from the core study area and 10 ports from the wider study area which are: Alexandria/Dekheila, Port Said and Damietta from Egypt; Haifa and Ashdod from Israel; Beirut from Lebanon; Lattakia and Tartous from Syria; Mersin/Tasucu and Iskenderun from Turkey.

The port of Limassol is the main national sea–gate of all imported and exported products of Cyprus and due to its strategic geographical position it also has the potential to serve container transhipment volumes for countries of the Middle East.

The Egyptian cluster ports include Alexandria, which is the biggest port in Egypt, (with Dekheila port being its natural extension), Damietta port which has the largest container terminal and Port Said strategically located at the end of the Suez canal as a gateway for intercontinental flows into and out of the Mediterranean area (Persian Gulf, Indian Ocean, Asia, Pacific, etc.) through the canal. The port of Alexandria is primarily an import/export gateway while at Damietta and Port Said transshipment traffic is predominant.

The Syrian ports of Tartous and Lattakia handle both general and containerized cargo traffic and are well placed geographically to serve transit traffic for Iran, Iraq and Jordan.

Beirut is the primary port of Lebanon displaying significant container throughput and apart from being a national import/export gateway, it serves transit traffic to Iraq as well as transhipment traffic to/from Turkey, Syria, Egypt and other eastern Mediterranean countries.

The two most important ports of Israel are Haifa and Ashdod which are the country’s maritime gateways and display significant container throughput volumes.

The Turkish ports of Mersin and Iskenderun mainly serve the country’s south eastern regions and play a rather secondary role in the national port system.

The dominant port within this cluster is the port of Piraeus, which is largest and busiest port in Greece. It is a major commercial port handling a variety of cargoes (general cargo, containers, Ro-Ro, cars etc) and also serving growing transhipment container traffic. The port is an international centre of transit and regional trade; it is the second container handling port in Eastern Mediterranean region and placed among

Deliverable 5.2 2-136 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study the first 10 ports in container traffic in Europe. In addition, the port of Piraeus is ranked as the first passenger port in terms of annual volume of passengers served in the Mediterranean Sea and one of the largest worldwide. The port is the main passenger hub between the hinterland the Aegean islands and Crete as well as the main maritime gateway to the European Union at its southeastern end.

Other ports of the cluster act complementarily to Piraeus and in a way partly alleviate the congested port of Piraeus mainly in terms of passenger flows (Rafina) but also for freight (Eleysina, Lavrio) especially for certain types of cargo such as dry bulk, general cargo and Ro-Ro traffic. The remaining island ports of the cluster on the Aegean Sea serve mainly passenger transport and the demand for cargo services are quite limited and are mostly centered around the serving the needs of their local communities.

The objective of the proposed MoS corridor between the EMR – Middle East & Central/ South Aegean ports clusters, and indicatively the connection between Limassol and Piraeus, is to offer a high quality Ro-Pax service (since such a connection does not currently exist) with prime emphasis to serving the existing passenger demand, mainly between Greece and Cyprus, and secondarily to serve the existing trade flows, mainly between Cyprus and Greece & Balkan countries) which at present are served by the existing maritime connections.

2.3.7.1 Potential trade flows of the MoS corridor – Catchment Area identification – Interrelation to EMR intermodal corridors - Interconnection with road transport network On the potential MoS corridor, the forecasts show the potential for a total volume of about 1.200 – 2.100 ktns per year (both directions) by 2015 between the EMR – Middle East & Central/ South Aegean ports clusters. This amount is equivalent to approximately 65.000 - 115.000 units (trucks/ trailers) for the same year.

In the following figure, along this proposed MoS corridor the maritime link between Piraeus (Greece) - Limassol (Cyprus) is presented as an indicative MoS link, serving the potential volumes estimated to form the future demand (2015) between the examined clusters. In the same figure, the flows of the particular indicative MoS link are also presented to/ from the source origins/ final destinations of the volumes.

Deliverable 5.2 2-137 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-42 MoS flows in the indicative MoS link Piraeus - Limassol (MoS potential corridor 6) (EMR – Middle East ports cluster & Central/ South Aegean ports cluster)

The above presentation of the MoS flows on the indicative MoS link Piraeus – Limassol for the examined potential MoS corridor between the EMR – Middle East & Central/ South Aegean ports clusters, also identifies the routes which are likely to be followed for the transportation of the cargo to be moved along the particular corridor.

The particular pairs of zones between the catchment areas of the EMR – Middle East & Central/ South Aegean ports clusters with their respective values of the potential estimated demand for the year 2015 are presented in detail at the following table.

Table 2-23 Estimated potential demand in 2015 between the EMR – Middle East & Central/ South Aegean ports clusters

MIN MAX MoS 6 Potential Potential (from cluster - ORIGIN_ZONE DESTINATION_ZONE Demand Demand to cluster) 2015 2015 (ktns) (ktns)

from 1 to 6 Egypt Attiki 270 450

Cyprus Attiki 175 290

Syria Attiki 90 150

Deliverable 5.2 2-138 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

MIN MAX MoS 6 Potential Potential (from cluster - ORIGIN_ZONE DESTINATION_ZONE Demand Demand to cluster) 2015 2015 (ktns) (ktns)

Israel Attiki 50 80

Lebanon Attiki 25 40

Egypt Kriti 15 25

Egypt Sterea Ellada 10 15

Cyprus Kriti 10 15

Egypt Peloponnisos 5 10

Syria Kriti 5 10

REST 25 40

1 - 6 total 680 1.125

MIN MAX Potential Potential ORIGIN_ZONE DESTINATION_ZONE Demand Demand 2015 2015 (ktns) (ktns)

Attiki Cyprus 215 360

Attiki Israel 145 240

Attiki Syria 60 100

Attiki Egypt 55 90 from 6 to 1 Attiki Lebanon 30 50

Sterea Ellada Cyprus 10 15

Kriti Israel 5 10

Peloponnisos Cyprus 5 10

Sterea Ellada Israel 5 10

Peloponnisos Israel 5 10

REST 20 35

6 - 1 total 555 930

Grand Total 1.235 2.055

Deliverable 5.2 2-139 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

According to the estimated future demand (2015), the strongest pair in terms of volume from the EMR – Middle East ports cluster to the Central/ South Aegean ports cluster is that from Egypt to the region of Attiki (Greece), with a total volume of approximately of 270 - 450 ktns. At the same direction, the pairs Cyprus – Attiki (Greece) and Syria – Attiki (Greece), are also dominant with maximum volumes of approximately of 290 and 150 ktns, respectively. At the opposite direction and from the Central/ South Aegean ports cluster to the EMR – Middle East ports cluster, the pair Attiki (Greece) – Cyprus is the strongest one with an estimated volume of approximately of 215 - 360 ktns, while the pairs Attiki (Greece) – Israel and Attiki (Greece) – Syria are also dominant with maximum 240 and 100 ktns, respectively.

From the above forecasted demand for 2015 it is estimated that 500 ktns will constitute the demand to be served by the existing maritime links.

The percentage split by direction is estimated to be 45% eastbound and 55% westbound and appears to be quite well balanced per direction thus providing a sound basis for the operation of the service.

Apart from the forecasted demand for cargo between the regions it should be noted that in accordance to the estimations made from the relevant case study examined in Volume III of Deliverable 1, the estimated passenger traffic that could be attracted by a potential future maritime service would range from 73.500 to 123.200 passengers annually for both directions.

Possible extensions to the MoS corridor that could be considered involve southbound connections primarily to Egypt (port of Alexandria) and secondarily to Lebanon and Israel. An intermediary stop at the island of could also be considered especially during the holiday seasons since it is a favourite tourist destination and could possibly supplement the connection with additional passenger traffic with minimum deviation from the route.

The diagrammatic depiction of the specific potential MoS corridor between the EMR – Middle East & Central/ South Aegean ports clusters and their hinterlands are presented in the figure that follows.

Deliverable 5.2 2-140 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-43 Map of the MoS 6 potential corridor (EMR – Middle East & Central/ South Aegean ports clusters)

In the case of the Central/ South Aegean ports cluster and of the port of Piraeus in particular, the catchment area consists of the Greek regions of Attiki, Sterea Ellada, Peloponnissos and Kriti. In the case of the ports of the EMR – Middle East cluster and of the port of Limassol in particular, the catchment area is located at the countries of Egypt, Syria, Israel and Lebanon.

The interrelationship between the MoS potential corridor 6 and the relevant intermodal maritime-based corridors in the EMR as previously defined at an earlier stage of the study (Deliverable 1, Vol. II, Chapter 4) is displayed in the following figure. From the figure, it can be seen that the potential MoS corridor 6 lies upon the Middle East-Europe intermodal corridor which is dominated by Lo-Lo traffic.

Deliverable 5.2 2-141 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-44 Map of the MoS potential corridor 6 in relation to the Middle East-Europe intermodal corridor

Concerning general trade flows that could potentially be served by this maritime connection, the westbound flows towards Greece involve the countries of Egypt (crude materials), Cyprus (crude materials, food and live animals), Syria (crude materials) and Israel (chemicals, manufactured goods). On its eastbound direction trade flows destined to Cyprus (manufactured goods, food and live animals), Israel (crude materials), Egypt (crude materials, manufactured goods) and Syria (food and live animals) could be served.

In terms of intermodal and logistics developments on the two nodal points of this MoS corridor, the most important ones are taking place in relation to the port of Pireaus and involve the pending development of the “Thriasio Pedio” Freight Centre between Athens and Elefsina (1.000.000 sq m for rail yards and freight terminal and 600.000 sq m for freight) and its rail connection to the port of Pireaus- Neo Ikonio- Thriasio rail connection which are expected to further reinforce the role of the port of Pireaus as a transshipment hub since it will be connected to the national and international rail network and provide the opportunity of serving other parts of Greece and the Balkan peninsula.

Therefore, it can be said that the Ro-Pax service proposed to operate on the MoS potential corridor 6 provides a different alternative to the wider Middle East-Europe

Deliverable 5.2 2-142 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study intermodal corridor which is dominated by Lo-Lo traffic thus widening potential intermodal transport options available with the introduction of a new type of service whilst also providing the possibility of new freight and passenger destinations firstly, by connecting mainland Europe to the island of Cyprus (meeting the cohesion objective for peripheral regions of the EU) and secondly, via Cyprus which would act as a hub for its neighbouring region by exploiting its existing maritime connections with this region.

The map that follows presents the road network to be used in the catchment area of the cluster ports to/ from initial origins/final destinations of the cargo flows to the zones (countries/ regions) within this area also including the road TEN-T network in order to illustrate the interconnection of the examined potential MoS corridor with these networks.

Deliverable 5.2 2-143 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-45 MoS potential corridor 6 (EMR – Middle East & Central/ South Aegean ports clusters) and interconnection with TEN-T road network

Deliverable 5.2 2-144 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Given the identification of the specific indicative MoS link as previously defined, and in regards to the surface accessibility of the ports involved the following should be noted :

ƒ The port of Pireaus has direct access to road network infrastructure and more specifically, it has direct access to the national road network Athina – Korinthos and Athina – Thessaloniki (PATHE Highway).

ƒ The port of Limassol has direct access to road network infrastructure, while it has two entrances with one lane per direction. The distance between the national highway network (Highway connecting all major cities) and the port is 3 km.

2.3.7.2 Articulation of the indicative MoS Link demand According to the methodology that has been developed and applied for the estimation of the potential future trade flows (2015) of the predominant/indicative MoS link, in the case of the MoS corridor 6, the total demand that this specific line may serve in the year 2015 for both directions will range from 400 ktns/year (pessimistic scenario) to 1.250 ktns/year (optimistic scenario) with the moderate scenario at the level of 850 ktns/year. This potential demand is expected to reach to the above levels within a six (6) year period with an annual average increase rate of 50%. In the table that follows, the evolution of demand on this particular case is presented in detail. This estimation is directly related to the competition analysis presented in the next section. Table 2-24 Evolution of demand on the indicative link of the MoS potential corridor 6

Estimated AVG Estimated Link Demand (“Master Plan” Corridor Estimated run*) Cluster - Indicative Demand Corridor Cluster link (run "all Demand open"*) (run "all MIN MAX open"*) YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 YEAR 5 YEAR 6 Piraeus - from 6 to 1 555 930 743 86 134 182 326 374 566 Limassol Limassol - from 1 to 6 680 1.125 903 103 161 219 392 450 681 Piraeus 1.235 2.055 1.645 189 294 400 718 824 1.247 56% 36% 79% 15% 51% * refer to Chapter 2 The analytical tables presenting the demand of the indicative MoS link per O-D pair, for the 6th year, during which it is estimated that the demand for the MoS indicative link will have reached the levels of the expected values for 2015 are displayed in Annex 3.

Deliverable 5.2 2-145 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

2.3.7.3 Competition overview The competition analysis which is presented next concerns only competitive intermodal maritime transport flows between the O-D pairs of the catchment area of the specific MoS corridor, and not unimodal road transport flows, since the road only transport mode for trade exchange between the catchment areas of the corridor is not a feasible choice - the distance to be covered is irrationally extensive to consist a competitive choice to the maritime corridor. Regarding the maritime part of the intermodal transport flows between the O-D pairs of the catchment area of this specific MoS corridor, the current trade flows between the EMR – Middle East & Central/ South Aegean ports clusters are served by Lo – Lo and Ro – Ro maritime links (graphically presented in the following figure), via the port of Piraeus, which is the origin/ destination of all the maritime connections between Greece and the Med Area countries (EMR – Middle East port cluster).

Figure 2-46 Existing maritime links between the EMR – Middle East & Central/ South Aegean ports clusters

More specifically, there are several maritime connections (mainly Lo-Lo) linking Cyprus with neighbouring countries (Syria, Lebanon, Israel, Egypt) through the port of Limassol, with frequency one (1) or two (2) voyages per week, that mainly serve the inter-country trade between these countries and Cyprus, and secondarily the inter- country trade of the same countries with Greece and Balkan countries. This observation is reinforced by the operation of direct Lo-Lo connections of ports of Mersin (Turkey), Haifa (Israel) and Alexandria (Egypt) with the port of Piraeus, with frequency one (1) voyage per week. The connection between Cyprus and Greece is

Deliverable 5.2 2-146 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study served by direct Lo-Lo and unaccompanied Ro-Ro maritime links both with a frequency of one (1) voyage per week.

The origin/ destination of the cargo flows served by the above described system of maritime links between the EMR – Middle East & Central/ South Aegean ports clusters, is characterized by the dominant role of the Attika Region (Greece) as the most significant pole of attraction and production of the cargo exchange between Greece and the EMR – Middle East cluster countries.

Given the catchment area of the specific MoS corridor and the prevailing conditions of competition in the wider area, an assumption is made that during its first year of operation the line will manage to attract from existing maritime connections flows of approximately 190 ktns, for both directions, with origin/ destination the pairs Attiki, Peloponnisos, Sterea Ellada and Kriti with Cyprus, Syria, Lebanon, Israel and Egypt. It is estimated that these flows will reach the expected levels of the year 2015 during the next years of operation of the line with origin/ destination the same regions that were mentioned above. In this six year time period it is estimated that the specific line will manage to gradually attract from existing competitive maritime connections freight traffic with origin/ destination the catchment area of this MoS corridor at a percentage of around 10% on average. The competition is mainly centred round the existing connections of Piraeus with Alexandria, Haifa and Limassol. In the table that follows, in conjunction to the evolution of demand on the indicative link, the estimation of the evolution of demand for the total of the existing maritime links being competitive to this link is also presented. Table 2-25 Evolution of demand on the competitive existing maritime links of the MoS potential corridor 6

Estimated AVG Estimated Existing Maritime Links Demand Corridor Estimated ("Master Plan" run*) Cluster - Indicative Demand Corridor Cluster link (run "all Demand open"*) (run "all MIN MAX open"*) YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 YEAR 5 YEAR 6 Piraeus - from 6 to 1 555 930 743 1.090 1.042 994 850 802 610 Limassol Limassol - from 1 to 6 680 1.125 903 1.323 1.266 1.208 1.035 977 746 Piraeus 1.235 2.055 1.645 2.414 2.308 2.202 1.884 1.779 1.355 -4% -5% -14% -6% -24% * refer to Chapter 2 The analytical tables presenting the demand of the competitive existing maritime links per O-D pair, for the 6th year, during which it is estimated that the demand for the MoS indicative link will have reached the levels of the expected values for 2015 are displayed in Annex 3.

Deliverable 5.2 2-147 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Concerning competition on the inland part of the intermodal transport flows between the O-D pairs of the catchment area of the specific MoS corridor, and specifically for competition between the road and rail transport modes, the current situation as recorded as well as the future situation (2015) as estimated is being described in the following paragraphs for the Central/ South Aegean ports cluster. The main railway network serving the catchment area of the Central/ South Aegean port cluster is shown in the figure that follows.

Road – Rail competition in the Central/ South Aegean ports cluster

The main ports included in this cluster are the ports of Piraeus, Korinthos, Elefsina and Layrio. All of these ports are not connected to the main railway network of Greece, which is particularly peculiar at least for the commercial port of Piraeus, which is the largest port in the country and has an important container terminal but is yet to be connected to the rail network. As such competition between these two transport modes is currently non-existent.

Figure 2-47 MoS potential corridor 6 (EMR – Middle East & Central/ South Aegean ports clusters) and interconnection with the main railway network

In the future, given the relatively restricted catchment area of this particular cluster within the Greek territory, and taking into account:

• the upgrading - modernization of existing axes of the national railway network, such as the axis Patra - Athens - Thessaloniki- Idomeni/ Promahonas, aiming at developing a high speed double line at its main route (Patra - Athens - Thessaloniki), signaling and electrification for the entire axis, (expected average time horizon for completion of these projects being 2018),

Deliverable 5.2 2-148 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

• the local projects planned for the improvement/ facilitation of the rail connection of the above ports with the main rail network of Greece (estimated average time horizon for the completion of these projects being 2016, except for the port of Piraeus where the railway line is expected to be completed within the next two years),

• the integrated planning and management of the entire port system of the Region of Attiki provided for in the Law for the General Spatial Planning and Sustainable Development of Greece including:

o the definition of the complementarity of the ports of the area (Praeus, Rafina, Lavrio) in conjunction with the distribution of the coastal navigation and freight services between the ports, and

o the conversion of the Port Fund of Corinthos into a Port Authority and its expected operation as a commercial and transit port for hazardous cargo transport both within the country’s boundaries and beyond them within the context of the completion of the sea freight infrastructure of the wider industrial and wholesale trade area of the Attiki region,

• the comparatively higher cost of road transport,

• the new charging policy that the Greek Railways Organisation (OSE) is expected to implement in order to make rail transport more competitive, as well as its market development policy aiming at striking agreements with “new clients,

A differentiation of some degree is expected to occur concerning the current situation, characterized by the almost total domination of the road transport mode regarding freight transportation to/ from the ports of this specific cluster.

Of course, on the other hand the development works taking place for upgrading the quality of the road connections in Greece is not negligible. The most important projects/ works taking place in the catchment area of this cluster within the Greek borders include the upgrading of the existing road axis Ε75, the in-progress upgrading of the Corinthos - Patra - Pyrgos - Tsakona Axis and the construction of the Eastern Peloponnesian Road Corinthos - Tripoli - Kalamata and Lefktro - Sparti (expected average time horizon for the completion of these works being 2015).

Based on the above overview some general estimations can be made in regards to the shape and form of the competition between road and rail freight transport in the catchment area of this particular cluster in the future and specifically until the time horizon used for the projections conducted in the context of this study (2015). In addition, taking into account the current situation of the ports, but also their potential future prospects, in accordance to the strategic development goals they have set, it can be claimed that in regards to:

Deliverable 5.2 2-149 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

• the in-progress rail works of the port of Piraeus connecting the port with the rail network through the construction of a rail station by the port, are expected to be completed within the next two years, leading to the estimation that the competition results between the two modes will be “visible” until the time horizon examined in the current study, 2015. Undoubtedly, beyond this time horizon the competition profile will be considerably altered in favour of the rail transport, since it being one of the main goals both from the port’s development view and from the national’s policy view. However, the estimation percentage of the attracted amount of the road freight transport from rail and for the time horizon until 2015 is approximately 25%,

• the port of Elefsina, similarly, the planned works for the upgrading of the existing rail network in the wider area in conjunction with the provisions of the General Spatial Planning for the Region of Attiki port system, and in particular for the Ikonio - Elefsina part of the network together with the shipyard infrastructure in Perama and the Thriasio Freight Centre, aim at operating as an integrated entity of freight/ combined transport and logistics. The above lead to the estimation that the goods transport pattern will considerably change in the entire Region of Attiki and as such in the port of Elefsina (the time horizon is difficult to be estimated). Within the context and the requirements of the current study it is estimated that the competition between the two modes for the port of Elefsina will be in a very initial and as such, marginal stage in the year 2015 and as a result is considered as non- existent,

• the port of Lavrio and until the time horizon of year 2015, the rail infrastructure projects concerning the port’s catchment area include the Attki Suburban Rail works. In particular, for the Region of Eastern Attiki the initial studies on the extension of the line towards Lavrio have been completed and their implementation is estimated for the year 2014. The parallel planned extension of the road infrastructure as well in the port’s catchment area (extension of Attiki Road and connection with the port of Lavrio and the Athens - Lamia national highway) will be implemented during the same time horizon and indicates the domination of the road freight transport to and form the port against rail until the target year 2015. A potential rebalance of this percentage in favor of rail transport could be attained during a later time horizon.

From the above it is evident that until 2015 and based upon the current planning for the course of the upgrading and constructing the foreseen rail and road transport infrastructures in the catchment area of the Central/ South Aegean ports cluster, the estimations lead to the conclusion that the competition between the two modes will remain “idle” or in a very initial stage in order to be safely quantified, except for the Piraeus case.

Deliverable 5.2 2-150 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Despite the fact that the under progress and planned road transport projects in the wider area of the accesses to/from the port of Piraeus, are being designed with high traffic capacity, quality and safety characteristics it is probable that cases of traffic speed reduction (even in some cases saturation) will appear in the future (2015), due to the expected traffic increase over time and the positioning of the port in proximity to the main entrance – exit gates of the city. The estimated increase in the use of railway infrastructure for the movement of cargo consignments in the same time period (2015) is expected to bring about significant positive impacts to the flow of road traffic, due to the reduction in the percentage of heavy goods vehicles on the road network. On the other hand, it is noted that there is a need to carefully design the rail infrastructure and the operational characteristics or the port’s railway connection, so as to avoid the creation of a bottleneck in this particular connection, as a result of the shift of transported consignments from the road to the railway network.

2.3.7.4 Indicative estimation of modal shift Taking into account the proposed MoS corridor and the alternative existing maritime connections between the EMR – Middle East & Central/ South Aegean ports clusters it can be stated that no modal shift will take place since Cyprus is an insular nation. However, such a connection would be of significant importance to Cyprus since in regards to passenger transport at international level it is currently connected to Europe only by means of air transport and it would also meet one of the main objectives of sea motorways policy which is “to increase cohesion by improving access to peripheral and island States”13. It should also be noted at this point that the EastMos project Steering Committee is very much in favour of this proposed MoS corridors while such a potential connection is also strongly supported by the Cypriot stakeholders. According to the stakeholders’ views it is unacceptable that the intra-EU passenger transport system of an EU member state is depended solely on one transport mode (air transport) which in way restricts its citizens’ options and flexibility in relation to the EU principle of “free movement of people”. Some people, for their own particular personal reasons, may not wish to travel by air transport while for others the cost factor may prohit it them for doing so. In addition, for Cyprus which is a well-known holiday destination, the absence of a Ro-Pax connection with mainland Europe also means that potential tourists and visitors can not bring along their preferred personal means of transport

13 Article 12a of the TEN-T Guidelines of 29 April 2004- Decision No 884/2004/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 amending decision No 1692/96 on Community guidelines for the development of the trans-European network, OJ L 167, 30.04.2004, p. 1.

Deliverable 5.2 2-151 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study e.g. cars, vans, caravan, motorcycle etc. which further undermines the prospects of the tourist industry of this insular peripheral EU member state.

2.3.7.5 Indicative service profile of the MoS link On the basis of a relevant search conducted in regards to the characteristics of the existing vessels operating in similar lines to the examined one and could potentially undertake the service of the expected trade flows in the particular line, the choice of a Ro-Pax vessel with capacity of 150 trailers and 1.000 passengers was concluded. The typical commercial speed (service speed) for this vessel would be about 20 knots given a maximum vessel speed of approximately 23 knots. After processing the relative data, on the basis of the assumptions presented in detail in the chapter that discussed the methodological approach for determining the indicative service profile, it can be concluded that one (1) vessel of this capacity and of the particular service, could serve the estimated cargo and passenger demand on the link with two (2) sailings per week for the first three (3) years. For the 4th and 5th years one (1) vessel, as previously specified, the service frequency will be increased to three (3) sailing per week while for the sixth year (2015) an additional vessel will be required to be introduced in the line thus, two ships will operate the service with a frequency of three (3) sailings per week- an assumption on which the private investment feasibility analysis that follows, was based upon. The travel distance (one- way) is approximately 530 nautical miles and will be covered in about 27 hours. For three (3) roundtrips per week the total travel time amounts to roughly 7 days. The above calculations were conducted separately for each of the first six (6) years of the line’s operation. The corresponding data for each year of operation examined are provided in Annex 4.

2.3.7.6 Economic viability assessment of the MoS link The economic viability assessment of the service of this particular indicative MoS link was carried out in line with the methodology that was presented in chapter 2.2.7 and the indicative service profile that was described in Annex 4 for each of the first six (6) years of the line’s operation. The assessment findings show that this MoS link initially displays a slightly negative balance of revenues over cost which is stabilized in positive exploitation results after the first year of its operation. Meanwhile, it is estimated that during the sixth year of operation (2015) the demand for the particular service would have reached the levels of the forecasted demand for 2015. It has to be mentioned that the economic viability of this Ro-Pax service is significantly affected by the passenger traffic generated which always entails a certain degree of future uncertainty. The calculation form outcome regarding this sixth year of operation is presented in the figure that follows.

The findings of the economic viability assessment of the service produced on an annual basis are presented in Annex 5.

Deliverable 5.2 2-152 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-48 MoS link economic viability assessment results- Year 6

Deliverable 5.2 2-153 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

2.3.8 MoS potential corridor 7: The eastern segment of the North Adriatic ports cluster & the central segment of the North Adriatic ports cluster & the northern segment of the South Adriatic - Balkan ports cluster, including their respective catchment areas (Indicative MoS link Venice – (Koper) - Ploce14)

The three port clusters connected by this MoS corridor are the eastern segment of the North Adriatic ports cluster (ports of Zadar, Rijeka, Koper, Trieste and Monfalcone), the central segment of the North Adriatic ports cluster (ports of Venice and Chioggia) and the northern segment of the South Adriatic - Balkan ports cluster (ports of Split and Ploce).

The port of Koper, the only Slovenian port, is well situated in the heart of Europe, at the junction of the international trade routes with direct international land transport connections. It is a multi-purpose port sufficiently equipped to accommodate and serve all types of cargoes and acts as an important transit port for Central and Eastern Europe.

Rijeka is the largest Croatian port displaying a significant annual increase in container throughput over the past few years and seeking to re-establish the its former role as a gateway for Central Europe and in particular for Hungary’s sea trade, a role lost to Germany and Slovenia as a result of the Yugoslav war. The port of Zadar specializes mostly in serving liquid and bulk cargo as well as passenger transport.

The port of Trieste handles significant volumes of container traffic, Ro-Ro (especially toward Turkey and Greece) and general cargo. The port of Monfalcone is currently characterised by sea cargo flows different from Ro-Ro traffic, albeit it has a great potential to develop also Ro-Ro traffic if supported by strong infrastructural interventions.

The main advantage of the ports belonging to this cluster is that in comparison to the northern European ports, they lie on the shortest transport route, linking commercial centres in Central and Eastern Europe with Mediterranean countries and the Far East. Sea routes through these ports are in excess of 2.000 nautical miles closer to these waterways than northern European ports. Land routes to the main Central European market centres can be reached through these ports in substantially shorter time allowing faster receipt of goods coupled with lower transport costs.

The geographical position of the port of Venice, north on the Adriatic Sea allows it to act as a gateway of commercial trade between Europe and Asia in the Mediterranean

14 The port of Ploce is located in Republic of Croatia which is one of the Acsession Countries

Deliverable 5.2 2-154 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study basin and also to serve the highly industrialized northern Italian regions. The port handles almost all types of cargo but it should be noted that Ro-Ro traffic served is substantial- approximately 2 million tons in terms of freight carried on trailers and trucks for the year 2006. Most traffic is concentrated on Greek routes (about 94%), with balanced freight flows per direction.

At present the port of Chioggia does not serve significant Ro-Ro and container traffic volumes.

The Port of Ploce is located on the central part of the Croatian Adriatic Coast and is a cargo port of special importance for the Republic of Croatia. Due to its location, it is also of exceptional significance for the economy of the neighbouring state (the port has the status of the official port of Bosnia-Herzegovina), as well as for Serbia and , Hungary and other Central European countries. The port mainly serves general cargo, dry and liquid bulk cargo traffic and the vast proportion of its traffic concerns transit flows to neighbouring countries. The port of Split, which is situated on the south part of the Croatian coast, is the most important Croatian passenger port with significant passengers volumes served annually placing it amongst the top passenger ports in the Mediterranean Sea.

The aim of this link is the provision of a maritime connection along the Adriatic Sea MoS corridor connecting Northern Adriatic ports with the Western ports. The focus of this “triangular” connection serving the upper and central part of the Adriatic would be on Ro-Ro.

2.3.8.1 Potential trade flows of the MoS corridor – Catchment Area identification – Interrelation to EMR intermodal corridors - Interconnection with road transport network On the potential MoS corridor, the forecasts show the potential for a total volume of about 800 – 1.300 ktns per year (both directions) by 2015 between the clusters 9a and 10b. This amount is equivalent to approximately 45.000 – 70.000 units (trucks/ trailers) for the same year.

In the following figure, along the proposed MoS corridor the indicative maritime MoS link Venice (Italy) - Koper (Slovenia) – Ploce (Croatia) is presented, serving the potential volumes estimated to form the future demand (2015) between the examined clusters. In the same figure, the flows of the particular indicative MoS link are also presented to/from the source origins/final destinations of the volumes.

Deliverable 5.2 2-155 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-49 MoS flows in the indicative MoS link Venice – (Koper) – Ploce (MoS potential corridor 7 (The central segment of the North Adriatic & the northern segment of the South Adriatic - Balkan ports clusters)

The above presentation of the MoS flows on the indicative MoS link Venice – Koper – Ploce for the examined potential MoS corridor between the northern segment of the South Adriatic - Balkan cluster & the central segment of the North Adriatic cluster, also identifies the routes which are likely to be followed for the transportation of the cargo to be moved along the particular corridor.

The particular pairs of zones between the catchment areas of the central segment of the North Adriatic port cluster (cluster no. 10b) & the northern segment of the South Adriatic - Balkan ports cluster (cluster 9a) with their respective values of the potential estimated demand for the year 2015 are presented in detail at the following table.

Deliverable 5.2 2-156 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Table 2-26 Estimated potential demand in 2015 between the central segment of the North Adriatic & the northern segment of the South Adriatic - Balkan ports clusters

MIN MAX MoS 7 Potential Potential (from cluster - ORIGIN_ZONE DESTINATION_ZONE Demand Demand to cluster) 2015 2015 (ktns) (ktns)

Veneto Croatia 75 120

from 10b to 9a Lombardia Croatia 65 110

REST 10 15

10b - 9a total 150 245

MIN MAX Potential Potential ORIGIN_ZONE DESTINATION_ZONE Demand Demand 2015 2015 (ktns) (ktns) from 9a to 10b Croatia Veneto 380 630

Croatia Lombardia 225 380

REST 40 70

9a - 10b total 645 1.080

Grand Total 795 1.325

According to the estimated future demand (2015), the strongest pair in terms of volume from the central segment of the North Adriatic cluster to the northern segment of the South Adriatic - Balkan cluster is that from the region of Veneto (Italy) to Croatia with a total volume of approximately of 75 - 120 ktns, followed by the pair Lombardia (Italy) - Croatia at the same direction with a total maximum volume of approximately of 110 ktns. At the opposite direction and from the northern segment of the South Adriatic - Balkan cluster to the central segment of the North Adriatic cluster, the pair Croatia – Veneto (Italy) is the strongest one with an estimated volume of approximately of 380 - 630 ktns, while the pair Croatia – Lombardia (Italy) is also dominant with maximum 380 ktns.

The percentage split by direction is estimated to be 82% northwest-bound and 18% southeast-bound. Therefore, there is significant imbalance of trade flows per direction between the catchment areas of the two involved port clusters which is similar to the general trade pattern between the two corresponding countries - Italy, Slovenia, as recorded in the trade exchange data between these countries for the base year (2006).

Deliverable 5.2 2-157 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

The diagrammatic depiction of the specific potential MoS corridor between the central segment of the North Adriatic & the northern segment of the South Adriatic - Balkan ports clusters and their hinterlands are presented in the following figure.

Figure 2-50 Map of the MoS potential corridor 7 (The eastern segment of the North Adriatic ports cluster & the central segment of the North Adriatic ports cluster & the northern segment of the South Adriatic - Balkan ports cluster)

In the case of the central segment of the North Adriatic port cluster and of the port of Venice in particular, the catchment area consists of the Italian regions of Veneto, Lombardia and Provincia Autonoma Trento. In the case of the ports of the northern segment of the South Adriatic - Balkan ports clusters, Split and Ploce in particular, the catchment area is located at the countries of Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina..

The interrelationship between the MoS potential corridor 7 and the relevant intermodal maritime-based corridors within the study area as previously defined at an earlier stage of the study (Deliverable 1, Vol. II, Chapter 4) is displayed in the following figure.

Deliverable 5.2 2-158 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-51 Map of the MoS potential corridor 7 in relation to the Adriatic-Ionian intermodal corridor

From the above map, it can be seen that the MoS potential corridor 7 lies upon the Adriatic-Ionian intermodal corridor which is amongst the most highly utilized intermodal corridors identified within the wider study area of the Eastern Mediterranean and is characterized primarily by the extensive and long standing provision of Ro-Ro and Ro-Pax services linking primarily Greek and Italian ports and to a lesser degree Italian ports with ports of Western Balkan countries with access to the Adriatic Sea.

The trade flows expected to be served by the MoS potential corridor 7 mainly involve exchanges between Italy and Croatia with the majority of product types destined to Croatia involving manufactured goods and crude materials, while the flows destined to Italy mainly involve crude materials.

In terms of significant intermodal and logistics developments in the nodal points involved in this MoS potential corridor, the following are noted :

The port of Venice foresees the development and re-qualification of parts of the Marghera area to be assigned to the Motorways of the Sea’s traffics with the provision

Deliverable 5.2 2-159 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study of direct connections to rail and main road networks as well as the the development of logistic services and infrastructures which can support MoS traffics.

In view of further exploiting its strategic location in serving Central Europe and neighbouring regions, the construction of a new container terminal and distribution centre of 1 million TEUs capacity in the port of Koper is under way while the port is also involved in the construction of a new large-scale freight village in Sezana (close to the Italian border) aiming to constitute Sezana Freight Village as Central Europe’s major freight centre, which will serve both the ports of Koper, Trieste and Monfalcone as a hinterland dry port connected to the ports by both rail and road.

It should also be noted that with the operation of the proposed maritime service modal shift off the road is expected to be created primarily concerning road journeys made along part of the Axis E65 and part of the Axis E70 (Venice – Dalmatia, approximately 550 km, see figure 2.49) which is further discussed and analysed in section 2.3.8.4.

Currently there is only one existing maritime connection between the North Adriatic ports of Italy and the northern segment of the South Adriatic - Balkan ports cluster Therefore, it is expected that the proposed new Ro-Ro connection on the MoS potential corridor 7 especially due to its triangular service type (Venice- Koper- Ploce) as well as the possibility of reaching a wide range of Central and Eastern European destinations by means of rail transport via the port of Koper would significantly contribute in enhancing transport activity along the Adriatic-Ionian intermodal corridor.

The map that follows presents the road network to be used in the catchment area of the cluster ports to/ from initial origins/final destinations of the cargo flows to the zones (countries/ regions) within this area. On the same map emphasis is placed on the display of the road TEN-T network in order to illustrate the interconnection of the examined potential MoS corridor with these networks.

Deliverable 5.2 2-160 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-52 MoS potential corridor 7 (the central segment of the North Adriatic & the northern segment of the South Adriatic - Balkan ports clusters) and interconnection with TEN-T road network

Deliverable 5.2 2-161 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

It is imperative when examining a potential MoS corridor also to carefully examine the land surface accessibility characteristics of all the ports involved. Given the identification of the specific indicative MoS link as previously defined it should be noted that:

ƒ The Port of Venice is situated on a strategic crossroads position for traffic flows between Corridor V Lisbon-Kiev (road and rail) and Corridor I Berlin-Palermo. The port has direct access to international corridors with regard to Pan European Corridor n. 5 (road and rail) Lisbon – Kiev - EU TEN – T (east – west) project n. 6 intersecting EU TEN T (north south) project n. 1 in Verona (Italy) and EU TEN T (Short Sea Shipping and Motorways of the Sea) project n. 21 in Venice. The distance between the port and the primary national road network A4, which links Turin to Trieste is about 5 km.

ƒ The port of Koper has direct access to the motorway and railway network. The distance between the port and the motorway Koper – Ljubljana is 2 km (Pan European Corridor Va), while the distance between the port and the Pan European Corridor X is 100 km. Furthermore, the port of Koper is connected to the main road axes leading to Trieste and Rijeka (2 km away). The new main entrance to the port is under construction, which will directly connect the motorway to the port.

ƒ The port of Ploce is directly connected to main artery Hungary- Osijek-B.Samac- Zenica-Sarajevo-Mostar-Metkovic-Ploce (E-73) which represents the shortest and the most convenient traffic link between the Baltic and the Adriatic Sea.

2.3.8.2 Articulation of the indicative MoS Link demand According to the methodology that has been developed and applied for the estimation of the potential future trade flows (2015) of the predominant/indicative MoS link, in the case of MoS corridor 7, the total demand that this specific line may serve in the year 2015 for both directions will range from 350 ktns/year (pessimistic scenario) to 980 ktns/year (optimistic scenario) with the moderate scenario at the level of 650 ktns/year. This demand is expected to gradually reach the above mentioned levels approximately within a four (4) year period with an average annual increase rate of 65%. In the table that follows, the evolution of demand on this particular case is presented in detail. This estimation is directly related to the competition analysis presented in the next section.

Deliverable 5.2 2-162 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Table 2-27 Evolution of demand on the indicative link of the MoS potential corridor 7

Estimated AVG Estimated MoS Link Demand Corridor Estimated (Master Plan run*) Cluster - Demand Corridor Indicative link Cluster (run "all Demand open"*) (run "all

open"*) YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 MIN MAX from 10b to 9a Venice - Ploce 150 245 198 50 100 152 200 from 9a to 10b Ploce - Venice 645 1.080 863 197 497 591 788 795 1.325 1.060 247 596 743 988 141% 25% 33% * refer to Chapter 2 The analytical tables presenting the demand of the indicative MoS link per O-D pair, for the 4th year, during which it is estimated that the demand for the MoS indicative link will have reached the levels of the expected values for 2015 are displayed in Annex 3.

2.3.8.3 Competition overview The competition analysis which is presented next involves, both competitive intermodal maritime transport flows, as well as unimodal road transport flows, between the O-D pairs of the catchment area of the specific MoS corridor. A. Intermodal (maritime & road) transport flows competition In regards to the maritime section of the intermodal transport flows between the O-D pairs of the catchment area of this particular MoS corridor, it should be noted that there is no existing maritime connection between the ports of the central segment of the North Adriatic cluster (Venice, Chioggia) and the northern segment of the South Adriatic - Balkan ports cluster (Split, Ploce).

Specifically, the demand recorded between the regions of Veneto & Lombardia (Italy) and Croatia can be served alternatively to road transport, by means of the Ro – Ro maritime link Ancona – Split, which is presented in the following figure. This maritime connection provides an exceptionally high level of service in terms of frequency since two companies are active and provide a total frequency equal to 13 voyages/ week.

Deliverable 5.2 2-163 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-53 Existing maritime links between the catchment areas of the central segment of the North Adriatic & the northern segment of the South Adriatic - Balkan ports clusters

Given the catchment area of the specific MoS corridor, and the conditions of competition that exist in the wider region, an assumption is made that during its first year of operation the line will manage to attract from existing maritime connections, flows of approximately 250ktns, in both directions, with origin/ destination the pairs Croatia with Lombardia and Veneto. It is estimated that these flows will reach the forecasted levels of 2015 during the 4th year of the line’s operation with origin/ destination the same above mentioned regions. In this time period of four years it is estimated that the specific line will manage to gradually attract from existing competitive maritime connections freight traffic with origin/ destination the catchment area of the MoS corridor at a percentage of around 25% on average. The competition is mainly traced on the existing connections of Venice with Ploce and Ancona with Split. In the table that follows, in conjunction to the evolution of demand on the indicative link, the estimation of the evolution of demand for the total of the existing maritime links being competitive to this link is also presented.

Deliverable 5.2 2-164 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Table 2-28 Evolution of demand on the competitive existing maritime links of the MoS potential corridor 7

Estimated Existing Maritime Estimated AVG Links Demand ("Master Plan" Corridor Estimated run*) Cluster - Demand Corridor Indicative link Cluster (run "all Demand open"*) (run "all open"*) MIN MAX YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 from 10b to 9a Venice - Ploce 150 245 198 289 239 187 139 from 9a to 10b Ploce - Venice 645 1.080 863 1.064 765 670 473 795 1.325 1.060 1.353 1.003 857 612 -26% -15% -29% * refer to Chapter 2 The analytical tables presenting the demand of the competitive existing maritime links per O-D pair, for the 4th year, during which it is estimated that the demand for the MoS indicative link will have reached the levels of the expected values for 2015 are displayed in Annex 3. Concerning competition on the inland part of the intermodal transport flows between the O-D pairs of the catchment area of the specific MoS corridor, and specifically for competition between the road and rail transport modes, the current situation as recorded as well as the future situation (2015) as estimated is being described in the following paragraphs for the each of the port clusters involved in the MoS 7 corridor. The main railway networks of the catchment areas of this indicative MoS link are displayed in the figure that follows.

Road – Rail competition in the central segment of the North Adriatic ports cluster

The main Italian ports included in this particular cluster are Venice and Chioggia. The Port of Venice is situated on a strategic crossroads position for traffic flows between Corridor V Lisbon-Kiev (road and rail) and Corridor I Berlin-Palermo. The port has direct access to international corridors with regard to Pan European Corridor n. 5 (road and rail) Lisbon – Kiev - EU TEN – T (east – west) project n. 6 intersecting EU TEN T (north south) project n. 1 in Verona (Italy) and EU TEN T (Short Sea Shipping and Motorways of the Sea) project n. 21 in Venice. The distance between the port and the primary national road network A4, which links Turin to Trieste is about 5 km.

Taking into account the current situation of the ports, but also their potential future prospects, in accordance to the strategic development goals they have set, it can be claimed that in regards to:

• the port of Venice, the Operational Plan forecasts the development of a specific terminal dedicated to the MoS and Short Sea Shipping localized in the Fusina (ex Alumix) Area of Marghera that is located in a strategic positioning for the MoS thanks to the availability of direct connections to rail and mainly road networks.

Deliverable 5.2 2-165 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

• the port of Chioggia, the railway connections are developed through the node of Chioggia train station that links the city to the Trieste-Venice/Udine-Tarvisio axis. Figure 2-54 MoS potential corridor 7 (the central segment of the North Adriatic & the northern segment of the South Adriatic - Balkan ports clusters) and interconnection with the main railway networks

From the above and based upon the development of Corridor I Berlin - Palermo (Railway axis Berlin-Verona-Milan-Bologna-Naples-Messina-Palermo) and Corridor V Lisbon Kiev (Railway axis Lyon - Turin - Milan - Venice -Trieste/Koper - Ljubljana -Budapest), an increase in the use of railway infrastructure for the movement of cargo consignments is expected to bring about significant positive impacts to the flow of road traffic, due to the reduction in the percentage of heavy goods vehicles on the road network.

Road – Rail competition in the northern segment of the South Adriatic - Balkan ports cluster

The main ports included in this cluster are Ploče and Split. Both ports have inadequate railway connection to the main Croatian railway network and to important economic centres in their hinterland. The railway infrastructure requires significant reconstructions and improvements to assure competition with road transport.

Deliverable 5.2 2-166 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

According to the traffic analysis of the port of Ploče, the majority of traffic consists of transit traffic (approximately 84%), other traffic (10%) represents cargo that is distributed between the port and industrial harbours and domestic cargo destined to the Croatian hinterland, while the export cargo represents only 6% of the total traffic. Stretching in the north-south direction there is the railway line Sarajevo -Ploče (195 km) which represents a part of the railway route of the C branch (Budapest - Osijek- B.Samac-Sarajevo-Ploče 809 km long) of the Paneuropean corridor V (Venice - Trieste -Budapest - Uzgorod - Lvov) making thereby the port of Ploče a nodal point along this branch. With corridor Vc the port is completely in line in terms of supplying Central European countries in its hinterland (mostly supplying Bosna & Herzegovina and to a less degree Serbia, Montenegro, Hungary and other Central European countries such as Slovakia, Romania and Poland). The railway line is currently being heavily modernized in order to revitalize the port of Ploče's. The part from Strizivojna-Vrpolje towards Slavonski Šamac is fully electrified, and recently the modernized catenary has been put into operation.

Regarding data for the port of Split, it serves mainly freight transport generated from the industry around the bay of Kaštelan and to a lesser degree international freight transport. With the end of the war in this region and the deblocation of the Lika railway (which is the only connection to the Croatian hinterland), the possibility has emerged to revitalize and redefine Split as a commercial port. The forthcoming modernization of the The Ogulin-Knin line, also known as the "Lička pruga", or Lika line is part of the railway connection between Zagreb and Split. As of 2007, this line is being heavily upgraded with many sharp bends and grades removed in order to allow tilting trains to travel at nearly full speed on most parts of the track. Reducing travel time from Split to Zagreb by around a third, to 5-6 hours. This track was not intended as the shortest distance between Zagreb and Split. The problems faced are that as the line was constructed a long time ago and contained many curves (often in difficult terrain), services were slow and speeds severely restricted. The modernization has involved rebuilding complete sections of track, straightening many curves, by repositioning and by renewing track and enabling for higher speeds. Electrification of the line is not scheduled for the near future. Lika railway (which will shorten the voyage from Split to Zagreb from 10 to 5 hours), and the future opening of the UNA railway, will assist in regaining lost traffic and attracting new cargo flows.

The improvements concerning road connections primarily involve:

• The Adriatic highway (E-65) that stretches from Trieste via Rijeka and Split. The remaining part of the modern motorway is currently being built (to be completed by the end of 2009) and will constitute the fastest connection between the port of Ploče and Zagreb.

• The main road (E-73) that stretches along the road of corridor Vc (Budapest - Osijek – Bosanski Šamac – Zenica – Sarajevo – Mostar – Metković – Ploče)

Deliverable 5.2 2-167 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

which represents the shortest and most attractive connection between the Baltic and the Adriatic sea.

• The highway that stretches from Split to Zagreb which connects the port of Split with its hinterland.

• Apart from the Vc corridor construction, the highway named ”Jadranskojonska“ is also planned which will strectch through Croatia and Bosnia & Herzegovina, will be further connected to Montenegro and Albania and thus will connect the port of Ploče with East Europe.

The current situation of the railway network is generally characterized by poor operational and technical characteristics. However railway infrastructure modernization and constructions works are expected at local level:

• The remaining part of the Pan European Railway line (that connects the port of Ploče) from Strizivojna-Vrpolje to the region of Osijek (heart of the region Slavonia) is scheduled to be electrified, as soon the general overhaul of the line track is completed, until 2011. But the line will remain single tracked.

• It was envisaged that the modernization and recostruction of Lika line would have been completed prior to the development of the Split-Zagreb highway, but this did not happen. The Split-Zagreb Highway was given to traffic in year 2004, while the reconstruction of the Lika line is not expected to have been completed even in 2009.

Based on the above mentioned information some estimations in regards to the competition between road and rail freight transport can be made:

• In the future a significant change in the current transport modal share is not expected. For almost all bulk cargo (almost 100%) it is envisaged that its transporation will be carried out by rail (Ploče-Mostar-Sarajevo) up to final destinations in Bosnia & Herzegovina. Railway modernization is very important for the transportation of bulk cargo from/to the port of Ploče. General cargo will be transported, as until now, partly by road, partly by railway. Liquid cargoes will be almost entirely transported by road. Transport of containers from Ploče (app. 70%) is mostly planned by road and less by rail. The realization of the highway projects is expected to further increase the transportation of containers and general cargo by road not only in regards to Bosnia & Herzegovina but also within Croatia. Regarding the scenario formulated in the context of the study «Consulting Services to Enhance Private Parcipitation in the Development of the Port of Ploče, 2006» conducted by Royal Haskoning – and the relevant forecasts made it is expected that a considerable increase of bulk and general cargo to 7 million tons till take place by the year 2010, over 10 million tons till year 2020 and 13 million tons till year 2030. An increase in the port's containers throughput is also expected :

Deliverable 5.2 2-168 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

15% /year- 40.000 TEU till year 2010 and 14% from the year 2010 till 2015 (60.000 TEUs). The greater part of the forecasted cargo concerns flows to/from Bosnia & Herzegovina.

• Given the fact that the port of Split is mostly to the serving of passenger traffic and Split's port supplies mostly bay of Kaštelan, it can be stated that rail cannot currently compete with road transport. However, according to its plans an increase in the cargo traffic through the port is expected, especially concerning container transport. In this case, the Lika railway line (following its reconstruction and modernization), which is added to Vb corridor, could have more significant and competitive role and could induce a road bottleneck. In case the volumes of freight flows from/to Bosnia & Herzegovina increase then the construction of the Jadranskojonska's line part - Split-Čapljina- Trebinje-Nikšić (year 2015) is expected to definitely assist in the shifting of significant volumes of cargo from road to rail.

B. Unimodal road transport flows competition

As mentioned previously, the percentage of the trade flows moved by means of road only (unimodal road transport flows) between the catchment areas of the examined port clusters with origin/ destination the regions Lombardia & Veneto from Italy and Croatia, via Ε64 & Ε70 is significant. The detailed presentation of these flows per O- D pair is included in Annex 3.

In the same Annex the detailed data (per O-D pair) emerging from the change caused to the estimated unimodal road transport flows on the do-nothing scenario of 2015, by the operation of the proposed indicative MoS link are also included. The outcome from this comparative assessment is briefly presented in the table that follows.

Table 2-29 Difference in unimodal road transport flows following the operation of the indicative MoS link on the MoS potential corridor 7

Road Road Competition Competition Cluster - Indicative link (Do-Nothing (Master Plan Difference Difference (%) Cluster 2015) Assignment) 1000 tons 1000 tons from 10b to 9a Venice - Ploce 720 660 -60 -8% from 9a to 10b Ploce - Venice 2.994 2.689 -305 -10% 3.714 3.349 -365 -10%

2.3.8.4 Indicative estimation of modal shift As resulting from the analysis carried out in the previous section, the current trade flows between the catchment areas of the central segment of the North Adriatic & the northern segment of the South Adriatic - Balkan ports clusters are primarily served in two ways:

ƒ Either by means of road transport only,

Deliverable 5.2 2-169 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

ƒ Either by means of intermodal transport (road and maritime).

The main objective of the proposed MoS corridor between the central segment of the North Adriatic & the northern segment of the South Adriatic - Balkan ports clusters, and indicatively between Venice and Ploce, is the modal shift to be created from the road network to maritime transport for the involved origin/ destination pairs between Italy and Croatia that are currently primarily using part of the Axis E65 and part of the Axis E70 (Venice – Dalmatia).

A first indicative estimation of the modal shift is carried out by using the model by the comparative analysis of two indicative shortest paths displaying the two alternative ways of connection (MoS corridor or road connection) of the central segment of the North Adriatic & the northern segment of the South Adriatic - Balkan ports clusters, and in particular between Croatia (Dalmatia) and region of Veneto (Italy). The graphic display of the shortest paths examined is provided in the figure that follows.

Figure 2-55 Indicative shortest paths displaying the two alternative ways of connection between the catchment areas of the central segment of the North Adriatic & the northern segment of the South Adriatic - Balkan ports clusters

The volume of ton/kms that could be shifted from the road to the maritime network, mainly involves the ton/kms travelled between part of E65 and part of E70 between Venice and Dalmatia on a journey of approximately 550 km. Given the potential cargo volume 1.000 million tons, estimated that could be transported on the indicative

Deliverable 5.2 2-170 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

MoS link examined, and the above mentioned travel distance, the total of travelled ton/kms that could be shifted off the road amount to 550 million ton/kms.

2.3.8.5 Indicative service profile of the MoS link A relevant search in regards to the characteristics of the existing vessels operating along the Adriatic Sea corridor and which could potentially handle the serving of the expected trade flows of the specific line, led to the selection of a Ro-Ro vessel with capacity 140 trailers. The typical commercial speed (service speed) for this vessel would be about 20 knots given a maximum vessel speed of 28 knots. Following the elaboration of the relevant data, on the basis of the assumptions previously presented in the chapter that discussed the methodological approach for determining the indicative service profile, it can be concluded that a ship with this capacity travelling with the specified speed, could serve the expected demand of the line with two (2) sailings per week for the first year of the line’s operation. The service frequency will be increased to three (3) sailings per week in the 2nd and 3rd year and to be further increased to four (4) sailings per week in the 4th year. The travel distance (one direction) is approximately of 285 nautical miles in length and it is expected to be covered in about 14 hours. For four roundtrips per week the total sailing time of the ship is approximately 4.5 days while the total turnaround time is excluded. Thus, it is estimated that a single vessel would be sufficient for the proposed service. Since there is a major flow demand in the northwest-bound direction a circular route (Venice-Koper-Ploce-Venice) is proposed. The above calculations were conducted separately for each of the first four (4) years of the line’s operation. The corresponding data for each year of operation examined are provided in Annex 4.

2.3.8.6 Economic viability assessment of the MoS link The economic viability assessment of the service of this particular indicative MoS link was carried out in line with the methodology that was presented in chapter 2.2.7 and the indicative service profile that was described in Annex 4 for each of the first four (4) years of the line’s operation. This MoS link is initially characterized by unbalanced traffic which can be said to be a typical characteristic of currently operated SSS services at least for a starting time period e.g. one year of operation. Actions for further balancing traffic or securing the exploitation potential of the final service to be established via the striking of agreements to attract specific market actors and supply chains lie primarily within the overall responsibilities of the industry. Nevertheless, the assessment findings show that this MoS link although initially displays a slightly negative balance of revenues over cost, the balance is stabilized in positive exploitation results after the first year of its operation. Meanwhile, it is estimated that during the fifth year of operation (2014)

Deliverable 5.2 2-171 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study the demand for the particular service would have reached the levels of the forecasted demand for 2015. The calculation form outcome regarding this fourth year of operation is presented in the figure that follows. The findings of the economic viability assessment of the service produced on an annual basis are presented in Annex 5.

Deliverable 5.2 2-172 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-56 MoS link economic viability assessment results- Year 4

Deliverable 5.2 2-173 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

2.3.9 MoS potential corridor 8: Ionian Sea/ West Greece port cluster & the Italian ports of the Central Mediterranean ports cluster, including their respective catchment areas (Indicative MoS link Patra - Catania)

The two port clusters connected by this MoS corridor are the Ionian Sea/ West Greece (ports of Igoumenitsa and Patra) and the Italian ports of the Central Mediterranean ports cluster (ports of Catania and Augusta).

The ports of Patra and Igoumenitsa are very well located for serving freight and passenger traffic from/to ports in southern Italy and along the Adriatic Sea destined for Italy and other Central and Western European countries. These ports act as the western gateways of Greece, they primarily serve Ro-Ro freight as well as a substantial volume of international passenger transport through their several Ro-Pax connections with Italian ports along the Adriatic Sea.

The two Italian ports of the Central Mediterranean ports cluster, Catania and Augusta, are located on the eastern part of Sicily and represent the Sicilian gateway to the East Mediterranean area. The port of Catania is strongly characterised by Ro-Ro traffic, mainly towards the West-Mediterranean area, but is also connected to Malta and the port of Ravenna. The port of Augusta is specialised in liquid bulk traffic generated by the local oil refineries but the enhancement of the port potential in the Ro-Ro and container segments is envisaged.

The aim of this link is the provision of a new maritime connection along this proposed MoS corridor between Greece and Sicily since at present there is no direct line connecting these two regions. The service focus of this proposed MoS corridor connection would be on Ro-Pax.

2.3.9.1 Potential trade flows of the MoS corridor – Catchment Area identification – Interrelation to EMR intermodal corridors - Interconnection with road transport network At the potential MoS connection, the forecasts show the potential for a total volume of about 150 - 250 ktons per year (both directions) by 2015 between the Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the Italian ports of the Central Mediterranean ports clusters. This amount is equivalent to approximately 8.000 – 14.000 units (trucks/ trailers) for the same year.

In the following figure, along the proposed MoS corridor the indicative maritime MoS link Patra (Greece) – Catania (Italy, Sicily) is presented, serving the potential volumes estimated to form the future demand (2015) between the examined clusters. In the same figure, the flows of the particular indicative MoS link are also presented to/ from the source origins/ final destinations of the volumes.

Deliverable 5.2 2-174 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-57 MoS flows in the indicative MoS link Patra – Catania (MoS potential corridor 8 (Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the Italian ports of the Central Mediterranean ports clusters)

The above presentation of the MoS flows on the indicative MoS link Patra – Catania for the examined potential MoS corridor between Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the Italian ports of the Central Mediterranean ports clusters, also identifies the routes which are likely to be followed for the transportation of the cargo to be moved along the particular connection.

The particular pairs of zones between the catchment areas of the Ionian Sea/ West Greece port cluster (cluster no. 7) and the Italian ports of the Central Mediterranean ports cluster (cluster no. 8a) with their respective values of the potential estimated demand for the year 2015 are presented in detail at the following table.

Deliverable 5.2 2-175 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Table 2-30 Estimated potential demand in 2015 between the Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the Italian ports of the Central Mediterranean ports clusters

MIN MAX MoS 8 Potential Potential (from cluster - ORIGIN_ZONE DESTINATION_ZONE Demand Demand to cluster) 2015 2015 (ktns) (ktns)

Sicilia Bulgaria 50 85

Sicilia Attiki 40 65

from 8a to 7 Sicilia Kentriki Makedonia 20 30

Sicilia Thessalia 2 3

REST 5 10

8a - 7 total 115 190

MIN MAX Potential Potential ORIGIN_ZONE DESTINATION_ZONE Demand Demand 2015 2015 (ktns) (ktns) from 7 to 8a Bulgaria Sicilia 15 25

Attiki Sicilia 10 20

REST 5 10

7 - 8a total 30 55

Grand Total 145 245

According to the estimated future demand (2015), the strongest pair in terms of volume from the Italian ports of the Central Mediterranean ports cluster to the Ionian Sea/ West Greece port cluster is that from Sicily to Bulgaria with a total volume of approximately of 50 – 85 ktns. At the opposite direction and from the Ionian Sea/ West Greece port cluster to the Italian ports of the Central Mediterranean ports cluster, the same pair Bulgaria - Sicily is the strongest one with an estimated volume of approximately of 15 - 25 ktns.

The percentage split by direction is estimated to be 22% westbound and 78% eastbound. Thus, there is uneven balance of traffic flows per direction which could be party remedied by the potential passenger traffic generated on the connection.

Deliverable 5.2 2-176 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

A possible extension to this service connection, justified by the model assignment and potential trade flows, could involve the connection with the southern segment of the South Adriatic – Balkan ports cluster thus creating a “triangular” service.

The interconnection of the Patra-Catania Ro-Pax service with the existing Ro-Pax service between Catania and Valetta (Malta) could be also considered in order to provide the possibility of two additional destinations for passengers from Malta and Greece that would potentially supplement the service with the generation of additional traffic since a Ro-Pax service between these two countries does not exist. In addition, the port of Catania is connected by Ro-Ro to west Med destinations and a possible interconnection of east-west MoS services could provide another alternative for westbound cargo originating from the Balkan Peninsula.

The diagrammatic depiction of the specific potential MoS corridor between the ports of the Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the Italian ports of the Central Mediterranean ports clusters and their hinterlands are presented in the following figure.

Figure 2-58 Map of the MoS potential corridor 8 (Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the Italian ports of the Central Mediterranean ports clusters)

In the case of the Italian ports of the Central Mediterranean ports cluster and of the port of Catania in particular, the catchment area consists of Sicily. In the case of the ports belonging to the Ionian Sea/ West Greece cluster and in regards to the port of Patra in particular, the catchment area is located at the country of Bulgaria and regions Attiki, Kentriki Makedonia, Thessalia, Sterea Ellada and Dytiki Ellada in Greece.

Deliverable 5.2 2-177 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

The interrelationship between the MoS potential corridor 8 and the relevant intermodal maritime-based corridors in the EMR as previously defined at an earlier stage of the study (Deliverable 1, Vol. II, Chapter 4) is illustrated in the figure that follows.

Figure 2-59 Map of the MoS potential corridor 8 in relation to the Adriatic-Ionian intermodal corridor

From the above map, it can be seen that the MoS potential corridor 8 lies primarily along the Adriatic-Ionian intermodal corridor (it can be considered as a short extension of this corridor westwards) which is amongst the most highly utilized intermodal corridors identified within the wider study area of the Eastern Mediterranean and is characterized primarily by the extensive and long standing provision of Ro-Ro and Ro-Pax services linking the ports of West Greece (port cluster no. 7) and the South and North Adriatic port clusters of Italy (ports clusters 11 and 10 respectively).

Deliverable 5.2 2-178 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Concerning general trade flows that could be served by this potential MoS connection, flows originating from Italy and destined to Bulgaria and Greece would be involved mainly for manufactured goods, machinery and transport equipment and chemicals whilst for the opposite direction flows originating from Bulgaria and Greece would concern primarily manufactured goods and crude materials.

Concerning intermodal and logistic developments in the two nodal points involved in this potential MoS corridor :

The Port Authority of Catania has planned several interventions in order to foster the development of ro-ro traffic. New parking areas for vehicles and stocking areas will be developed and current rail tracks will be renovated. Furthermore, the future establishment of the Interporto of Catania entails the development of a Logistics freight terminal and of an intermodal freight terminal allowing the interchange between road and rail since this terminal will be served by three rail tracks of about 500 m, by the office district and two intermodal warehouses of a total of 7.000 sq.m.

The possibility of developing a freight centre in proximity to the port of Patra is also under examination in collaboration with the port and local authorities while construction works are taking place for the relocation of the main port in proximity to its original location but with much better access to the road network avoiding the previous route via the city centre.

In terms of modal shift that could be potentially created off the road, it would involve the transportation of flows to and from Sicily by road, that would have otherwise been to be directed to one of the South Adriatic/ Italian cluster ports (Bari, Brindisi, Taranto) which is further discussed and analysed in section 2.3.9.4.

Thus, this proposed new Ro-Pax service is expected to have a strongly positive impact to the Adriatic-Ionian intermodal corridor via its westwards extension linking two country regions previously not connected. Via Catania, a linkage between West Greece and Malta can also be established through the existing maritime connections between the islands of Sicily and Malta while at the same time providing the possibility of new passenger destinations and contributing towards increased cohesion between peripheral regions of the EU.

The map that follows presents the road network to be used in the catchment area of the cluster ports to/ from initial origins/final destinations of the cargo flows to the zones (countries/ regions) within this area. On the same map emphasis is placed on the display of the road TEN-T network in order to illustrate the interconnection of the examined potential MoS corridor with these networks.

Deliverable 5.2 2-179 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-60 MoS potential corridor 8 (Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the Italian ports of the Central Mediterranean ports clusters) and interconnection with TEN-T road network

Deliverable 5.2 2-180 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

An additional significant parameter in examining a potential MoS corridor is the examination of the accessibility of the ports involved. Given the identification of the specific indicative MoS link as previously defined it should be noted that:

ƒ The port of Patra has direct access to road network infrastructure, while it has two post entrances with one lane per direction. The distance between the port and the national highway network is 2 km (Patra – Athens Highway E65). Furthermore, the port has also direct access to the secondary road network “Patra – Pirgos” highway (E55). The nearest airport to the port of Patra is situated approximately 25 km away, while there is direct road network connection.

ƒ The port of Catania has direct access to the national road network (A18: Messina – Catania and A19: Palermo-Catania). The Fontanarossa airport is approximately 5 km away.

2.3.9.2 Articulation of the indicative MoS Link demand According to the methodology that has been developed and applied for the estimation of the potential future trade flows (2015) of the predominant/indicative MoS link, in the case of MoS corridor 8, the total demand that this specific line may serve in the year 2015 for both directions will range from 130 ktns/year (pessimistic scenario) to 200 ktns/year (optimistic scenario) with the moderate scenario at the level of 160 ktns/year. This potential demand is expected to reach to the above levels approximately within a six year period of the line’s operation with an annual average increase rate of 7%. In the table that follows, the evolution of demand on this particular case is presented in detail. This estimation is directly related to the competition analysis presented in the next section. Table 2-31 Evolution of demand on the indicative link of the MoS potential corridor 8

Estimated AVG Estimated Link Demand (“Master Plan” Corridor Estimated run*) Cluster - Indicative Demand Corridor Cluster link (run "all Demand open"*) (run "all MIN MAX open"*) YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 YEAR 5 YEAR 6 Patra - from 7 to 8a 30 55 43 28 29 30 32 33 53 Catania Catania - from 8a to 7 115 190 153 85 88 92 96 100 108 Patra 145 245 195 113 117 122 127 133 160 3% 5% 4% 4% 21% * refer to Chapter 2 The analytical tables presenting the demand of the indicative MoS link per O-D pair, for the 6th year, during which it is estimated that the demand for the MoS indicative link will have reached the levels of the expected values for 2015 are displayed in Annex 3.

Deliverable 5.2 2-181 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

2.3.9.3 Competition overview The competition analysis which is presented next involves only competitive intermodal maritime transport flows between the O-D pairs of the catchment area of this specific MoS corridor, and not unimodal road transport flows, since the road only transport mode for trade exchange between the catchment areas of the corridor is not a feasible choice. Concernig the maritime part of the intermodal transport flows between the O-D pairs of the catchment area of this particular MoS corridor, currently there is no maritime connection linking the Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the Italian ports of the Central Mediterranean ports clusters and the trade flows are served by Lo – Lo and Ro – Ro connections linking the South Adriatic/ Italian ports cluster (ports of Brindisi, Bari and Taranto) to the North Aegean (port of Thessaloniki), Central/ South Aegean Sea (port of Pireaus) and Ionian Sea/ West Greece (ports of Patra, Igoumenitsa, Corfu) port clusters. More specifically, the existing competitive maritime links are graphically presented in the following figure.

Figure 2-61 Existing maritime links between the catchment areas of the Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the Italian ports of the Central Mediterranean ports clusters

The above map depicts several connections the majority of which are Ro-Ro. There are only two Lo-Lo services which connect Taranto with Pireaus and Thessaloniki with both connections having a service frequency of once per week. Patra is connected to Bari and Brindisi with Ro-Ro services of frequency eight (8) and fourteen (14) voyages per week respectively. Igoumenitsa is also connected to Bari

Deliverable 5.2 2-182 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study and Brindisi with Ro-Ro services of frequency fourteen (14) and seven (7) voyages per week respectively. Corfu also has a maritime connection with Bari with a service frequency of seven (7) voyages per week. From the above mentioned connections between western Greek ports and southeastern Italian ports it is clear that there is a well established level of service with very high frequency. Given the current gap in the specific market in regards to the serving of the trade flows with origin/ destination the pairs of Sicily with Bulgaria, Kentriki Makedonia, Thessalia, Attiki, Sterea and Dytiki Ellada, an assumption is made that during the first year of operation the line will manage to attract from the existing maritime connections flows of around 110 ktns, in both directions. At present these flows are served by the existing maritime connections of Dytiki Ellada (Patra, Igoumenitsa) and Attiki (Piraeus) with the ports of Bari, Brindizi and Taranto respectively, involving a road journey of significant length where the conditions are not particularly favourable thus incommoding the whole cargo transportation process. More specifically, during this six (6) year period it is estimated that the specific line will gradually achieve in attracting from existing competitive maritime connections all the freight traffic with origin/ destination Sicily to/ from Bulgaria and Kentriki Makedonia. In the table that follows, in conjunction to the evolution of demand on the indicative link, the estimation of the evolution of demand for the total of the existing maritime links being competitive to this link is also presented. Table 2-32 Evolution of demand of the competitive existing maritime links of the MoS potential corridor 8

Estimated AVG Estimated Existing Maritime Links Demand Corridor Estimated ("Master Plan" run*) Cluster - Indicative Demand Corridor Cluster link (run "all Demand open"*) (run "all MIN MAX open"*) YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 YEAR 5 YEAR 6 Patra - from 7 to 8a 30 55 43 5 4 3 2 0 0 Catania Catania - from 8a to 7 115 190 153 15 12 8 4 0 0 Patra 145 245 195 20 16 11 6 0 0 -18% -33% -48% -100% - * refer to Chapter 2 The detailed tables presenting the demand of the competitive existing maritime links per O-D pair, for the 6th year, during which it is estimated that the demand for the MoS indicative link will have reached the levels of the expected values for 2015 are displayed in Annex 3.

Concerning competition on the inland part of the intermodal transport flows between the O-D pairs of the catchment area of the specific MoS corridor, and specifically for competition between the road and rail transport modes, the current situation as recorded as well as the future situation (2015) as estimated is being described in the following paragraphs for the Ionian Sea/ West Greece and the Italian ports of the

Deliverable 5.2 2-183 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Central Mediterranean ports cluster. The main railway networks of the catchment areas of this indicative MoS link are displayed in the figure that follows.

Road – Rail competition in the Ionian Sea/ West Greece ports cluster

The West Greece/ Ionian Sea port cluster consists of the ports of Igoumenitsa and Patra. Currently, neither of these two ports are connected to the national railway network and as a result competition between road and rail is non-existent. Figure 2-62 MoS potential corridor 8 (Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the Italian ports of the Central Mediterranean ports clusters) and interconnection with the main railway networks

However, in the future given the catchment area of this specific cluster within the Greek territory– which is slightly differentiated depending on the potential MoS corridor proposed, that includes the total or the greatest part of the foreseen upgrading works – the following planned rail infrastructure projects must be taken into account: • The upgrading/ modernization works of the existing axes of the national railway network such as the axis Patra – Athens – Thessaloniki – Idomeni/ Promahonas, aim at the development of a high speed double line along the core line (Patra – Athens – Thessaloniki), signalling and electrification covering the whole Axis, but also new alignments, such as the construction of the Egnatia Railway (connection between the ports of Alexandroupolis and Igoumenitsa) and the remaining segments of the Western Railway Axis, such as the construction of the sections Patra – Pyrgos – Kalamata, Ioannina –

Deliverable 5.2 2-184 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Antirio, Kalabaka – Ioannina – Igoumenitsa, Kalabaka - Kozani and Siatista - Kastoria, that will guarantee a railway connection of high standards between north – south and east -west firstly within the Greek borders and secondly the connection of the country with neighbouring countries via its ports and border stations (expected average time horizon for the completion of these projects being 2020), • the local projects planned for the improvement/ facilitation of the rail connection of the above ports with the main railway network of Greece and more specifically, the connection of the new port of Patra with the railway network of the Hellenic Railways Organisation following the construction of a double electrified line and the port of Igoumenitsa through the West Railway Axis project works (expected average time horizon for the completion of these projects being 2018), • the supporting – promoting of the ports of Igoumenitsa and Patra (including also the other main national ports) through the new national land-use plan into becoming primary sea gates of the country • the comparatively higher cost of road transport, • the new charging policy that the Greek Railways Organisation (OSE) is expected to implement in order to make rail transport more competitive, as well as its market development policy aiming at striking agreements with “new clients”, a differentiation of some degree is expected to occur concerning the current situation characterized by the almost total domination of the road transport mode regarding freight transportation to/ from the ports of this specific cluster. In regards to road transport, an important upgrading/ construction plan constituting of significant infrastructure projects for the enhancement of the quality of road connections in Greece is similarly being executed. The projects which dominate in the catchment area of this specific cluster within the Greek territory include the completion of the Egnatia Highway (Ε90) and its vertical axes, and the upgrading of the existing road axis Ε75, the construction of the Ionian Highway (Ioannina – Antirio), the construction of the Central Greece Axis Ε65, the undergoing upgrading of the Korinthos – Patra - Pyrgos – Tsakona Axis and the construction of the Eastern Highway of the Peloponnese Korinthos – Tripoli – Kalamata and Lefktro - Sparti (expected average time horizon for the completion of these projects being 2015). Concerning neighboring Bulgaria that constitutes part of the catchment area of this potential MoS corridor in the respective cluster examined, the current situation of the railway network is generally characterized by poor operational and technical characteristics and low investments for its modernization over the past years. However, on the medium-term time horizon in general rehabilitation and modernization works of the railway network are expected, albeit at local level (not covering the total of an axis), as well as the implementation of rail transport

Deliverable 5.2 2-185 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study development programmes (expected average time horizon for the completion of these projects being 2012), but it is foreseen that these projects will not fundamentally change the current situation. Similarly, the road axes in Bulgaria require substantial improvements/ upgrading per sections, with emphasis on road sections that pass through or in proximity to large urban centres which are already saturated. The foreseen works aim primarily at the upgrading of the primary road network (especially of the cross border axes and the axes connecting large urban centres) or /and the construction of new axes and alternative alignments per sections (expected average time horizon for the completion of these projects being 2015). Based on the above overview some general estimations can be made in regards to the shape and form of the competition between road and rail freight transport in the catchment area of this particular cluster in the future and specifically until the time horizon used for the projections conducted in the context of this study (2015). In addition, taking into account the current situation of the ports, but also their potential future prospects, in accordance to the strategic development goals they have set, it can be claimed that in regards to: • the port of Igoumenitsa, the prospects for its connection to the main railway network via the West Railway Axis and the Egnatia Railway, leads to the estimation that rail can become an important competitive mode for freight transportation against road transport (attraction from road transport at the level of 30% - 40%), which, however, is expected to take place at a time horizon greater than the current study’s (2015) and • to the port of Patra, similarly, the implementation of the planned projects concerning its connection to the main railway network, as well as the development of rail infrastructure within its entire catchment area, with main objective the creation of a satisfactory grid of connections with important gates and freight transport attraction poles, is estimated that will substantially delay the emergence of competition between the two transport modes, which is expected to take place beyond 2015. From the above it is evident than until 2015 and based upon the current planning for the course of the upgrading and constructing the foreseen rail and road transport infrastructures in the catchment area of the West Greece/ Ionian port cluster, the improvement and construction of large scale road infrastructure projects and the road connections of these two ports with the road network of their catchment area, is expected to be realized in a shorter time period in relation to the corresponding improvement/ construction of the rail infrastructure, thus initially strengthening even more the monopolistic role of road transport as the sole option for inland transportation since the competition between the two modes will remain “idle” for the specific time horizon (2015) in question.

Deliverable 5.2 2-186 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Road – Rail competition in the Italian ports of the Central Mediterranean ports cluster

The main Italian ports included in this particular cluster are Catania and Augusta. Port inland access remains a key problem regarding both road and rail connections. Taking into account the current situation of the ports, but also their potential future prospects, in accordance to the strategic development goals they have set, it can be claimed that in regards to:

• the port of Catania, two rail access points exist, which however have not been in use for several years. In order to make these access points operative again, several interventions and upgrading should take place; • the port of Augusta, the port’s area does not have relevant railway connections. Further development of railway connections could be expected according to the completion of Corridor I Berlin - Palermo (Railway axis Berlin-Verona-Milan- Bologna-Naples-Messina-Palermo).

From the above and based upon the current planning for the course of the upgrading and constructing the foreseen rail and road transport infrastructures in the catchment area of the Central Mediterranean ports cluster, it is apparent that until 2015 the competition between the two transport modes will virtually remain “non-existent”.

2.3.9.4 Indicative estimation of modal shift The objective of the proposed MoS corridor between the Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the Italian ports of the Central Mediterranean ports clusters and indicatively between Patra and Catania is to connect mainland Greece with the island of Sicily. This connection would serve trade flows from Sicily, Greek regions (Kentriki Makedonia, Attiki, Thessalia, Dytiki Ellada, Sterea Ellada) and Bulgaria that would otherwise had to be directed to one of the South Adriatic/ Italian cluster ports (Bari, Brindisi, Taranto) and travel by road to/ from Sicily thus enabling modal shift from road transport. In addition, since the proposed connection is Ro-Pax it would also provide new passenger destinations and generate passenger traffic activity unexploited up to now.

A first indicative estimation of the modal shift is carried out by using the model by the comparative analysis of two indicative shortest paths displaying the two alternative ways of connection (MoS connection or combination of maritime and road connection) of the Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the Italian ports of the Central Mediterranean ports clusters. The graphic display of the shortest paths examined is provided in the figure that follows.

Deliverable 5.2 2-187 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-63 Indicative shortest paths displaying the two alternative ways of connection between the catchment areas of the Ionian Sea/ West Greece & the Italian ports of the Central Mediterranean ports clusters

The estimated freight flows that could be shifted from the road to the maritime network, which mainly involve flows travelled from Puglia (Bari) to Sicily using mainly autostrada A3, a journey of approximately 550 km. Given the potential volume of 130.000 tons, estimated that could be transported on the indicative MoS link examined, and the above mentioned travel distance, the total of traveled ton/kms that could be shifted off the road amount to 72 million ton/kms.

Finally, it is important to note at this point that apart from the modal shift expected to be generated, the operation of a service along this MoS corridor would also meet one of the main objectives of sea motorways policy which is “to increase cohesion by improving access to peripheral and island States”15 by providing an eastwards

15 Article 12a of the TEN-T Guidelines of 29 April 2004- Decision No 884/2004/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 amending decision No 1692/96 on Community guidelines for the development of the trans-European network, OJ L 167, 30.04.2004, p. 1.

Deliverable 5.2 2-188 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study connection to the island of Sicily linking it to Greece as well as the Balkans region in general. As mentioned previously, potential visitors from Greece, the Balkans and elsewhere may also be offered the possibility of visiting Malta, another island on the periphery of the EU which is not connected to the above mentioned regions, via the maritime connections already in operation via Sicily. Especially, Sicily’s economy, which can be considered as greatly underdeveloped in comparison to the rest of Italy, can only benefit from the operation of a quality service along this MoS corridor. Furthermore, apart from purely economic gains there is another dimension to be taken into account which concerns the facilitation of the movement of people between these regions. Such an action would definitely be a step in the right direction in terms of assisting the cultural communication to flourish once more between regions, whose relationships have traditionally been characterized by strong and deeply rooted cultural bonds and ties spanning thousands of years back in time since the origins of European history and civilisation.

2.3.9.5 Indicative service profile of the MoS link A relevant search in regards to the characteristics of the existing vessels operating on the Adriatic-Ionian corridor and which could potentially handle the serving of the expected trade flows of the specific line, led to the selection of a Ro-Pax vessel with capacity of approximately 100 trailers. The typical commercial speed (service speed) for this vessel would be about 25 knots given a maximum vessel speed of 30 knots. Following the elaboration of the relevant data, on the basis of the assumptions previously presented in the chapter that discussed the methodological approach for determining the indicative service profile, it can be concluded that a ship with this capacity travelling with the specified speed, could serve the expected demand of the line with two (2) sailings per week, for a one direction trip of length approximately 325 nautical miles in about 16 hours. For two roundtrips per week the total sailing time of the ship is approximately three (3) days while the total turnaround time is excluded. Thus, it is estimated that a single vessel would be sufficient for the proposed service. The above calculations were conducted separately for each of the first six (6) years of the line’s operation. The corresponding data for each year of operation examined are provided in Annex 4.

2.3.9.6 Viability analysis of the MoS link The economic viability assessment of the service of this particular indicative MoS link was carried out in line with the methodology that was presented in chapter 2.2.7

Deliverable 5.2 2-189 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study and the indicative service profile that was described in Annex 4 for each of the first six (6) years of the line’s operation. The assessment findings show that this MoS link initially displays a negative balance of revenues over cost for the first five years of operation which eventually becomes slightly positive during the sixth year. Meanwhile, it is estimated that during the sixth year of operation (2015) the demand for the particular service would have reached the levels of the forecasted demand for 2015. It has to be mentioned that the economic viability of this Ro-Pax service is significantly affected by the passenger traffic generated which always entails a certain degree of future uncertainty. The calculation form outcome regarding this sixth year of operation is presented in the figure that follows.

The findings of the economic viability assessment of the service produced on an annual basis are presented in Annex 5.

Deliverable 5.2 2-190 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-64 MoS link economic viability assessment results- Year 6

Deliverable 5.2 2-191 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

2.3.10 MoS potential corridor 9: The western segment of the North Adriatic ports cluster & the southern segment of the Central Mediterranean ports cluster, including their respective catchment areas (Indicative MoS link Malta - Venice)

The two port clusters connected by this MoS corridor are the western segment of the North Adriatic ports cluster (ports of the ports of Venice and Chioggia) and the southern segment of the Central Mediterranean ports cluster (ports of Marsaxlokk and Valletta).

The geographical position of the port of Venice, north on the Adriatic Sea allows it to act as a gateway of commercial trade between Europe and Asia in the Mediterranean basin and also to serve the highly industrialized northern Italian regions. The port handles almost all types of cargo but it should be noted that Ro-Ro traffic served is substantial- approximately 2 million tons in terms of freight carried on trailers and trucks for the year 2006. Most traffic is concentrated on Greek routes (about 94%), with balanced freight flows per direction.

At present the port of Chioggia does not serve significant Ro-Ro and container traffic volumes.

Malta’s position at the heart of the Mediterranean’s most significant maritime routes provides a natural choice for the island as a hub where a number of crossroad activities such as feedering can take place. At present the Malta Freeport is the 12th major European port in terms of container throughput and the 3rd largest transhipment and logistics centre in the Mediterranean. On average, approximately 5% of total annual throughput is local cargo, with the rest being transhipment cargo. The port of Valletta is also serving Ro-Ro/ Ro-Pax and general cargo traffic. The Malta Freeport and the port of Valletta, to a certain extent, operate complementarily by accommodating and serving all cargo commodity classes, comprising containers, Ro- Ro, break bulk or even more specialised non-unitised cargos such as grain and oil.

The aim of this corridor is the provision of a new maritime connection between Malta and the North Adriatic ports including an extension to the Black Sea. The focus of this service linking the Adriatic, Aegean and Black Sea would be on Lo-Lo.

2.3.10.1 Potential trade flows of the MoS corridor – Catchment Area identification – Interrelation to EMR intermodal corridors - Interconnection with road transport network On the potential MoS corridor, the forecasts show the potential for a total volume of about 650 – 1.100 ktons per year (both directions) by 2015 between the clusters 10b and 8b. This amount is equivalent to approximately 35.000 – 60.000 units (trucks/ trailers) for the same year.

Deliverable 5.2 2-192 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

In the following figure, along the proposed MoS corridor the indicative maritime MoS link Malta – Venice is presented, serving the potential volumes estimated to form the future demand (2015) between the examined clusters. In the same figure, the flows of the particular indicative MoS link are also presented to/from the source origins/final destinations of the volumes.

Figure 2-65 MoS flows in the indicative MoS link Malta – Venice (MoS potential corridor 9) (The western segment of the North Adriatic & the southern segment of the Central Mediterranean ports clusters)

The above presentation of the MoS flows on the indicative MoS link Malta – Venice for the examined potential MoS corridor between the western segment of the North Adriatic & the southern segment of the Central Mediterranean ports clusters, also identifies the routes which are likely to be followed for the transportation of the cargo to be moved along the particular corridor.

Although Malta is connected to several Italian ports there is no current connection between the island and the central segment of the North Adriatic port cluster. However, it should be noted that in order for the proposed service to be viable in terms of cargo volumes to be transported it is imperative that it should involve an extension that would supplement the link with additional generated cargo volumes. Based on the model assignment and the potential trade flows analysis an appropriate extension to this service would be the connection of Malta with the Black Sea, and especially with Russia and (North Black Sea ports cluster, cluster no. 3b). As

Deliverable 5.2 2-193 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study such, this MoS corridor is expected to serve deep sea maritime transport combining the transshipment hub status of Malta through which the Black Sea and Italy will be interconnected. Therefore, such a MoS corridor will exploit the high quality transshipment capabilities of Malta which is strategically located in the centre of the Mediterranean whilst at the same time would meet the increasing demand for serving flows to/from the Black Sea primarily to/from Italy. This is perceived as the best possible way that the island of Malta could be successfully involved in the EMR MoS corridors development since Malta is a small insular state and no other MoS link could be justified purely on flow generated between the island and any other EU country..

The particular pairs of zones between the catchment areas of the western segment of the North Adriatic port cluster (cluster no. 10b) and the southern segment of the Central Mediterranean ports cluster (cluster no. 8b) – taking into account the extension of the link to the Black Sea, with their respective values of the potential estimated demand for the year 2015 are presented in detail in the following table.

Table 2-33 Estimated potential demand in 2015 between the western segment of the North Adriatic & the southern segment of the Central Mediterranean ports clusters

MIN MAX MoS 9 Potential Potential (from cluster ORIGIN_ZONE DESTINATION_ZONE Demand Demand - to cluster) 2015 2015 (ktns) (ktns)

Lombardia Russia 70 120

Veneto Russia 50 85

Veneto Malta 35 55

Lombardia Georgia 20 35 from 10b to 8b (& 3b) Veneto Georgia 15 25

Provincia Autonoma Trento Malta 10 15

Provincia Autonoma Trento Russia 5 10

Provincia Autonoma Trento Georgia 5 10

10b - 8b (& 3b) total 210 355

MIN MAX Potential Potential ORIGIN_ZONE DESTINATION_ZONE Demand Demand 2015 2015 (ktns) (ktns)

from 8b (&3b) Russia Veneto 220 365

Deliverable 5.2 2-194 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

MIN MAX MoS 9 Potential Potential (from cluster ORIGIN_ZONE DESTINATION_ZONE Demand Demand - to cluster) 2015 2015 (ktns) (ktns)

to 10b Russia Lombardia 195 330

Russia Provincia Autonoma Trento 15 20

Malta Veneto 20 30

REST 5 10

8b (& 3b) - 10b total 455 755

Grand Total 665 1110

According to the estimated future demand (2015), the strongest pair in terms of volume from the western segment of the North Adriatic cluster to the southern segment of the Central Mediterranean ports cluster is that from Lombardia to Russia with a total volume of approximately of 70 – 120 ktns. At the opposite direction and from the southern segment of the Central Mediterranean cluster to the western segment of the North Adriatic cluster, the pair Russia - Veneto is the strongest one with an estimated volume of approximately of 220 - 365 ktns.

The percentage split by direction is estimated to be 32% northbound and 68% southbound. The diagrammatic depiction of the specific potential MoS connection between the the western segment of the North Adriatic & the southern segment of the Central Mediterranean ports clusters and their hinterlands are presented in the figure that follows.

Deliverable 5.2 2-195 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-66 Map of the MoS potential corridor 9 (The western segment of the North Adriatic & the southern segment of the Central Mediterranean ports clusters)

In the case of the western segment of the North Adriatic port cluster and of the port of Venice in particular, the catchment area consists of the regions of Italy Lombardia, Veneto and Provincia Autonoma Trento. In the case of the ports belonging to the southern segment of the Central Mediterranean ports cluster and the ports of Malta in particular, the catchment area is located at the countries of Malta, Russia and Georgia.

The interrelationship between the MoS potential corridor 9 and the relevant intermodal maritime-based corridors in the EMR previously defined at an earlier stage of the study (Deliverable 1, Vol. II, Chapter 4) is presented in the figure that follows.

Deliverable 5.2 2-196 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-67 Map of the MoS potential corridor 9 in relation to the Adriatic-Ionian & Black Sea Aegean North-South intermodal corridors

From the above map, it can be seen that the MoS potential corridor 9 lies primarily along the Adriatic-Ionian intermodal corridor but it is also intersects with the Black Sea – Aegean North South intermodal corridor with the island of Malta acting as a hub point between the two intermodal corridors. The Adriatic-Ionian corridor is characterized primarily by Ro-Ro and Ro-Pax services while the Black Sea – Aegean North South corridor displays a high percentage of Lo-Lo services with Ro-Ro services mainly restricted to serving connections between the Aegean ports of Turkey and North Adriatic ports of Italy.

Therefore, in terms of potential trade to be served by the proposed Lo-Lo service it should be noted that it entails flows from Italy towards Georgia (crude materials), Russia (manufactured goods, machinery and transport equipment, food and live animals) and Malta (manufactured goods, animal and vegetable oils, machinery and transport equipment). On the opposite direction towards Italy the connection can potentially serve flows from the same countries, Russia (manufactured goods, crude materials), Georgia (chemicals, crude materials) and Malta (crude materials, manufactured goods).

In respect to logistics and intermodal developments in the ports that act as nodal points in this potential MoS corridor the following can be noted :

The port of Venice foresees the development and re-qualification of parts of the Marghera area to be assigned to the Motorways of the Sea’s traffics with the provision

Deliverable 5.2 2-197 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study of direct connections to rail and main road networks as well as the the development of logistic services and infrastructures which can support MoS traffics.

The Malta Freeport, through its distripark facilities, serves as a major logistics platform for containerised cargo taking advantage of the island’s central location in the Mediterranean and its development as a major transhipment hub . Malta Enterprise is currently investigating the potential for promoting an international value added logistics centre in Malta in order to further develop and differentiate the services offered and allow the island also to become a redistribution hub in the Mediterranean, efficiently servicing east to west trade.

In terms of potential modal shift, the connection between Malta and Venice does not display any modal shift from the road, Malta being an island. However, if the potential chain originating from the Black Sea is considered there is great modal shift potential from road from a large distance freight transport corridor, an issue which is further examined and analysed in section 2.3.10.4.

Therefore, the proposed Lo-Lo service along the potential MoS corridor 9 linking Malta and Northern Italy by exploiting the advantageous position of Malta as a transshipment hub, which facilitates the consolidation of flows originating/destined from/to regions that “belong” to the Black Sea- Aegean North-South intermodal corridor, supports the interconnection of the aforementioned intermodal corridor with the Adriatic-Ionian intermodal corridor while at the same time provides another connection between Malta and Italy, a connection that would have otherwise not been viable if was to serve solely trade exchanges between these two countries.

The map that follows presents the road network to be used in the catchment area of the cluster ports to/ from initial origins/final destinations of the cargo flows to the zones (countries/ regions) within this area. In the same map emphasis is placed on the display of the road TEN-T network in order to illustrate the interconnection of the examined potential MoS corridor with these networks.

Deliverable 5.2 2-198 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-68 MoS potential corridor 9 (The western segment of the North Adriatic & the southern segment of the Central Mediterranean ports clusters) and interconnection with TEN-T road network

Deliverable 5.2 2-199 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

An additional significant parameter in examining a potential MoS corridor is the examination of the accessibility of the ports involved. Given the identification of the specific indicative MoS link as previously defined it should be noted that :

ƒ The Port of Venice is situated on a strategic crossroads position for traffic flows between Corridor V Lisbon-Kiev (road and rail) and Corridor I Berlin-Palermo. The port has direct access to international corridors with regard to Pan European Corridor n. 5 (road and rail) Lisbon – Kiev - EU TEN – T (east – west) project n. 6 intersecting EU TEN T (north south) project n. 1 in Verona (Italy) and EU TEN T (Short Sea Shipping and Motorways of the Sea) project n. 21 in Venice. The distance between the port and the primary national road network A4, which links Turin to Trieste is about 5 km.

ƒ Malta’s main national road network consists of Highway 1, (capital of Gozo)- Mgarr (ferry station on Gozo)- Cirkewwa (ferry station on Malta)- Bugibba- St. Julian’s- Marsa- Valletta (including the links to Grand Harbour and Passenger Sea Terminal)- Luqa (airport)- Birzebbugia (Freeport).

2.3.10.2 Articulation of the indicative MoS Link demand According to the methodology that has been developed and applied for the estimation of the potential future trade flows (2015) of the predominant/indicative MoS link, in the case of MoS 9 corridor, the total demand that this specific line may serve in the year 2015 for both directions will range from 400 ktns/year (pessimistic scenario) to 1500 ktns/year (optimistic scenario) with the moderate scenario at the level of 850 ktns/year. This potential demand is expected to be reach to the above levels within three (3) years roughly with an average annual increase rate of about 70%, assuming that in the 1st year of operation the new service will attract flows of approximately 500 ktns in both directions. In the table that follows, the evolution of demand on this particular case is presented in detail. This estimation is directly related to the competition analysis presented in the next section.

Deliverable 5.2 2-200 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Table 2-34 Evolution of demand on the indicative link of the MoS potential corridor 7

Estimated MoS Link AVG Demand (“Master Plan” Estimated Corridor Estimated run*) Cluster - Demand Corridor Indicative link Cluster (run "all open"*) Demand (run "all open"*) MIN MAX YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 Venice - from 10b to 8b 210 355 283 37 59 73 Marsaxlokk Marsaxlokk - from 8b to 10b 455 755 605 461 790 1.317 Venice 665 1.110 888 498 849 1.390 71% 64% * refer to Chapter 2 The analytical tables presenting the demand of the indicative MoS link per O-D pair, for the 3rd year, during which it is estimated that the demand for the MoS indicative link will have reached the levels of the expected values for 2015 are displayed in Annex 3.

2.3.10.3 Competition overview The competition analysis which is presented next involves, both competitive intermodal maritime transport flows, as well as unimodal road transport flows, between the O-D pairs of the catchment area of the specific MoS corridor. A. Intermodal (maritime & road) transport flows competition In regards to the maritime segment of the intermodal transport flows between the O- D pairs of the catchment area of the specific MoS corridor, the trade flows between Malta and the Black Sea are currently served by two Lo-Lo connections between the port of Marsaxlokk and the ports of Novorossijsk and Poti. Both connections have a frequency of once per week. The port of Marsaxlokk is also connected by Lo-Lo to the ports of Koper and Rijeka whose hinterland partly coincides with the port of Venice. The service frequency of the connections is one (1) and two (2) per week to the ports of Koper and Rijeka respectively. The above mentioned existing maritime links are graphically presented in the following figure.

Deliverable 5.2 2-201 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-69 Existing maritime links of relevance to the MoS 9 corridor

Given the catchment area of the specific MoS corridor and specifically the particularities of this line, which will play the role of a feeder line in the region undertaking a share of the exchanges between Italy and the countries of the Black Sea, with greater emphasis the transportation of cargo towards Italy, due to the relevant import volumes to the country from the Black Sea countries, the following assumption is made in regards to the evolution of demand for the new line: In the first three (3) years period of its operation, it is expected that the line will manage to attract the market share of the cargo with origin the Italian regions of Veneto and Provincia Autonoma Trento and destination Malta and the Black Sea countries of Russia and Georgia much faster than in the opposite direction, where competition is particularly strong. It is noted that an assumption is made that the 50% of the total demand that the line is expected to serve in the direction from Italy towards the Black Sea will have been attracted during the 1st year of its operation, while the corresponding percentage of total flows in the opposite direction estimated that the line will achieve to attract and serve is set for the 2nd year of its operation. The situation will be stabilized along the forecasted values of 2015 during the 3rd year of operation of the line. In the first three year period of the new line’s operation it is estimated that the line will gradually achieve the attraction of cargo traffic with origin/ destination the catchment areas of the MoS corridor at a percentage of around 10% on average from

Deliverable 5.2 2-202 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

existing competitive lines involving mainly the connections from Malta with Koper, Rijeka, Venice, Novorossijsk and Poti. In the table that follows, in conjunction to the evolution of demand on the indicative link, the estimation of the evolution of demand for the total of the existing maritime links being competitive to this link is also presented. Table 2-35 Evolution of demand on the competitive existing maritime links of the MoS potential corridor 9

Estimated Existing Estimated AVG Maritime Links Demand Corridor Estimated ("Master Plan" run*) Cluster - Demand Corridor Indicative link Cluster (run "all Demand open"*) (run "all open"*) MIN MAX YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 from 10b to 8b Venice - Marsaxlokk 210 355 283 301 279 265 from 8b to 10b Marsaxlokk - Venice 455 755 605 3.995 3.666 3.139 665 1.110 888 4.296 3.945 3.403 -8% -14% * refer to Chapter 2 The analytical tables presenting the demand of the competitive existing maritime links per O-D pair, for the 3rd year, during which it is estimated that the demand for the MoS indicative link will have reached the levels of the expected values for 2015 are displayed in Annex 3.

Concerning competition on the inland part of the intermodal transport flows between the O-D pairs of the catchment area of the specific MoS corridor, and specifically for competition between the road and rail transport modes, the current situation as recorded as well as the future situation (2015) as estimated is being described in the following paragraphs for the western segment of the North Adriatic ports cluster. The main railway network serving this port cluster is depicted in the figure that follows.

Road – Rail competition in the western segment of the North Adriatic ports cluster

The main Italian ports included in this particular cluster are Ancona and Ravenna. Taking into account the current situation of the ports, but also their potential future prospects, in accordance to the strategic development goals they have set, it can be claimed that in regards to: • the port of Ancona, the port has an internal rail network which reaches several berths but is not connected to the national network. As for passengers, the city’s central station is 3 km away from the port and within proximity to the Passengers Terminal; • the port of Ravenna, the port is directly connected to the main transport networks of Italy, and can be easily reached from the main Italian and European centres.

Deliverable 5.2 2-203 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

The Port's potential is strengthened due to the fact that it is part of the European Freeways Network and in the "Adriatic Corridor" project.

Figure 2-70 MoS potential corridor 9 (The western segment of the North Adriatic & the southern segment of the Central Mediterranean ports clusters) and interconnection with the main railway network

From the above and based upon the current planning for the course of the upgrading and constructing the foreseen rail and road transport infrastructures in the catchment area of the western segment of the North Adriatic Italian ports cluster, it is apparent that until 2015 the competition between the two transport modes will virtually remain “non-existent” in the case of the port of Ancona but could increase in the case of the port of Ravenna according to the development of Corridor V Lisbon Kiev (Railway axis Lyon - Turin - Milan - Venice -Trieste/Koper - Ljubljana -Budapest). B. Unimodal road transport flows competition The trade flows moved by means of road only (unimodal road transport flows) between the catchment areas of the examined port clusters are those with origin/ destination the regions Lombardia, Veneto & Provincia Autonoma Trento from Italy and Russia, via the main road network of the Eastern Europe. These flows per O-D pair are presented in detail in Annex 3.

In the same Annex the analytical data (per O-D pair) emerging from the change caused to the estimated unimodal road transport flows on the do-nothing scenario of 2015, by the operation of the proposed indicative MoS link are also included. The

Deliverable 5.2 2-204 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

outcome from this comparative assessment is briefly presented in the table that follows.

Deliverable 5.2 2-205 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Table 2-36 Difference in unimodal road transport flows following the operation of the indicative MoS link on the MoS potential corridor 9

Road Road Competition Competition Cluster - Indicative link (Do-Nothing (Master Plan Difference Difference (%) Cluster 2015) Assignment) 1000 tons 1000 tons from 10b to Venice - Marsaxlokk 294 297 3 1% 8b from 8b to Marsaxlokk - Venice 3.125 3.127 2 0% 10b 3.419 3.424 5 0%

2.3.10.4 Indicative estimation of modal shift The specific MoS corridor is characterized by high degree of unbalance between the two directions. In addition, high level of total demand variation for the specific line is recorded from 400 ktns in the pessimistic scenario up to 1.500 ktns in the optimistic scenario of traffic estimation. The moderate scenario quantifies the future freight transport demand of the link at the level of 850 ktns per year. The high demand variation is explained by the fact that freight traffic volumes from Malta to Italy mainly originate from the wide study area countries of the Black Sea, Russia etc. that may use the ports of Malta as hubs of long distance container lines. When considering the average traffic forecast the viability assessment of the line results to negative figures. This analysis is presented in a later chapter of this report and demonstrates that the specific service can become profitable when the total traffic volume (both directions) along the line reach a level of 2.300 ktns, an assumption that may be realistic for beyond the 2015 horizon and if the previously discussed additional demand (from transit over Malta ports’ traffic) will be generated for the benefit of the specific line. Since Malta is an island, the connection between Malta and Venice does not display any modal shift from the road. However, if the potential chain originating from the Black Sea is considered there is great modal shift potential from road from a large distance freight transport corridor. The alternative route would combine maritime - intra Black Sea connection, from the Georgian port of Poti to the Bulgarian port of Burgas and road transport originating from the port of Burgas and reaching the port of Venice after crossing the Balkan Peninsula that is mainly A1 and part of E70. The distance to be covered by road is approximately 1.450 kms and the potential demand shifted to maritime is 900.000 tons, giving the total amount of 1.300 million ton/kms potential modal shift. The graphic display of the two shortest paths examined for the two alternative ways of connection (MoS corridor connection or combination of maritime and road connection) is provided in the figure that follows.

Deliverable 5.2 2-206 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-71 Indicative shortest paths displaying the two alternative ways of connection between the catchment areas of the western segment of the North Adriatic & the southern segment of the Central Mediterranean ports clusters

2.3.10.5 Indicative service profile of the MoS link The findings of a relevant search in regards to the characteristics of vessels currently operating on the Adriatic-Ionian corridor and which could potentially handle the serving of the expected trade flows of the specific line, indicated towards the selection of a Lo-Lo vessel with capacity of approximately 1.100 containers (TEUs). The typical commercial speed (service speed) for this vessel would be about 18 knots given a maximum vessel speed of 20 knots. Following the elaboration of the relevant data, on the basis of the assumptions previously presented in the chapter that discussed the methodological approach for determining the indicative service profile, it can be concluded that a ship with this capacity travelling with the specified speed, could serve the expected demand of the line with two (2) sailings per week, for a one direction trip of length approximately 770 nautical miles in about 59 hours. For two roundtrips per week the total sailing

Deliverable 5.2 2-207 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

time of the ship is approximately 10 days with the total turnaround time is excluded which means that for a service of twice per week two vessels would be needed. The above calculations were conducted separately for each of the first three (3) years of the line’s operation. The corresponding data for each year of operation examined are provided in Annex 4.

2.3.10.6 Viability analysis of the MoS link The economic viability assessment of the service of this particular indicative MoS link was carried out in line with the methodology that was presented in chapter 2.2.7 and the indicative service profile that was described in Annex 4 for each of the first three (3) years of the line’s operation. The assessment findings show that this MoS link does not display a potential for positive economic results even after the first 5 years of operation despite the estimation that during the third year (2012) of operation the demand for the particular service would have reached the levels of the forecasted demand for 2015. The calculation form regarding this third year of operation is presented in the figure that follows. A major influencing parameter for this negative outcome is the fact that the large distances of the connection and the low speed of the vessels result to the need to operate the specific lines with the use of two vessels from the first year of the operation during which the bundling of the demand over the service is low. Therefore, in order for the service to become viable either supplementary financial support would be required e.g. in the form of state aid or substantial relevant changes in the market conditions would have to occur that would significantly act favourably towards the operation of the service.

Deliverable 5.2 2-208 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Deliverable 5.2 2-209 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-72 MoS link economic viability assessment results- Year 3

Deliverable 5.2 2-210 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

2.4 Missing Links Identification

2.4.1 Introduction In order to identify the missing links, in the context of the study, the following two- level approach was followed:

• Level 1 – Missing infrastructures (port capacity restraint) and access to the ports for satisfying the potential MoS traffic needs in the EMR • Level 2 – Missing services for the serving of future transport demand (2015)

At a previous stage of the study, in the context of the work presented in Del. 1, Vol. I, the Level 1 the missing links identification was examined as derived from the bottlenecks’ analysis and the system users’ & stakeholders’ surveys. It must be clarified that the Level 1 approach focused entirely on the examined core study area ports of the five countries involved in the study, in line with the study’s objectives, whilst the Level 2 approach included all the countries of the EMR (core and wider study area) thus considering services/ connections to non-EU countries as well.

The Level 2 analysis of the missing links identification is carried out at this present stage of the study since it required the running of the model and its output concerning the future trade flows estimations made for the 2015 time horizon. It should be noted that the feedback received from the system users’ & stakeholders’ surveys did not provide concrete input directing towards specific non-existing services that can characterized as missing links.

2.4.2 Methodology

The methodology followed for the identification of the missing links in the EMR, at the Level 2 stage, as non-existing maritime services in cases where there is demand, was based on the elaboration/ utilization of the model’s assignment results whereas the maritime network was considered as the total of all possible connections between the ports of the study area (existing and “non-existing”). More specifically, the steps which constituted the implementation stages of the methodology applied are summarized as follows:

1. Step1: Selection of all the O-D pairs which in the specific assignment are served by “non-existing” maritime links (i.e. by missing links) 2. Step 2: Exclusion from the above set (Step 1) all those O-D pairs which could be alternativly served by at least one existing maritime link between the port clusters that constitute the end points of the “non-existing” maritime links 3. Step 3: Exclusion from the above set (Step 2) of those O-D pairs between an i core area country and an j wide area country, which could be alternativly served by at least one existing maritime link between the i core and j wide area country

Deliverable 5.2 2-211 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

4. Step 4: Exclusion from the above set (Step 3) of those O-D pairs which could be served by the indicative MoS links proposed along the potential MoS corridors identified 5. Step 5: Exclusion from the above set (Step 4) of those O-D pairs of which the demand is less than 5 ktons16 6. Step 6: Grouping (sum of the respective estimated demand) of the above set (Step 5) per port cluster and O-D pair 7. Step 7: Grouping (sum of the respective estimated demand) of the above set (Step 6) per port cluster.

The findings resulting from applying stage 6 of the methodology are presented in Annex 6, while the corresponding outcomes from stage 7 are displayed in Table 2.37.

2.4.3 Presentation of missing links

In accordance to the methodological steps followed, as described in the previous section, a number of missing links were identified and are displayed in the table that follows. More specifically, fourteen cases are presented as potential missing links, indicating each of the relevant port clusters involved, as previously defined in the study for the whole EMR, as well as the corresponding estimated demand between the OD pairs for 2015. It is noted that the demand cell is shadowed in grey in regards to those cases where the estimated demand volumes fall below the minimum level of the critical cargo masses required for the service to be considered as viable. The critical mass check conducted is relevant to Lo-Lo services for all cases, besides cases 4, 8, 14 and 16, since extended travel distances are involved in these potential connections.

Table 2-37 Overview of the missing links

DEMAND Case FROM TO CLUSTER 2015 (000s COMMENTS no. CLUSTER tons)

3b- Russia, 10b- North Italy unbalanced flows, but it 2.404 Georgia (Venice, Chioggia) could be an option as an 1 extention of a MoS case 10b- North Italy between two Member 3b- Russia, Georgia 277 (Venice, Chioggia) States

unbalanced flows, but it 3b- Russia, 10c- North Italy 1.619 could be an option as an

16 Refer to Chapter 2.2.2

Deliverable 5.2 2-212 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

DEMAND Case FROM TO CLUSTER 2015 (000s COMMENTS no. CLUSTER tons)

Georgia (Ravenna, Ancona) extention of a MoS case between two Member 2 10c- North Italy States, this case could be 3b- Russia, Georgia 259 (Ravenna, Ancona) combined with case 1

10a- North Italy unbalanced flows, but it 3b- Russia, (Monfalcone, Slovenia, 1.005 could be an option as an Georgia Croatia) extention of a MoS case 3 between two Member 10a- North Italy States, this case could be (Monfalcone, 3b- Russia, Georgia 154 combined with cases 1 & Slovenia, Croatia) 2

9b- Albania, 7- West Greece Montenegro, Bosnia & 957

Herzegovina unbalanced flows, there is 9b- Albania, strong competition from Montenegro, 4 7- West Greece 153 road Bosnia & Herzegovina

West Italy ports 7- West Greece 850 it is an option (υπάρχει όμως τώρα με τη γραμμή 5 7- West Greece West Italy ports 537 του Grimaldi)

3b- Russia, 11- South Italy unbalanced flows, but it 516 Georgia (Brindisi, Bari, Taranto) could be an option as an extention of a MoS case between two Member 11- South Italy States, this case could be (Brindisi, Bari, 3b- Russia, Georgia 75 6 combined with cases 1, 2 Taranto) & 3

9b- Albania, 6- Central/ South Montenegro, Bosnia & 330 Greece Herzegovina unbalanced flows, there is

9b- Albania, strong competition from Montenegro, 6- Central/ South road, but this case could 7 56 Bosnia & Greece be combined with case 4 Herzegovina

7- West Greece 1- Middle East 170 it is an option 8 1- Middle East 7- West Greece 160

8a- Sicily 3b- Russia, Georgia 97 low flows, but it could be (Augusta, Catania) an option as an extention

Deliverable 5.2 2-213 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

DEMAND Case FROM TO CLUSTER 2015 (000s COMMENTS no. CLUSTER tons)

9 3b- Russia, 8a- Sicily (Augusta, of a MoS case between 74 Georgia Catania) two Member States,

10c- North Italy 5- North Greece 74 (Ravenna, Ancona) low flows, but it could be 10 10c- North Italy 5- North Greece 69 an option (Ravenna, Ancona)

10b- North Italy 5- North Greece 54 (Venice, Chioggia) low flows, but it could be 11 10b- North Italy an option, this case could 5- North Greece 49 (Venice, Chioggia) be combined with case 10

6- Central/ South 9a- Croatia (Split, 49 low & very unbalanced Greece Ploce) flows, but this case could be combined with cases 4 12 9a- Croatia (Split, 6- Central/ South 6 & 7 Ploce) Greece

10a- North Italy

5- North Greece (Monfalcone, Slovenia, 46 Croatia) low flows, but it could be an option, this case could 13 10a- North Italy be combined with cases (Monfalcone, 5- North Greece 24 10 & 11 Slovenia, Croatia)

9a- Croatia (Split, 7- West Greece 21 low flows, but it could be Ploce) an option, this case could be combined with cases 14 9a- Croatia (Split, 7- West Greece 5 12 & 11 Ploce)

From the table, the main conclusions that can be drawn are the following:

• there are either greatly unbalanced flows in both directions – even in the case where links are combined within routes this imbalance continues to persist. Only in the case that specific commercial arrangements and deals are made within the industry could this problematic issue be surpassed and more balanced flows to be secured and maintained; • or there are particularly low flows that do not satisfy the critical masses required for the viable operation of these potential connecting services; and, • the only case in which the flows are balanced in both directions whilst at the same time critical masses are also satisfied concerns the connection of West Greece with West Italy (case 5). It is noted that in this case the strongest OD

Deliverable 5.2 2-214 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

pairs that emerged from the analysis involve West Europe with Attiki, Kentriki Makedonia and Dytiki Ellada with approximately 448, 168 and 54 thousand tons respectively.17

Therefore, it is evident that these missing links involve non-existing connections which to present have been ignored by the industry possibly due to significant shortcomings and risks that a potential operator would have to face. In addition, concerning a limited number of cases the connections between the ODs of which could be combined in order to secure critical masses may involve only one EU country without the possibility of a viable extension to another EU member state and as such as they can not be considered by the study in the context of potential MoS set- up since one of the main requirements for MoS development is not met (two or more EU member states to be involved). Another aspect that may hinder the prospects of combining cases with low flows, that will inevitably require more calls at different ports along the service route, is that apart from the total transport cost that will increase, the overall journey time may also increase substantially that would in a way undermine, particularly in relation to road transport, the competitive advantage which is sought to be achieved by the development of MoS.

2.5 Proposed Projects under the 2nd Call for Motorways of the Sea Project Proposals in the East Mediterranean area 2009

Within the framework of the TEN-T project “Elaboration of the East Mediterranean Motorways of the Sea Master Plan”, the Steering Committee consisting of representatives from the Hellenic Ministry of Mercantile Marine, Aegean and Islands Policy, the Ministry of Transport of the Italian Republic, the Ministry of Transport of the Republic of Slovenia, the Cyprus Ports Authority and the Malta Maritime Authority, launched, in April 2009, the second call for proposals with regard to the MoS in the East Mediterranean area. This 2nd call for proposals was part of the ambitious plan to develop viable Motorways of the Sea routes in the region, and was also considered as a method to receive valuable feedback regarding prospective MoS routes and infrastructure interventions and improvements in the inter-modal-logistics chain.The following two proposals were submitted on the 2nd call due date:

• Eleusis-Barcelona • Adriatic Motorways of the Sea - ADRIAMOS

17 The information regarding the OD pairs that emerged from the analysis concerning all the missing links identified are presented in detail in Annex 5I.

Deliverable 5.2 2-215 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

A brief outline of the two proposed projects is presented in the following. A detailed description of the projects, including their respective objectives, proposed activities, benefits and impacts is included in Annex IX.

2.5.1 ELEUSIS-BARCELONA The proposed project includes a new door-to door logistics chain linking the hinterland of the Port of Barcelona and the hinterland of the Greek port of Eleusis (notably the area of Athens).

Today, freight between the and Greece, and between the Iberian Peninsula and Greece's neighbouring countries, is transported mainly by road and to a lesser extent by a combination of road and maritime modes (either road to Italy and then maritime from Italy to Greece, or maritime to Italy, then crossing Italy by truck and then maritime again from an Adriatic Italian Port to Greece).

Based on the above, the service will be launched in order to attract traffic from the road, thus minimizing current bottlenecks, as well as contributing to the reduction of

CO2 emissions in Europe.

The project is located in the West and East Mediterranean and is a unique action, due to the fact that it connects by sea and through a Ro-Ro service two very distant areas, such as the Iberian Peninsula and Greece.

The proposed project has the following main components: a) A new viable, regular and frequent maritime route between the two ports. b) Improvement of the infrastructure and services in the terminal used by the maritime services in the Port of Barcelona and Eleusis. c) Intermodal services from the two ports connected to the main consumption and distribution centres, where cargo using this particular chain has origin or destination. d) Improvement of the accessibility to the terminal in the Port of Barcelona.

The main features of the proposed service are:

• Type of freight (automotive materials, dangerous material, software, electronic material, plastics and associated manufactured products, textiles, steels and other metals, pharmaceutical products, papper-cardboard, chemicals,… ) • Initial estimate of volume targets: 5,000 UTI´s per year both ways • Anticipated frequency of the maritime service: one service per week to increase to 2 services per week after 6 / 12months according to market demand. • Type of vessel: one of Neptune Aegli or Neptune Okeanis type. • Transit time: 60 hours

The main partners of the project are:

Deliverable 5.2 2-216 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

• The Port of Eleusis • The Port of Barcelona • Neptune Lines (the shipping company)

2.5.2 ADRIAMOS The Adriamos project aims at developing the Adriatic Sea corridor, thus, contributing to the East Mediterranean Motorways of the Sea Master Plan, with a proposed MoS linking Venice-Koper-Igoumenitsa/Patra.

ADRIAMOS was initially submitted in the previous 1st East Mediterranean Motorways of the Sea Master Plan - call for proposals. On 31st July 2008, the project Coordinator met with the Technical Committee of the EastMed-MoS programme to discuss the details of the project. The present Project, described herein, is an updated version of the previous one, with an enlarged partnership consortium that now includes the port of Koper.

On the north Adriatic side, the project will promote interoperability and intermodality by creating a new logistic infrastructure that will allow the combination of maritime and rail transport modes connecting Greece, and other countries in the South East Mediterranean, with the economic areas of North-Eastern Italy and Central European countries. On the Greek side, the project will take advantage of the new Egnatia Motorway to connect to destinations in Eastern Greece, Bulgaria, Turkey, as well as the Black sea regions.

The proposed project foresees the following infrastructural interventions in the ports of Venice, Koper and Igoumenitsa/Patra:

ƒ Activity 1 (Venice) - Motorways of the Sea Terminal (North basin); ƒ Activity 2 (Venice) - Motorways of the Sea Terminal of "Fusina Logistic Platform" (South basin and Terminal); ƒ Activity 3 (Venice) - Implementation of a "cold ironing" system for the new MoS Terminal; ƒ Activity 4 (Venice) - Improvement of the road connection between the local network and the new MoS Terminal accessibility; ƒ Activity 5 (Venice) - Gauging of the Malamocco-Marghera Canal in proximity of the new MoS Terminal. ƒ Activity 6 (Koper) - Construction of the new RO-RO berth and a new floating pontoon for RO-RO vessels, for loading and unloading of cars which are stored in the nearness of the berth area in the port of Koper; ƒ Activity 7 (Igoumenitsa/Patra) – Deployment of a port community system and security system;

The consortium partnership involves both public and private sectors bringing together port authorities (Venice, Igoumenitsa, Corinth and Patra), shipping companies (Minoan lines, Anek lines, Hellenic Seaways), rail operator (Sistemi Territoriali) and logistic operators (Pastrello, Kannelos).

Deliverable 5.2 2-217 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

2.6 Overall Master Plan results

In the next paragraphs, the outcome of the process followed for the determination of the MoS potential corridors proposed to constitute the East Mediterranean MoS Master Plan is concisely presented.

In addition to the implementation of the methodology that was presented in detail in previous paragraphs, both for the determination of the MoS potential connections proposals, a final assignment was made in the traffic model assuming the implementation of all the proposed MoS potential corridors in the year 2015. Furthermore, a scenario on the impact of improvement and development works on the involved ports performance was tested, taking into account the target values of the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) as the overall performance efficiency targets of MoS port nodes. A detailed description of the KPIs is presented in Chapter 3.

2.6.1 Master Plan cut-view In the map that follows the existing maritime links as well as the nine (9) MoS potential corridors (indicative MoS links) that compose the EMR MoS Master Plan cut-view are presented. Moreover, the interconnection of the MoS potential corridors with the TEN-T road network, are also presented in the same map.

The total of the proposed MoS potential corridors with the respective indicative MoS links and their service type are presented in table 2.38 which provides a general overview. In the same table, the directional as well as the summed up minimum and maximum values of the estimated potential freight corridor demand in year 2015 (in ktns), are also presented per MoS corridor.

Eleven (11) out of the seventeen (17) port clusters of the core and wide study area, that were defined at a previous stage of the study (WP 1 –Deliverable 1/ Volume II), are involved in the EMR Master Plan with the involvement of thirteen (13), in total, different ports of the core study area. These include five (5) Greek ports (Patra, Igoumenitsa, Kavala, Pireaus, Korinthos), four (4) Italian ports (Ancona, Catania, Taranto, Venice), one (1) Cypriot port (Limassol), one (1) port from Slovenia (Koper), one (1) port from Malta and one (1) port from Croatia18 (Ploce). The nine (9) proposed MoS potential corridors involve three (3) Ro-Pax, two (2) Lo-Lo and four (4) Ro-Ro connections. The majority of these connections involve journeys along the

18 Acsession Country

Deliverable 5.2 2-218 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Ionian and Adriatic Sea with the exception of cases 2 (Limassol - Kavala) and 6 (Limassol - Pireaus) which travel via the Aegean and the southeastern part of the Mediterranean Sea and case 9 (Malta-Venice), which also includes a Black Sea connection to Italy via Malta.

The most promising in terms of greatest maximum values of the total (both directions) estimated potential freight demand for the year 2015 are the cases 4 (Venice – (Igoumenitsa) – Patra – (Korinthos)), 5 (Igoumenitsa – Koper – Ancona) and 6 (Limassol – Piraeus) with 2.765, 2.860 and 2.055 ktns respectively.

Table 2-38 Overview of the proposed MoS potential corridors of the EMR MoS Master Plan

Estimated Potential Freight MoS Corridor Demand 2015 (in ktns) Type of Cluster - Cluster Indicative MoS Link service MIN MAX corridor Freight Freight MOS potential

Demand Demand

from 11 to 7 Taranto - Igoumenitsa 320 540 1 from 7 to 11 Igoumenitsa - Taranto Ro-Pax 240 390 560 930 from 1 to 5 Limassol - Kavala 300 490 2 from 5 to 1 Kavala - Limassol Lo-Lo 360 590 660 1.080 from 10a to 7 Koper - Igoumenitsa 380 650 3* from 7 to 10a Igoumenitsa - Koper Ro-Ro 360 610 740 1.260 Venice - (Igoumenitsa) - from 10b to 7 1.135 1.920 Patra - (Korinthos) 4* (Korinthos) - Patra - Ro-Ro from 7 to 10b 525 845 (Igoumenitsa) - Venice 1.660 2.765 Koper – Ancona – from 10a to 10c 1.040 1.655 (Igoumenitsa) 5 (Igoumenitsa) - Ancona - Ro-Ro from 10c to 10a 765 1.205 Koper 1.805 2.860 from 1 to 6 Limassol - Piraeus 680 1.125 6 from 6 to 1 Piraeus - Limassol Ro-Pax 555 930 1.235 2.055

Deliverable 5.2 2-219 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Estimated Potential Freight MoS Corridor Demand 2015 (in ktns) Type of Cluster - Cluster Indicative MoS Link service MIN MAX corridor Freight Freight MOS potential potential MOS

Demand Demand

from 10b to 9a Venice - (Koper) - Ploce 150 245 7 from 9a to 10b Ploce - (Koper) - Venice Ro-Ro 645 1.080 795 1.325 from 8a to 7 Catania - Patra 115 190 8 from 7 to 8a Patra - Catania Ro-Pax 30 55 145 245 from 10b to 8b Venice - Malta 210 355 9 from 8b to 10b Malta - Venice Lo-Lo 455 755 665 1.110 from 6 to Eleusis-Barcelona 57.5 WESTMoS 10** from WESTMoS Ro-Ro Barcelona-Eleusis 57.5 to 6

* related to the ADRIAMOS proposal, as submitted under the 2nd call for proposals

**this potential corridor is included since it was submitted under the 2nd call of proposals

2.6.2 Results of the assignment In addition to the case by case analysis for the nine proposed MoS corridors, a final assignment of the traffic model was conducted, assuming the implementation of all nine proposed MoS corridors in the year 2015.

The implementation of this scenario shows a potential increase in the total maritime freight volumes to the level of 117.7 million tns, which when compared to the “do nothing” scenario for 2015, gives an average increase of about 2.7% in volumes transported by sea. The relevant traveled ton kilometers by sea amount to 141,681 millions and include a potential reduction in the total traveled ton kilometers by road of about 2% or approximately 4,000 million ton kilometers.

Furthermore, a scenario on the impact of the Key Performance Indicators concept applied to the nine MoS corridors was also tested by running the model. For this scenario, under the title “Masterplan and KPIs scenario”, the changes and improvements in the ports and the facilitations for the nine MoS corridors have been taken into account as introduced in the Key Perforformance Indicators chapter and also in the Gap Analysis for the ports. It has been assumed that these changes will

Deliverable 5.2 2-220 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

affect the traffic assignment of the model when translated into amendments of the generalized cost function parameters for the nine MoS corridors and in particular of the parameter related to the cost derived by the delays in the port. In terms of this assignment, it was assumed that the application of the KPIs concept will achieve an overall average minimization of delays by 20% for the ports involved in the nine MoS corridors. The implementation of this scenario shows a potential increase in total maritime freight volumes at the level of 118.1 million tns, which when compared to the “do-nothing” scenario for 2015, gives an average increase of about 3.2% in volumes transported by sea. The relevant traveled ton kilometers by sea amount to 142,248 millions and induce a potential reduction in the total traveled ton kilometers by road of about 2.2% or approximately 4,500 million ton kilometers.

In Table 2.15 the overall traffic assignment results and assumptions of the model for each of two afore mentioned scenarios are presented as well as the relative maritime and road shares in comparison to the “do nothing” scenario for the year 2015.

A graphical representation of the model assignment results for each of the masterplan scenarios, versus the “do-nothing” scenario is presented in the two maps that follow. The maps are displaying the difference network of scenario testing when compared to the “do-nothing” scenario. The red coloured bundles display the decline in freight flows when compared to the “zero” scenario while the blue coloured flow bundles show the links to experience an increase. As shown in these maps a significant number of maritime links benefit by the implelentation of the MoS corridors and at the same time a reduction in traffic volumes in major road segments is displayed.

Deliverable 5.2 2-221 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Table 2-39 Scenarios definition (year 2015)

Increase percentage Change Change Total MARITIME VS Total Travel percentage Total Travel percentage num name description volumes in million Scenario 0 millionTn.Km VS millionTn.Km VS tns (object of range: by MARITIME Scenario 0 by ROAD Scenario 0 volumes on maritime links) for MARITIME for ROAD

Scenario 0 Do nothing 114.5 132,087 197,060 Implementation of MOS 1 case MOS 2 case MOS 3 case Scenario MOS 4 case Do something 117.7 average 2.7% 141,681 7.2 % 193,157 -2.0 % Masterplan MOS 5 case MOS 6 case MOS 7 case MOS 8 case MOS 9 case Implementation of MOS 1 case MOS 2 case MOS 3 case MOS 4 case MOS 5 case Scenario MOS 6 case Do something Masterplan MOS 7 case 118.1 average 3.2% 142,248 7.7 % 192,696 -2.2 % and KPIs and KPIs MOS 8 case MOS 9 case

Overall average -20% reduction for delays in ports involving the MoS corridors

Deliverable 5.2 2-222 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-73 Map presenting flow difference comparing”Do Nothing” with “Do Something” scenario

Deliverable 5.2 2-223 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 2-74 Map presenting flow difference comparing”Do Nothing” with “Do Something & KPI’s” scenario

Deliverable 5.2 2-224 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

2.6.3 Sum-up of indicative/ predominant MoS links’ economic feasibility pre-assessment results Table 2.16 shows the volumes of freight flows considered per MoS link for the different years of the potential service operation. In the majority of the cases an average scenario of traffic generation and articulation along the first years of the operation was applied. The articulation of the flows in the first time horizon of the operation was made by taking into account the existing competition in each connection and the detailed analysis by OD pairs of the demand that will be attracted by the potential service. In this table traffic is given in Ktns since the results of the demand forecasting model of the study were used as primary data.

The demand profile generated and presented in Table 2.16 was transformed in transported units mainly for facilitating calculation of vessels operating cost and revenues associated to the service of the potential demand of the link by applying the major assumptions employed for the conversion indexes (section 2.2.5). Table 2.17 displays the potential traffic by MoS link in transported units.

In Table 2.18 the balance of the cost and revenues by year of operation and by MoS link is presented. As shown in the table, the majority of the lines to operate along the proposed MoS corridors face years of negative exploitation results at least at the beginning of the operation period. In particular:

• The two Lo-Lo lines included in the Master plan does not show a potential for positive economic results even after the first 5 years of operation. A major influencing parameter for this result is the fact that the large travel distances involved together with the relative low speed of the vessels result to the need to operate the specific lines with the use of two vessels from the first year of the operation during which the bundling of the demand over the service is low.

• The Ro-Pax lines included in the Master plan show negative exploitation results during their first year of operation but with a clear tendency (depending on the case) for becoming positive within a period of 2-5 years. It has to be mentioned that the economic viability of these services is significantly affected by the passenger traffic volumes of the specific links. This demand dimension is highly uncertain in all of the three Ro-Pax services cases.

• The Ro-Ro services included in the master plan display the most promising prospects regarding economic viability results. The majority of the lines display slightly negative or positive balance of revenues over cost while stabilization in positive exploitation results is achieved within the first two years of the operation.

Deliverable 5.2 225 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

In summing up the above presented results and the information of table 2.18, it has to be concluded that a total service operation deficit at the level of 200 million Euros is to be faced if all the services included in the East-MoS master plan are put in operation. This services’ operational deficit is associated to the first 6 years of services operation and may refer to a time horizon 2010 – 2016.

Figure 2-75 Sum up of traffic estimation (in Ktns) by MoS link used for the service economic viability assessment

Deliverable 5.2 226 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Table 2-40 Sum up of the freight traffic by unit of cargo used for MoS services’ economic viability assessment

Deliverable 5.2 227 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Table 2-41 Results of MoS links’ economic viability assessment by year

Deliverable 5.2 2-228 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

2.6.4 Conclusions The Master Plan scenarios and the relative traffic assignments show that a significant number of maritime links benefit by the implementation of the MoS corridors connections and at the same time a reduction in traffic volumes in major road segments is displayed. Also regarding the competition with existing maritime connections it should be noted that no major reduction on volumes of the existing maritime services is observed.

The greatest difference and competition is observed for the corridors connecting Black Sea regions which provide major volumes of exported goods and raw materials to northern Italy and the southmost countries of central Europe and which can be served via the combination of the Adriatic-Ionian and the Black Sea–Aegean North- South intermodal corridors. The two major competitive corridors for these volumes of trade involves the road networks of Bulgaria and central Balkan coutries such as either route E70 or its parallel routes with these major road segments being in competition with almost 100% of the freight flows transported by sea via Malta and through their feeder destinations to northern Italy.

Furthermore, the Adriatic-Ionian intermodal corridor appears to be gaining additional volumes with the implementation of the proposed MoS corridors since these Adriatic Sea connections further promote SSS and the integration of the maritime links between Italy, Greece and Slovenia. In case these SSS lines are further supported by relevant policy measures they can potentially replace short distance trips of 500-1000 kms traditionally carried out by road transport. The potential of this particular corridor identified by the simulation model, is also proven by the submission of the ADRIAMOS proposed project, related to an MoS corridor in the Adriatic Sea, under the 2nd call of proposals.

The new proposed MoS corridor linking Cyprus with Northern Greece as a gate to the rest of the Balkan Peninsula countries with a relevant reduction in road volumes along the E75 part of corridor X can potentially promote the role of Cyprus as a hub and feeder port of the East-Med area and further support the generation of flows to be transported along the Middle East-Europe intermodal corridor.

Seven out of the nine proposed MoS corridors display evidence of creating modal shift from the road to sea while the remaining MoS corridors, the Limassol-Pireaus (MoS corridor 6) and Igoumenitsa-Taranto (MoS corridor 1) connections may not create modal shift but can be justified in terms of EU policy requirements (cohesion and peripheral regions) and transport network efficiency/ utilization respectively. The potential total modal shift estimated from the seven aforementioned proposed MoS corridors (corridors: 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9) amounts to the level of four (4) to five (5) billion ton/kms.

Therefore, the operation of MoS services along these potential MoS corridors would significantly affect the economies of the EMR regions involved, which would greatly

Deliverable 5.2 2-229 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study benefit from trade facilitation less road transport related externalities (congestion, air and noise pollution, accidents etc.), and more cost effective transportation.

The Two Seas MoS proposal submitted under the 1st call of proposals (MoS potential corridor 5) presented in the previous sections shows the potential for the cooperation between the West & the East Med MoS networks that should be further supported in the future. On the other hand, there is another project proposal submitted under the 2nd call of proposals, connecting East and West Meditteranean, the Eleusis-Barcelona.

Important conclusions may also be drawn for the EMR island regions (Malta & Cyprus). MoS involving the two regions are of different typology (feeder service interface in Malta and region isolation alleviation in the case of Cyprus) prove the need for rationalizing MoS not only on strict modal shift issues among the EU countries involved in the East Med MoS but also in terms of increasing cohesion between the EU and its peripheral and island member states, which is of course one of the main stated objectives of the overall EU MoS policy. Finally, it is noted that from the competition analysis that was realized, and analytically presented in the previous sections where each of the potential MoS corridors were presented, emerges the low competitiveness of rail based transport alternatives in the study which are is mainly due to the topology of the core study area and the low level of service rail can provide. This situation is not expected to change drastically until 2015 taking into account the foreseen in the core study area projects for rail infrastructure rehabilitation and rail operation enhancement. The TEN-T development relevant provisions and the priorities of national-transnational initiatives as officially published indicate major improvements in both areas (infrastructure & operation) of rail mode in the area in the period 2020-2025.

In Annex 8, the recording of the current situation for each of the ports clusters involved in the 9 in total potential MoS corridors is being summarized, whilst also at the same time attempting to record:

♦ the main bottlenecks that currently, but also till 2015, are expected to continue to hinder the development of rail in the core study area (Italy, Slovenia, Greece), as well as

♦ the prospects visible until 2015, taking into account the scheduled projects/ works and initiatives of the core study area countries, but also of neighboring countries (where possible) in the catchment areas of the 9 potential MoS corridors.

The information presented in Annex 8 provides evidence to support the conclusion that the competitiveness of rail in the study area is not expected to dramatically change until 2015. State intervention in the core study area countries through the application of policy initiatives, with primary focus on Italy and Slovenia, which already have a developed railway network, could provide impetus towards the development of rail in the region. Indicatively, some of the main actions needed to

Deliverable 5.2 2-230 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study foster the development of the railway – maritime intermodal transport are listed below:

♦ providing support to Railways Operators by funding rolling stock

♦ promoting the inclusion of port terminals’ network in the logistics chains

♦ enhancement of the existing network of public intermodal terminals close to the MoS ports

♦ improvement of the "last mile” process related to the infrastructure and operational link between the long-distance movement of intermodal trains over the main railway network and the intermodal terminal where intermodal loading units (LU) are transshipped between rail and sea.

A more detailed presentation of the actions is included in Deliverable 9 of the project.

Deliverable 5.2 2-231 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

3 Specification of Minimum Requirements for MoS

3.1 Scope and general context for Minimum Requirements for MoS

By conception, MoS chains (composite maritime-terrestrial chains) are meant to be associated with minimum requirements of the provided transport services throughout the various chain links. A number of predetermined quality criteria therefore are needed to guarantee the competitiveness of the MoS chains against the road haulage alternative with respect to

ƒ speed, frequency, regularity, continuity and safety / security

ƒ cost of the "door-to-door" service

ƒ simplicity of documents and administration processes

The minimum requirements should represent a minimum acceptable quality level to be attained, against which design standards and performance levels have to be adapted regarding the areas of :

ƒ infrastructure, installations and equipment

ƒ operations (shipping, port, haulage)

ƒ externally provided services

ƒ information flows and documentation

The minimum requirements for MoS, in order to be practical and easy for application, have to be at the same time:

ƒ specific enough in order to create a clear identity for MoS services,

ƒ suitably generic in order to be uniformly applied to all MoS services, corridors and associated constituent elements (ports, vessels, trucks, operators etc) and

ƒ orientated towards chain-link operations efficiency rather than technical characteristics / capacities of infrastructure, installations, handling equipment and transport means

This chapter is about to attempt the identification and specification of minimum requirements for MoS, in order to establish the possibility of "certification" for MoS services in the EMR, taking into consideration its own specificities. It has to be mentioned that the term “minimum requirements” was used rather as an abstract term that denotes a qualified service. Furhtermore, it was not in the scope of the study to collect the full data that are needed in order to justify a benchmarking on service quality.

Deliverable 5.2 3-232 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

3.2 Minimum Requirements for MoS

As already mentioned, MoS services are complex services with their overall efficiency depending on efficiencies of individual links and interconnections. Figure 3.1 schematically presents MoS service integral components and how these are interconnected. In this sense, the minimum requirements of an integrated MoS service are stemming from a synthesis of the minimum requirements of its integral components. For this reason, MoS minimum rewuirements were developed by categorizing them in terms of performance quality for:

ƒ Port hinterland connection

ƒ Land-side terminal and quay

ƒ Sea-side terminal and quay

ƒ Shipping operations

ƒ Information exchange and Documentation

Deliverable 5.2 3-233 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 3-1 Synthesis of MoS services by its integral components

Deliverable 5.2 3-234 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

3.2.1 Port hinterland connections Port connection with adjacent land networks refers to the link between port main road / rail gate to the closest motorway / main rail artery, and it is of crucial importance to MoS services efficiency. Its quality refers to the following parameters:

ƒ speed (average speed to cross the connection leg),

ƒ safety,

ƒ capacity,

ƒ easy access to road / rail operator(s) within the port

Focusing now on road connection side of a MoS port, it needs to:

ƒ be the shortest possible in length,

ƒ have the shortest path through urban areas,

ƒ be adequately maintained and signposted, to acceptable national and EU standards and

ƒ have adequate capacity (taking into consideration normal traffic conditions), so that congestion is avoided.

Having these parameters in mind, key minimum requirements of port hinterland connections for MoS service compatibility are proposed as the following:

Table 3-1 Key Minimum Requirements for MoS port hinterland connections

OBJECTIVE INDICATORS VALUES

Fast and direct access to Number of certified road haulage At least one (1) road haulage operators operators based within port within port premises premises

Direct port connection Existence of rail-terminal within At least one (1) in category with national rail network the port A ports

3.2.2 Land-side terminal and quay For a cargo vehicle moving within the port area, between port-gate and a MoS quay (on its way from the port-gate to the quay or inversely), minimum requirements may be developed with respect to the following key areas:

ƒ Internal port roads

Deliverable 5.2 3-235 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Internal port roads accommodating MoS traffic need to be suitably wide (minimum width and number of lanes per direction), signposted, lighted and maintained. They also need to be clearly identified from parking / waiting areas, with no obstacles that could interrupt the flow of vehicles to / from the MoS terminal / quay.

ƒ MoS terminal and quay characteristics

A need for dedicated MoS terminal / quay depends on the volume of traffic demand which is port and time specific. It also depends on productivity levels of handling operators and equipment. In order to overcome this, it is proposed that the need for dedicated terminal / quays should be mainly associated to unaccompanied cargo demand, which imposes larger and stricter requirements with respect to space and operations productivity.

From a functional perspective, a MoS terminal should:

• specialise in "ro-ro", as far as possible, as a non-exclusive criterion,

• be adequately arranged, with different areas for waiting and pre-embarkation and the interior traffic areas,

• have parking spaces adequately signposted for identification and of adequate size for the vehicles,

• have roads between the parking spaces adequately wide for vehicles to enter and leave without being damaged,

• foresee regulation of driving inside the terminal with horizontal or vertical signs

• allow for an auxiliary services area close to the vehicles

The terminal should be adjacent or close to the mooring quay(s). Lighting should be adequate and a vehicles monitoring system should be in operation. Monitoring vehicles and allocating parking spaces should be streamlined to minimize waiting time. Minimum vehicle check-in time should be as short as possible and differentiated between accompanied or non-accompanied vehicles or semi-trailers.

Regarding safety and security all necessary port regulations should be fully applied. Furthermore, when applying safety and security inspections, priority has to be clearly assigned to MoS vehicles and passengers.

ƒ Loading / unloading activities and stevedoring

Stevedoring operations should be efficient and flexible with respect to availability and capacity of staff and equipment, to absorb delays and demand peaks. Full

Deliverable 5.2 3-236 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

compliance to existing safety regulations should be applied, particularly with respect to Dangerous Goods and Cargo Stowage and Securing.

Quay(s) ramps should be adequately designed to the existing standards and regulations. A certified ramp service provider should be allowed to ensure fast and safe loading / unloading operations.

Following the above, key minimum requirements for the land-side of MoS terminal(s) / quay(s) are proposed as follows:

Table 3-2 Key Minimum Requirements for the land-side of MoS terminal(s) / quay(s)

OBJECTIVE INDICATORS VALUES

Suitable Ro-Ro / Ro-Pax Dedicated Ro-Ro / Ro-Pax YES if unaccompanied port facilities terminal / quay cargo is accommodated

Easy and fast access of the • Special and clear road • YES MoS terminal / quay signposting within the port area (after • >=3.5 m wide & >=1 line entering the gate) • Adequate road characteristics per direction

• Absence of obstacles that could • YES interrupt the flow of vehicles to / from the MoS terminal / quay

• Differentiation between waiting • YES areas and roads

Efficient MoS terminal • Availability of computerized • YES operations management system in the port

• Adequate size of parking area • >=2.5 times the capacity of maximum serviced vessel • Guaranteed stevedoring service 24 hours / day - 365 days / year • YES

• Guaranteed flexibility in the composition of stevedoring crews and handling equipment • YES to absorb demand peaks in

loading / unloading services

• Possibility for Port Authority to license more than one cargo- • YES handling operators within the port / MoS terminal not forbidden

Deliverable 5.2 3-237 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

OBJECTIVE INDICATORS VALUES

• Existence of a flow-chart for loading / unloading operations preventing interference between • YES the flow of trucks and tractors for unaccompanied trailer

Fast access to the mooring MoS terminal adjacent to, or close • YES quay through the MoS to the mooring quay terminal

Early admission of freight Minimum admission time of • for accompanied vehicles to MoS terminal freight, before vessel officially <=20 min announced departure time • for non-accompanied vehicles <=40 min

Terminal / quay security Conformity with ISPS Code • YES

Safe vehicle embarkation / Certified ramp service provider • YES disembarkation

Safety with respect to Conformity with EU Dangerous • YES Dangerous Goods Goods regulations regulations

Fast safety and security • Priority assigned to MoS • YES inspections vehicles / cargo and passengers

• Data bases of vehicles / drivers should be created in parallel • YES with application of a risk management system

3.2.3 Sea-side terminal and quay Looking at MoS service requirements from the sea-port side there is a need for fast, safe and guaranteed sea access of the terminal(s) / quay(s) throughout the year. This calls for high technology level of monitoring means from the port. It also implies that MoS ports are carefully selected so that they do not shut down operations easily due to extreme whether conditions.

MoS services vessels should be allowed priority once they enter port boundaries regarding quay mooring. In parallel, auxiliary services (tugging, pilotage, waste collection) should be readily available again on a priority basis.

Deliverable 5.2 3-238 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Subsequently, key Quality Labels / indicators for the sea-side of MoS terminal(s) / quay(s) are proposed as follows:

Table 3-3 Key Quality Labels / Indicators for the sea-side of MoS terminal(s) / quay(s)

OBJECTIVE INDICATORS VALUES

Suitable Ro-Ro / Ro-Pax port Dedicated Ro-Ro / Ro-Pax YES if unaccompanied facilities terminal / quay cargo is accommodated

Fast, safe and guaranteed sea • Operation of VTMIS system • YES access of the terminal / quay in port by MoS vessels • Adequate sea-access channel for draught of maximum sized • YES MoS vessel

• Time during which MoS • <20 days / year terminal / quay may be non- operational due to extreme whether conditions

Minimise waiting times for • Priority assigned to MoS • YES services provision to MoS service vessels vessels within port (mooring, tugging, pilotage, waste • Pilotage Exemption YES collection) Certificates granted to regular • port MoS service operators

• Minimum response time on • <=15 minutes demand

• Coordination between service operators and MoS terminal • YES

Safety with respect to Conformity with EU • YES Dangerous Goods regulations Dangerous Goods regulations

3.2.4 Shipping operations MoS adequacy of shipping services may be examined with respect to operations features and vessel characteristics.

MoS shipping services are unavoidably associated with high regularity, reliability and continuity. Therefore service frequency and punctuality must be high. Continuity throughout the year must be guaranteed by the operators. Safety and security on board are also non-negotiable.

MoS shipping vessels on the other hand must be adequately fast and reliable, particularly in terms of navigational / communications means and mooring flexibility.

Deliverable 5.2 3-239 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

As a result, key Minimum Requirements for MoS shipping operations are proposed as follows:

Table 3-4 Key Minimum Requirements for MoS shipping operations

OBJECTIVE INDICATORS VALUES

Regular, reliable and • Service frequency • >=2 departures / week continuous shipping services • Vessel departure / arrival • YES. Operators should times predetermined and contractually guarantee advertised service compliance with timetables and non- • No interruption allowed interruption, against strict throughout the year compensation fees

Reliable shipping vessels • Vessel compliance with all • YES IMO safety / security / reliability regulations

• Vessel compliance with • YES VTMIS technology

requirements (navigation and communication aids)

• Bow-thruster availability • YES

Safety of personnel and • Availability of cargo securing • YES cargo in shipping Manual on board

• Compliance with Directives on means of securing cargo • YES

3.2.5 Information exchange and Documentation Information exchange and Documentation efficiency within a port is crucial for MoS level standards performance. Main concerns are:

ƒ the exchange of real time information between MoS service stakeholders (shipping operators and agents, port authorities, road hauliers, ship crew, stevedores, customs etc)

ƒ time consuming inspections (for documents, transport means, cargo and passengers).

Critical issues in order to minimize delays are:

ƒ the use of modern ICT technology in order to be able to process multiple documents in parallel, in advance and from a distance

Deliverable 5.2 3-240 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

ƒ streamlining of inspections (parallel inspections and not in series)

ƒ assigning priority to MoS subjects (transport means, cargo and passengers), identifying regular MoS customers and certifying them in advance so that they can be easily cleared (create relevant data bases)

Key minimum Requirements for MoS procedures related to Information Exchange and Documentation are proposed as follows:

Table 3-5 Key Minimum Requirements for MoS procedures related to Information Exchange and Documentation

OBJECTIVE INDICATORS VALUES

Fast, flexible and remote Availability of suitable ICT • YES exchange of real time system for remote real time information between MoS information exchange service stakeholders (electronic document transfer) (shipping operators and between all MoS service agents, port authorities, road stakeholders hauliers, ship crew, stevedoring operators, Coordination between ports of • YES customs, health services, port origin and destination police etc) regarding documentation of the Communication of cargo • YES provided MoS services documentation well in advance of ship arrival in port

Priority assignment to MoS • YES services for procedures and dispatch

Fast clearing of MoS subjects Identify regular MoS customers • YES (transport means, cargo and and certify them in advance so passengers) from document that they can be easily cleared and physical inspections (create relevant data bases)

Streamlined document and Priority assigned to MoS cargo • YES physical inspections by (special queue line) Customs

Coordinated customs and Coordination of routine • YES safety inspections inspections between different authorities

Deliverable 5.2 3-241 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

3.2.6 Overall performance efficiency indicators It was considered important to set up a minimum number of quantitative indicators as overall performance efficiency targets of MoS port nodes. These indicators are presented in the table below (and graphically in Figure 3-2).

Table 3-6 Overall MoS chain performance efficiency indicators (targets)

OBJECTIVE INDICATORS VALUES

Safe and fast access of road Time needed for a standard Ten (10) minutes trucks from port exit gate to truck vehicle to reach the the closest motorway closest motorway connection connection from the port exit gate (and inversely), under fully safe driving conditions (taking into consideration road quality and normal traffic conditions)

Easy and fast access through Clearing time through port gate Maximum allowed time - port entry gate to MoS five (5) minutes terminal / quay - Monitoring system (manual or automatic)

Efficient MoS terminal Maximum allowed time for Ten (10) minutes operations disembarkation (from vessel to quay)

Minimise waiting times for Time spent by entering / exiting <=5 minutes services provision to MoS vessel from / to port boundaries vessels within port (mooring, to / from quay mooring tugging, pilotage, waste collection)

Administrative and Maximum allowed time for full <=20 minutes procedural overall efficiency cargo inspections and within port boundaries documentation clearance within port (from cargo disembarkation to port exit gate and inversely from port entry gate to complete embarkation)

Deliverable 5.2 3-242 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 3-2 Overall MoS chain performance efficiency indicators (targets)

PORT BOUNDARY

ADJACENT EMBARKATION / MoS PORT MAIN PORT - MOTORWAY ROAD PORT WATER QUAY PORT INTERNAL ROADS MOTORWAY DISEMBARKATION TERMINAL GATE CONNECTING LINK JUNCTION

MAXIMUM MAXIMUM MAXIMUM MAXIMUM MAXIMUM ALLOWED TIME ALLOWED TIME ALLOWED TIME ALLOWED TIME ALLOWED TIME - 5' - 10' - 20' - 5' - 10'

Deliverable 5.2 3-243 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

4 Gap analysis and action drivers

4.1 Identification of discrepancies between Quality labels and MoS links

4.1.1 Approach A MoS service/link is an intermodal door to door service which integrates, in one single transport chain, two or more modes of transport and terminal operations. The full success of the Motorways of the Sea depends on the quality of all the legs of transport from the origin to the destination and to the integration and linkage among all the operations necessary to pass from a mode of transport to another one.

The level of service of a MoS link could be assessed on the basis of level of quality of the following legs of transport:

ƒ port infrastructures (berths, yards, parking area, etc),

ƒ port accessibility with the road and/or rail networks,

ƒ port services provided by terminal operators,

ƒ service provided by the maritime operators in terms of frequency and cost of transport,

ƒ integration and linkage of the different legs of a MoS link.

On the basis of the above elements and according to the quality labels defined in chapter 3, the following indicators have been considered to evaluate the quality of a MoS service/link and the gap between the market needs and the level of service provided on each corridor:

1. Port hinterland connections:

a. Road connections: safe and fast access of road trucks from port exit gate to the closest motorway connection

b. Rail connections: direct port junctions with national rail network and existence of rail-terminal within the port

2. Land-side terminal and quay:

a. Existence of an easy and fast access through port entry gate to MoS terminal / quay

b. Suitable number of quay dedicated to MoS services (RoRo, RoPax and container feeder) according to the level of MoS traffic

Deliverable 5.2 4-244 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

c. Adequate size of parking area for accompanied and not accompanied traffic to allow an efficient MoS terminal operations

3. Sea-side terminal and quay:

a. Appropriate number of dedicated Ro-Ro / Ro-Pax terminal / quay according to the number of calls

b. Fast, safe and guaranteed sea access of the terminal / quay by MoS vessels: Adequate sea-access channel for draught of maximum sized MoS vessel

4. ICT and Safety & Security issues:

a. Exchange of real time information between MoS service stakeholders (e.g. shipping operators and agents, port authorities, road hauliers, ship crew, stevedores, customs)

b. Streamlining of inspections (parallel inspections and not in series)

The existing gap has been evaluated comparing the market needs with respect to the current infrastructure situation and the investment planned to overcome the current bottlenecks.

A survey has been carried out to collect data from port authorities related to the current bottlenecks and the projects planned in order to overcome the bottlenecks highlighted. A detailed description of the projects is provided in D6 – Annex I – List of Port Projects. We focused the analysis on the port systems because they represent the core of any MoS service. More specifically, they include:

- the hinterland connections, between the port area and the land networks;

- land side port capacity (e.g. parking area, waiting area for heavy vehicles, equipped areas for trucks, port road network, etc)

- sea side capacity (e.g. berths, quay, yards, etc).

In the five countries of the core Study area, the development of a MoS service is not constrained by the land country networks but is actually limited by the integration among different transport modes. Besides, at country level, the main land networks are well developed or will be improved in the next years within the context of the TEN-T network (e.g. Egnatia in Greece). For these reasons, the analysis has been focused on the port systems.

The following table summarises, for each port included in the study, the interventions needed in order to guarantee a MoS service with an adequate level of quality. The port of Barcelona is not included in the table below since it is related to the WESTMOS Master Plan.

Deliverable 5.2 4-245 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Table 4-1: Main port bottlenecks for each identified quality indicator

D) A) Port B) Land-side C) Sea-side Administrative, hinterland terminal and terminal ICT, safety and connections quay and quay security Country Cluster Port A1 A2 B1 B2 B3 C1 C2 D1 D2

y ua Rail area MoS MoS ICT q quay MoS Road Road Road Road security Parking Parking Draught Safety & EMR- Cyprus Middle East Limassol √ √ √ √ (CL1) Alexandroupo √ √ √ √ North lis Aegean Kavala √ √ √ √ √ (CL5) Volos √ √ √

Greece Ionian sea Igoumenitsa √ √ √ √ (CL7) Patras √ √ Central/ Piraeus √ √ √ √ south Aegean sea Eleusis √ √ (CL6) Central- Augusta √ √ Mediterrane an (CL8) Catania √ √ √ √ Ancona √ √ √ √ Chioggia √ √ North- Monfalcone √ Adriatic Italy (CL10) Ravenna √ √ Trieste √ Venezia √ √ √

South Bari √ √ √ √ Adriatic Brindisi √ √ √ (CL11) Taranto √ √ √ Central- Valletta √ Malta Mediterrane an (CL8) Marsaxlokk North- Slovenia Adriatic Koper (CL10)

Deliverable 5.2 4-246 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

In Cyprus, the main commercial port is Limassol. It is a multipurpose port serving both passenger and cargo vessels. The Limassol Port includes three multipurpose quay facilities, the East, the North and the West Quay. One berth along the West Quay is appointed exclusively for Ro-Ro vessels calls. However berth cannot be used due to low level of its ramp and therefore, Ro-Ro vessels are berthing alongside any available quay at Limassol port. The multipurpose berths, with a total length of 1,360 m, are used for the handling of cargo and passenger vessels. Two designated container quays with lengths of 320 m and 300 m respectively and a water depth of 14 m are located in the west part of the port along the West Quay and the South Quay, in the West Basin. The port’s turning circle has a diameter of 600 m.

In Greece, ports are facing severe deficiencies concerning MoS services. Hinterland connections are poor, mainly with respect to railway transport. Port areas dedicated to Ro-Ro traffic are not adequate for MoS needs. ICT systems adopted for port operations and administrative issues are not widespread among ports, except for container handling services within the ports of Piraeus and Thessaloniki. Besides, there are new ports that show limited draught and are planning relevant investments to overcome this bottleneck.

Almost all the Italian ports19 are placed within the urban context for historical reasons. In the last decades, the development of the urban area has often limited the growth of the ports area from the land side. Besides, Italian ports show weak hinterland connections between the port gate and the closest motorway connection. Safe and fast junctions are still far away from the market needs for many ports20 as well as a direct effective railway connection with the national railway network21. Concerning the Italian port land side, several ports mainly need adequate parking areas for Ro-Ro/Ro- Pax not accompanied traffic22 and/or show an inadequate road network within the port giving access to the quays23. Other ports also need more quays’ area for Ro-Ro/Ro- Pax accompanied traffic. As Regards to the port sea side, relevant bottlenecks have not been identified (just the port of Chioggia needs to enhance the quays’ draught). ICT systems able to integrate the communication among all the port stakeholders (e.g. Port Authorities, customs, terminal operators, ship-owners, forwarders, etc) are also missing or not completely operative in almost all the Italian ports.

In Malta, the port of Valletta has several multi-purpose quays capable of handling all types of cargo: the main types of vessels served by the different quays are RoRo and

19 Except for Monfalcone and Taranto. 20 Ancona, Augusta, Bari, Brindisi, Catania, Chioggia, Ravenna, Taranto and Venice. 21 Catania, Ancona. Bari, Brindisi and Taranto. 22 Catania, Monfalcone, Trieste, and Venice. 23 Augusta, Bari and Venice.

Deliverable 5.2 4-247 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

general cargo vessels. The port has adequate parking areas for not accompanied RoRo traffic24 and effective road connections with the main road network. The main bottleneck concerns the availability of quays dedicated to RoRo traffic: the six quays available, although they primarily function as Ro-Ro/Ro-Pax quays, are not dedicated in the sense that they can take on a multi-purpose role and are used according to the port’s needs. The port planned the upgrading of the Deep Water Quay in order to be able to handle large cargo, particularly Ro-Ro vessels. The project should be completed by 2011. A Vessel Traffic System allows the vessel monitoring within the port and the PortNet Malta system supports vessel clearance documentation.

The port of Marsaxlokk is focusing its activity towards containerisation and feedering, whilst moving away from its RoRo/RoPax activity. The port will be expanding further its facilities to increase the Terminals’ capacity through the enhancement of quays’ length. The Port concession operator will also be developing in four phases an additional 100,000 m2 of land behind Terminal One for further container stacking. There are fair road connections with the national network and the port has technology in place for container tracking, yard and ship planning, container and equipment control. Relevant bottlenecks and gaps to be overcome have not been identified.

In Slovenia, the port of Koper is the main port. It is a multipurpose port serving different types of cargo traffic: mainly containers, cars, break bulk, general cargo and Ro-Ro. The port shows adequate infrastructures to manage Ro-Ro traffic both in terms of sea-side and land-side terminals and quays. The port has also direct access to the motorway and railway network. The distance between the port and the motorway Koper – Ljubljana is 2 km (Pan European Corridor Va), while the distance between the port and the Pan European Corridors X is 100 km. The port is connected to the international rail network, having direct access to all terminals.

4.1.2 Port hinterland connections Many ports planned some investments to overcome the bottlenecks identified on road and railway connections. The following table shows the main mature projects that will allow the improvement of the port hinterland connections. In case the gap will persist because any mature project is planned to be realised in the short and middle term, the budget needed to overcome the gap has been estimated multiplying the size of the intervention needed to enhance the level of quality (km) by the average unit cost (€/km) to carry out the project25. It should be noted that the investments proposed

24 A further parking area of 44,600 m2 could be adapted to the port's needs including: a car park behind Shed 2/3 on the Deep Water Quay, an improvement of the area across the MMA building on Deep Water Quay, the use of the road leading to Laboratory Wharf.

25 The average unit costs have been distinguished for new links and upgrading of existing links.

Deliverable 5.2 4-248 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study under the 2nd call for proposals are not reflected in the tables below. These are presented in Deliverable 6.2.

Table 4-2: Investment planned on Port hinterland connections

Budget26 Persisting needed Investment Country Cluster Port Issue gap until to planned 2015 overcom e the gap Need to enhance port EMR- accessibility (a new road, Middle connecting port of Limassol Cyprus Limassol Yes No East to highway / (CL1) Limassol / , has been planned) Congestion on the Road Under connection between the port Yes 3,8 M€ Alexandroupo discussion and the Egnatia Motorway lis Need to upgrade the existing No Yes n.a. railway connection North Lack of a direct railway Kavala No Yes n.a. Aegean connection (CL5) No railway connection of port terminals (the railway lines Volos No Yes 5,8 M€ pass near but do not enter the port) The port does not show gaps on Thessaloniki this side Greece Lack of adequate railway Igoumenitsa No Yes n.a. connection Ionian sea (CL7) No railway connection of port Patra Yes Yes n.a. terminals

Lack of adequate road Korinthos No Yes 4 M€ connection Central/ The port has direct access to south road network which is often No Yes n.a. Aegean highly congested. sea (CL6) Piraeus Rail connection of Ikonion container terminal with the Yes No n.a. Thriassion freight centre is under implementation.

26 Budget information is sometimes missing because the level of the maturity of some projects is very low (e.g. lack of a feasibility study or a preliminary project). Without a clear definition of the technical requisite of an infrastructure project is not possible to calculate the amount of the investment and the necessary budget. Besides, these projects will not start before the 2015 and will be developed in the long term.

Deliverable 5.2 4-249 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Budget26 Persisting needed Investment Country Cluster Port Issue gap until to planned 2015 overcom e the gap Congestion on road north Central Yes No access to the port Mediterra Catania The two rail point of access nean that have not been used for Yes No (CL8) many years Lack of a direct road link with Under Yes 112 M€ the highway discussion27 Ancona The connection to the national Yes No rail network is still missing Lack of direct road connection Augusta No Yes 15 M€ with the national network North- The national road network is 40 Adriatic Chioggia No Yes 174 M€ km far away (CL10) Intersection with SS16 need to Yes No be developed Ravenna Difficulties to manage the No Yes n.a. railway service Congestion on the Mestre Venice Yes Italy bypass The national road network (A14) is 10 km far away and Yes No there are strong interferences between urban and port traffic Bari The railway system causes difficulties on the urban Yes No viability and the access track lies in a very bad status South Road accessibility to the port Adriatic No Yes 34 M€ needs to be completed (CL11) Brindisi Lack of railway connection with the national network No Yes

The road connecting the port Yes No with the A14 is often congested Taranto Port area is not directly connected to the national Yes No railway network

27 However the project is still at a screening stage (poor level of maturity).

Deliverable 5.2 4-250 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Budget26 Persisting needed Investment Country Cluster Port Issue gap until to planned 2015 overcom e the gap Central- The port does not show gaps on Valletta Mediterra this side Malta nean The port does not show gaps on Marsaxlokk (CL8) this side Improvement of road North- connection: the road Slovenia Adriatic Koper connection to the motorway (2 Yes No (CL10) km) passes through an urban zone

In Cyprus, the new 4-lane motorway of 7,5 km has been planned to be constructed (from 2009 to 2015 with a budget of 48 M€). The new road will connect Limassol port’s exit gate to the main Highway Road of Cyprus from Paphos to Nicosia via Limassol, shifting trucks traffic from Limassol town’s roads and facilitating road access to the port.

In Greece, the Egnatia Motorway improved the road hinterland access of almost all northern main ports. However, Piraeus port road connections to nearby motorways are currently highly congested. The expected new railway connection of container terminals with the Thriassion freight (with a budget of 90 M€)centre is expected to relieve but not to solve the problem in the long run. Railway connections are few and not adequate reflecting the long standing struggle of rail transport development in modern Greece.

In Italy, ports are developing and planning interventions that aim at overcoming some constrains that can affect the quality of the MoS services (Ro-Ro/Ro-Pax and/or container). For instances, the ports of Catania and Ravenna are currently carrying out a project that aims at enhancing the road connection between the port gate and the closer road axis. However, other ports (e.g. Ancona, Augusta, Brindisi, Chioggia and Ravenna) show a persisting gap dealing with the road and rail hinterland connections. The estimated total budget needed to achieve a good quality level related with the road connection between the ports gate and the national road network is about 223 M€.

In Malta, The port of Valletta has direct access to the main road network and is directly connected to the airport (the distance between the port of Valletta and the airport is 6km). The port of Marsaxlokk is also in close proximity to the main road network and thus easily accessible from all areas across Malta and Gozo in relatively short distances.

In Slovenia, a new port exit gate to the motorway is expected to be constructed not before the end of 2009. When constructed, this new gate will be a great improvement

Deliverable 5.2 4-251 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

in comparison with the existing connection to the motorway and will offer a safe and fast access to the motorway. However, even now, the length of the existing connection is not more than 2 km and it offers a valid connection solution. Only during peak traffic concentration at certain hours of the day, some more time is needed for trucks to cover this distance, as the road passes through an urban zone where other vehicles are involved.

4.1.3 Land-side terminal and quay The land side capacity is one of the most important factors for the success of the MoS and ports are taking in great account this aspect in their development plan. Many projects that aim at improve the quality of quays and parking area are currently on- going or have been planned. The following table shows the main mature projects that will allow to improve port infrastructures on the land side. In case the gap will persist because any mature project is planned to be realised in the short and middle term, the budget needed to overcome the gap has been estimated multiplying the size of the intervention (m2) needed to obtain berth efficiency by the average unit cost (€/m2) to carry out the project.

Table 4-3: Investment planned on Land-side Terminal and quay

Budget28 Persisting Investment needed to Country Cluster Port Issue gap until planned overcome 2015 the gap Lack of dedicated Ro- Ro quay and parking EMR-Middle area. Cyprus Limassol Yes No East (CL1) Extension of container terminal’s quays has been planned. Lack of handling equipment and equipped parking North Aegean Greece Alexandroupolis areas. (Studies for the No Yes 4 M€ (CL5) development of a multipurpose port are in progress)

Kavala Limited parking and New quay 1 M€ waiting areas. No under handling equipment construction

28 Budget information is sometimes missing because the level of the maturity of some projects is very low (e.g. lack of a feasibility study or a preliminary project). Without a clear definition of the technical requisite of an infrastructure project is not possible to calculate the amount of the investment and the necessary budget. Besides, these projects will not start before the 2015 and will be developed in the long term.

Deliverable 5.2 4-252 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Budget28 Persisting Investment needed to Country Cluster Port Issue gap until planned overcome 2015 the gap for any feeder container or any other MoS freight traffic Limited parking and waiting areas, to Volos accommodate MoS No 1 M€ standard services level. The port does not Thesaloniki show gaps on this side Enhancement of parking areas (New truck parking spaces, Igoumenitsa with MoS dedicated Yes No quays are included in the port development - phases B and C) Enhancement of areas Ionian sea dedicated to MoS (CL7) services (New Ro-Pax terminal under construction is Patra Yes No expected to provide adequate capacity and space for efficient MoS services development) Lack of adequate areas dedicated to Ro- Central/south Ro traffic (as it is not Aegean sea Piraeus No Yes considered a strategic (CL6) area of port development).

Italy Congestion of the Augusta Yes No Central road port network Mediterranean Lack of equipped (CL8) parking areas, Catania Yes No interferences among different traffics North-Adriatic Lack of adequate Ancona No Yes 24 M€ (CL10) quay’s area More parking and Monfalcone waiting area for MoS Yes No traffic is needed Lack of wide yards for container and Ro- Trieste Ro/Ro-Pax traffic: Yes No need of a new terminal

Venice Lack of road Yes No connection with the Ro-Ro/Ro-Pax

Deliverable 5.2 4-253 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Budget28 Persisting Investment needed to Country Cluster Port Issue gap until planned overcome 2015 the gap terminal

More parking and waiting area for MoS No Yes 3 M€ traffic is needed Traffic congestion Bari No Yes within the port South Adriatic Lack of connection (CL11) Taranto between quays and Yes No operating areas The port does not Central- Valletta show gaps on this side Malta Mediterranean The port does not (CL8) Marsaxlokk show gaps on this side North-Adriatic The port does not Slovenia Koper (CL10) show gaps on this side

In Cyprus, there is no availability of any dedicated Ro-Ro quay in Limassol port. The existing Ro-Ro berth at port’s West Quay cannot be used due to low level of the ramp. Therefore, Ro-Ro vessels are berthed alongside any available berth at the port’s container terminal. Consequently, there is no availability of dedicated parking area for Ro-Ro vessels. However, the Port Authority planned the extension of existing quays in container terminal by 500 m (total investment of 36 M€), which will be adequate to meet port’s future demands. In addition, port’s operational procedures are in compliance with ISPS code and EU dangerous goods regulations.

Main Greek ports show lack of adequate areas for Ro-Ro, Ro-Pax traffic, since their growth is heavily restricted by urban areas. Patra and Igoumenitsa ports are currently implementing significant development projects that will provide them adequate land space for MoS services in the next years. Piraeus and Thessaloniki ports as they are currently paying attention to the more profitable markets of container and car terminal: they need to improve quays and areas’ availability.

In Italy, ports are developing and planning interventions that aim at overcoming some constrains that can affect the quality of the MoS services (Ro-Ro/Ro-Pax and/or container). For instances, the ports of Catania, Monfalcone and Trieste are going to implement interventions that aim at overcoming the lack of adequate parking area while Augusta, Taranto and Venice planned to carry out projects in order to have an easy and fast access through port entry gate to MoS terminal / quay. However, the ports of Ancona and Venice show a persisting gap dealing with quays and parking area while the port of Bari still needs to enhance road access within the port area. The estimated total budget needed to enhance quay’s and parking area for the two above mentioned ports is equals to about 27 M€.

Deliverable 5.2 4-254 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

In Malta, both the ports of Valletta and Marsaxlokk do not show bottlenecks concerning land-side terminals and quays’ availability. The port of Marsaxlokk planned investments related to hinterland and terminal development with the aim of significantly increasing the number of ground slots for container storage and stacking. The port has already an adequate direct link between the port gate and the MoS terminal/quay.

In Slovenia, within the port of Koper, there are four dedicated RoRo ramps available and about 20,000 m2 surface area per quay. A parking area of about 30,000 m2 is also available for not accompanied Ro-Ro traffic: this area could be enlarged but currently the unaccompanied traffic in the Port of Koper is very limited and there is no demand for additional parking area for this type of traffic.

4.1.4 Port sea-side terminal and quay With respect to the port sea side, relevant bottlenecks have not been identified. The following table shows the main mature projects that will allow to improve port infrastructures on the sea side.

Deliverable 5.2 4-255 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Table 4-4: Investment planned on Sea side Terminal and quay

Budget29 Persisting Investment needed to Country Cluster Port Issue gap until planned overcome 2015 the gap Lack of adequate EMR-Middle quay’s Cyprus Limassol Yes No East (CL1) draught. Dredging has been planned. Lack of adequate quay’s and Alexandroupolis entry Yes No channel’s draught

Lack of adequate North Aegean Kavala quay’s Yes No (CL5) draught

The port does not show Volos gaps on this side The port does Greece not show Thessaloniki gaps on this side Lack of adequate quay’s and Igoumenitsa entry Yes No channel’s Ionian sea (CL7) draught

The port does not show Patra gaps on this side Lack of Yes (unless Central/south suitable Ro- Attica ports Aegean sea Piraeus No n.a. Ro quays to system is (CL6) service MoS integrated

29 Budget information is sometimes missing because the level of the maturity of some projects is very low (e.g. lack of a feasibility study or a preliminary project). Without a clear definition of the technical requisite of an infrastructure project is not possible to calculate the amount of the investment and the necessary budget. Besides, these projects will not start before the 2015 and will be developed in the long term.

Deliverable 5.2 4-256 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Budget29 Persisting Investment needed to Country Cluster Port Issue gap until planned overcome 2015 the gap services into a single managing authority) Lack of North Adriatic adequate Italy Chioggia No Yes n.a. (CL10) quay’s draught Lack of Valletta adequate Yes n.a. n.a. Central- quay’s length Malta Mediterranean The port does (CL8) not show Marsaxlokk gaps on this side Low North-Adriatic Slovenia Koper extension of Yes No (CL10) piers

In Cyprus, dredging of Limassol port’s main basin is under completion up to the end of 2008, increasing port’s draught from 14 to 16 m (total investment of 10M €). VTMIS system is in full operation at port of Limassol.

In Greece, new under-development ports own limited draught and are planning relevant investments to overcome the bottleneck (Alexandroupolis, Kavala, and Igoumenitsa). The ports of Patra and Igoumenitsa, characterized from Ro-Pax traffic, have already developed terminals adequate for MoS services.

In Italy, just the port of Chioggia shows a persisting gap concerning the quay’s draught that should be enhanced according to MoS traffic’s needs.

In Malta, the port of Valletta planned the upgrading of the Deep Water Quay in order to be able to better handle large cargo, particularly Ro-Ro vessels. This project is expected to be completed by 2011 and will be funded from Cohesion funds and the national budget.

The port of Marsaxlokk planned investments involving dredging and deepening works, to increase and widen berths and to enable the manoeuvring and berthing of larger draft vessels.

In Slovenia, within the port of Koper the sea access channel to the MoS quay has already enough depth to accommodate MoS vessels with over 11 m of draught. Constant monitoring of depths in the channels is performed and dredging is effected occasionally if required. The extension of Pier No.1 is under construction: this pier is currently used for containers, with lengthening for 160 m it will be used also for RoRo traffic.

Deliverable 5.2 4-257 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

4.1.5 ICT and Safety & Security issues The quality of a MoS service/link does not depend only by the quality of each single leg of the transport but it is strongly affected by the integrations and linkage of all the transport legs. ICT platforms work as a good tool to achieve this goal and integrate the communication systems of all the stakeholders involved in the transport chain of a MoS service (e.g. Port Authorities, customs, ship-owners, road hauliers, etc). Besides, ICT systems can have also an important role to guarantee adequate level of safety and security in all the legs of the transport. Many ports planned investments to overcome the lack of dedicated ICT solutions enhance the quality of MoS services and guarantee good standards for safety and security. The following table shows the main mature projects that will allow to improve both the exchange of real time information between MoS service stakeholders and the streamlining of inspections. In case the gap will persist because any mature project is planned to be realised in the short and middle term, the budget needed to overcome the gap has been estimated on the basis of available data30 on ICT investments.

Table 4-5: Investment planned on ICT, Safety and security

Budget Investment Persisting needed to Country Cluster Port Issue planned Gap overcome the gap31 The port does not EMR-Middle Cyprus Limassol show gaps on this East (CL1) side North Aegean Lack of a dedicated 0,3 – 1,4 Greece No Yes (CL5) ICT network M€ Yes (PPP Alexandroupolis project in ISPS Code under progress for No implementation all major Greek PAs)

Lack of a dedicated 0,3 – 1,4 Kavala No Yes ICT network M€

30 Source: Ports’ surveys and official documents (e.g. Port Operational Programs in Italy).

31 The estimated budget needed to overcome the lack of an ICT dedicated network is defined as a range obtained for similar projects.

Deliverable 5.2 4-258 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Budget Investment Persisting needed to Country Cluster Port Issue planned Gap overcome the gap31

Yes (PPP project in ISPS Code under progress for No implementation all major Greek PAs)

Lack of a dedicated 0,3 – 1,4 No Yes ICT network M€ Yes (PPP Volos project in ISPS Code under progress for No implementation all major Greek PAs) Lack of a dedicated 0,3 – 1,4 No Yes ICT network M€ Yes (PPP Igoumenitsa project in ISPS Code under progress for No implementation all major Ionian sea Greek PAs) (CL7) Lack of a dedicated 0,3 – 1,4 No Yes ICT network M€ Yes (PPP Patra project in ISPS Code under progress for No implementation all major Greek PAs) There are ICT applications available 0,3 – 1,4 No Yes mainly in the M€ Central/south container terminals Aegean sea Piraeus Yes (PPP (CL6) project in ISPS Code under progress for No implementation all major Greek PAs) Lack of a dedicated 0,3 – 1,4 Italy No Yes ICT network M€ Central Mediterranean Catania Need to pay more attention on (CL8) No Yes passengers’ safety aspects North-Adriatic Lack of a dedicated Ancona Yes (CL10) ICT network Lack of a dedicated ICT network (the South Adriatic Bari development of an Yes (CL11) ICT port system is under construction) Lack of a dedicated 0,3 – 1,4 Brindisi No Yes ICT network M€

Deliverable 5.2 4-259 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Budget Investment Persisting needed to Country Cluster Port Issue planned Gap overcome the gap31 Lack of a dedicated ICT network (the port promoted the Taranto Yes New.Ton project in order to enhance intermodal transport) The port does not Valletta show gaps on this Central- side Malta Mediterranean The port does not (CL8) Marsaxlokk show gaps on this side Upgrading of the ICT system (there are over North-Adriatic 20 subsystems Slovenia Koper Yes (CL10) interconnected to provide complete logistic support)

In Cyprus, the Port Authority deployed CyPOS, which is considered a modern IT system in order to all port activities and work processes in Limassol port, connecting port with Nicosia Head Office and main business and state stakeholders and services. CyPOS integrates 20 different modules (13 of them related to port and cargo handling activities), serving separately the above parties according to their work necessities.

In Greece, ICT applications within ports are available only for the ports of Piraeus and Thessaloniki to manage container handling services. The associated Ministry allocated funds for a homogeneous ICT penetration in all major Greek ports but the project is still presenting low maturity.

An investment of 340 M€ is expected to be allocated to implement the ISPS Code among 12 Port Authorities (PAs) in order to enhance Safety and Security among Greek ports and to boost the level of ICT penetration among the ports.

In Italy, all the ports included within the North Adriatic cluster32 have implemented (at least partially) some ICT solutions for Ro-Ro/Ro-Pax and/or container traffic. Ancona, Bari and Taranto have also on-going and/or planned investments in order to develop ICT solutions able to enhance and make easier their traffic flows, that could be available in the short term (e.g. Bari took part to the GIPSY project33 in order to

32 The port of Ancona does not have an ICT network but has already planned the intervention.

33 Within the general framework of the Community Initiative Programme INTERREG III A.

Deliverable 5.2 4-260 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

develop a Greek Italian multimodal platform for freight and passengers transport flows among the ports of Bari, Brindisi, Igoumenitsa and Patra, while Taranto promoted the New.Ton project34 in order to enhance intermodal transport among Italy, Greece and Turkey). However, the ports of Catania and Brindisi still show a persisting gap regards the availability of adequate ICT systems dedicated to MoS services. The estimated total budget needed to enhance the lack of effective ICT networks among the above mentioned ports can change from a minimum value of 0,9 M€ to a maximum value of 4,2 M€.

In Malta, the ship navigation activities of the Port of Valletta are supported by a Vessel Traffic System while the system PortNet Malta supports vessel clearance documentation (its implementation has resulted in a reduction in the handling of manual forms). A Container Terminal Management System is planned to be implemented by 2011. The estimated budget for this intervention is €250,000 excl. VAT, which amount is expected to come from private funding.

The port of Marsaxlokk has advanced technology in place for container tracking, yard and ship planning, container and equipment control:

ƒ Navis Sparcs, that offers accurate and real time information for planning, managing and tracking container movements through the Terminals,

ƒ Navis Express, that provides statistical and billing information as well as full computerization of operations at the Main Gate,

ƒ SMDG-EDIFACT connections, used as a system interface to facilitate the intermodal handling of containers by streamlining the information exchange between the shipping lines, the agents and the Port operation,

ƒ Motorola Digital Communications System, that facilitates voice communication throughout the terminals and has resulted in an enhanced communication system throughout the terminals.

In Slovenia, the information system of Luka Koper is composed of over 20 subsystems, interconnected to provide complete logistic support and linkage to partners. The system is currently being modernized, which includes a radical reduction in the number of subsystems and their standardization.

34 Within the general framework of the Community Initiative Programme INTERREG III B – Archimed.

Deliverable 5.2 4-261 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

4.2 Actions identification including possible incentives

The level of service required by the market is not always satisfied by the operators that provide MoS services on the corridors of the Eastern Mediterranean. As shown in the previous paragraph, a lot of issues affect the operations in the ports and do not allow to the MoS operators to provide services with a good level of integration among the different legs of the intermodal transport. This gap has to be reduced. More specifically, the following actions have been identified to achieve this goal and foster the development of the MoS:

ƒ Increase the competitiveness of the MoS services financing port infrastructures (e.g. enhancing infrastructure capacity, improving multimodal transport, reducing administrative costs on business and price levels, innovation and technological development to improve competitiveness, etc);

ƒ Incentive transport operators to provide MoS services able to compete with the road transport in terms of regular, reliable and continuous shipping services (e.g. service frequency, vessel departure / arrival times predetermined and advertised, no interruption allowed throughout the year, etc)

The following table shows detailed actions to enhance the performances of a MoS services. The actions identified fulfil the following goals:

- Infrastructure development. Even if the action is general, it aims at fostering specific infrastructures that will allow to overcome the gaps identified

- Fostering the launch of new routes. A new “operational” aid scheme has been presented in this section

The impact assessment of the actions was not in the scope of this Study.

Table 4-6: Actions to enhance the performances of a MoS service

No. Goals Actions Instruments

Improve the road connection Improve infrastructural capacity of with the national network ports financing port projects with: Enhancing of port 1 Build or upgrade the railway ƒ Port Authorities resources hinterland connections connection with the national ƒ National sources of funding, network and ƒ EU funds (e.g. annual call for Enlarge quay and parking area proposals under TEN-T both for accompanied and not Enhancing of budget, ERDF and CF accompanied traffic 2 infrastructural land available within Operative Build up easy and fast access Programs) side capacity through port entry gate to MoS quay Enhancing of Increase the number of dedicated 3 infrastructural sea side Ro-Ro / Ro-Pax terminal / quays

Deliverable 5.2 4-262 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

No. Goals Actions Instruments

capacity Enlarge quay’s draught in line with the market needs Implement suitable ICT system ƒ Harmonization of information for remote real time information systems among the Fast, flexible and exchange (electronic document stakeholders involved in the provision of services related to remote exchange of transfer) between all MoS 4 real time information the MoS service stakeholders ƒ Implementation of pilot between MoS service projects to develop an stakeholders Enhance Coordination between integrated system involving ports of origin and destination Port Authorities, road hauliers, ship-owners, customs, etc Enhance safety and Identify regular MoS customers security issues (e.g. and certify them in advance so fast clearing of MoS that they can be easily cleared subjects from (create relevant data bases) ƒ Promotion of education and training 5 document and physical ƒ Use of specific ICT tools to inspections, Coordination of routine manage safety and security streamlined document inspections between different issues and physical authorities inspections by Customs) Direct financing of new MoS Promote new incentive schemes to Fostering the launch 6 links according to the regulation foster the start-up of new MoS of new routes on State Aid services

The actions usually carried out by Public Bodies are focused to enhance both the infrastructural capacity of ports and ICT platform. However, the development of new MoS links needs the adoption of a strategic approach able to gather all the market opportunities available in order to support the start-up of new MoS services that can compete against the road transport and shift traffic from the road to the sea transport.

The competitiveness of a MoS services is associated with high regularity, reliability and continuity characteristics. Besides, service frequency and punctuality must be high. Continuity of the service throughout all the year must be also guaranteed by the operators. MoS shipping vessels on the other hand must be adequately fast and reliable, particularly in terms of navigational / communications means and mooring flexibility.

The provision of a MoS service characterised by the above performances requires a great effort by the ship-owners. More specifically, the decision to operate a new route between two or more Mediterranean regions which are currently not linked with a MoS service is a very difficult choice to be taken by a maritime operator. The development of a new segment of a business is a very risky operation. Besides, the start-up of a new route is characterised by a relevant economic effort due to marketing and advertising costs, low profits due to the low level of the vessels’ load factor

Deliverable 5.2 4-263 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

before the route will start to work at full capacity, installation costs incurred by the ship-owner at the ports in question in order to launch the route. Within this context, the European Commission can accept that public aid will be paid for a limited period and under certain conditions, if this aid provides to the ship-owners with the necessary incentive to create new routes or new schedules to reach the traffic volume which will enable them to break even within a limited period.

The Commission can approve aids aiming to attenuate financial difficulties of ship- owners concerning the start-up of new MoS services within the meaning of Article 1 of EC Regulation n. 4055/8635. Allowing financial support to MoS services/links, the European Commission could aim at improving the intermodal chain and decongesting roads in the Member States (MS) through the promotion of sustainable and safe mobility.

On the basis of the above considerations, a new scheme of incentives can be proposed according to the following conditions:

ƒ the aid must not exceed three years in duration and its purpose must be to finance a shipping service connecting ports situated in the territory of the MS,

ƒ the service should allow transport (of cargo essentially) by road to be carried out wholly or partly by sea,

ƒ the aid must be directed at implementing a detailed project with a pre-established environmental impact, concerning a new route or the upgrading of services on an existing one,

ƒ no more than one project should be financed per line (with no renewal, extension or repetition of the project in question),

ƒ the aid should cover up to 30 % of the operational costs of the service or finance the purchase of trans-shipment equipment to supply the planned service (up to a level of 10%),

ƒ the aid must be granted on the basis of transparent criteria applied in a non- discriminatory way to ship-owners established in the MS36,

ƒ the service must be commercially viable after the period in which it is eligible for public funding,

35 In respect of ships flying the flag of one of the Member States.

36 The aid should normally be granted for a project selected by the authorities of the Member State through a tender procedure in compliance with applicable Community rules

Deliverable 5.2 4-264 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

ƒ such aid must not be cumulated with public service compensation (obligations or contracts).

The new proposed incentive scheme foreseen that a Port Authority of a MS could promote calls for tender in order to grant public contribution to ship-owners for the start-up of new MoS links among MS’ territory. The same approach is already adopted within the air transport sector in order to support the start-up of new air routes according to the Community Communication 2005/C 312/01 on “Community guidelines on financing of airports and start-up aid to airlines departing from regional airports”. The added value is related to the fact that the new scheme would allow a Port Authority (with a bottom up approach) to publish a call for proposals in order to operate new links from its port terminal to other new specific destinations (according to the state aid rules). This approach would allow to finance a new maritime link with a local perspective and could be applied quickly with a lower level of constrains with respect to Marco Polo Programme (in 2008, no project proposals were selected for funding in the area of MoS actions but only some new regular maritime services).

It is very important that the aids must not encourage traffic simply to be transferred from one maritime link to another. In particular, it must not lead to a relocation of traffic which is unjustified with regard to the frequency and viability of existing services leaving from another port in the same area, which serve the same or a similar destination under the same criteria.

At a European level, Marco Polo II Programme37 provides financial supports to MoS actions achieving a door-to-door service, shifting freight from long road distances to a combination of short sea shipping and other modes of transport.

However, the proposed scheme has some advantages in comparison with the Marco Polo II funding conditions that are related to:

ƒ the possibility to allocate a specific budget for new MoS links while under Marco Polo calls, projects concerning the start-up of new MoS links must compete with other kind of projects (related to common learning, modal shift, traffic avoidance and catalyst actions) for the same budget

37 The main eligible direct costs for Marco Polo funds are the cost of temporary or permanent staff assigned to the action and employed by the beneficiary, travel and subsistence allowances for staff taking part in the action, the purchase cost of equipment (new or second-hand) , costs of consumables and supplies, costs entailed by other contracts awarded by a beneficiary for the purposes of carrying out the action , costs arising directly from requirements imposed by the agreement (e.g. dissemination of information, specific evaluation of the action, audits, , reproduction). Furthermore additional financing can be granted for ancillary infrastructures needed in order to achieve the projects’ objectives.

Deliverable 5.2 4-265 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

ƒ the possibility to propose new MoS links apart from the port dimension while Marco Polo calls refer only to category A ports,

ƒ the absence of a minimum threshold both in terms of project’s costs and modal shift generated, while Marco Polo requires a minimum indicative grant threshold per action of 2,5 M€ or a modal shift of 1.25 billion tonne-kilometres.

The call for tender to be launched by a Port Authority should:

ƒ characterize ex-ante relevant MoS corridors where new MoS links can be promoted from ship-owners and, for each corridor, should define the maximum contribution available for the first three year of activity

ƒ define the maximum level (%) of contribution that could be granted during the first three years of activity

ƒ define a minimum threshold of discounted tariffs that ship-owners should apply to road hauliers in a limited period of time.

Ship-owners that aim at submitting proposals according to the call’s criteria, must prepare a detailed business plan and a marketing strategy in order to promote the new service line. The proposals’ evaluation would be done according to the following minimum information to be given within the application:

ƒ ports to be connected (origin and destination of the new MoS link);

ƒ time scheduling (to give evidence of the first year of activity of the new service)

ƒ kind of vessel;

ƒ service’s frequency;

ƒ average promotional tariff available for road hauliers;

ƒ minimum number of road hauliers that can benefit of the promotional tariff (in terms of percentage on the total vessel’s capacity);

ƒ detailed operational costs needed to implement the new service (among the first three year of activity);

ƒ value of public contribution required for the first three year of activity (the amount of aid must be strictly linked to the additional start-up costs incurred in launching the new route).

Moreover, the business plan has to show the financial viability of the new service after that the public contribution is not more available.

Deliverable 5.2 4-266 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

5 Strategic Environmental MoS Assessment

5.1 Definition of environmental impact assessment criteria

The strategic environmental assessment of East Med MoS has been carried out mainly on the basis of provisions defined by Annex 1 to the EU Directive 2001/42 on the assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment.

The mentioned Directive states that Member States have the responsibility to carry out an assessment of certain plans and programmes which are likely to have significant effects on the environment. The focus of the assessment is on the preparation of an environmental report which identifies, describes and evaluates the likely significant effects on the environment and the reasonable alternatives taking into account the objectives and the geographical scope of the plan or programme.

Another significant step within the assessment evaluation is the consultation process: the draft of the plan or programme and the environmental report have to be made available to specific authorities (designated by Member States in accordance to their specific environmental responsibilities) and the public (e.g. relevant non- governmental organisations) in order to give them the opportunity to express their opinion before the adoption of the plan or programme and the subsequent implementation of the project. Moreover, when a plan or programme is likely to have effects on the environment in other Member States, they have to be informed and involved in the consultation. The opinion and position of the consulted bodies have to integrated into the plan or programme.

Moreover, the assessment has to:

ƒ assure that the involved subjects are informed about the adoption of the plan or programme and about the measures concerning the adoption and the monitoring procedures;

ƒ monitor the significant environmental effects of the implementation in order to identify at an early stage, unforeseen adverse effects and to be able to undertake appropriate remedial actions.

Deliverable 5.2 5-267 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 5-1 The Environmental Assessment Procedure according to EU Directive 2001/42

IDENTIFICATION OF PLAN ELABORATION OF THE CONSULTATIONS WITH AND PROGRAMMES ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGNATED REPORT ON EFFECTS AUTHORITIES, THE PUBLIC, AND ALTERNATIVES AND OTHER MEMBER STATES

ELABORATION AND INFORMATIVE PROCEDURE MONITORING ON THE ADOPTION OF THE FINAL ON THE ADOPTION AND SINGNIFICANT PLAN OR PROGRAMME EFFECTS OF THE PLAN OR ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS PROGRAMME OF THE PLAN OR PROGRAMME

It is important to specify that consultations, to be effective, require a detailed definition of the mentioned plan. With specific reference to the East Med MoS Master Plan, it will be possible to carry out consultations in case of complete implementation of the measures contained in the Master Plan. Furthermore, in order to guarantee the information of relevant authorities and consider their opinion , in case some of the proposed new routes projects are presented to a TEN-T call, the relevant documentation on proposals description and strategic environmental assessment will be published on a dedicated section of the project web-site (www.eastmed-mos.eu) together with a specific form allowing interested stakeholders to express their opinion on the subject. The form will be available on the web-site for an appropriate time frame (at least 3 weeks) together with other relevant documentation regarding environmental impacts of MoS in the East Med area in order to allow all interested Bodies to view the proposals and understand the environmental effects of each project. Public Authorities and the Public of involved Member States will be properly informed about the starting of consultations.

The environmental assessment of the East Med MoS Master Plan is focused on the analysis of the following main topics in relation to the proposed new routes in the area that will be developed in the following sections:

Deliverable 5.2 5-268 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

OUTLINE OF MOS MAIN ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECTS: identification of main environmental impacts of the short sea shipping in general: • positive effects on road congestion • reduced emissions of greenhouse gases THE CURRENT STATE OF THE ENVIRONMENT IN THE EAST MED AREA: main characteristics of the area which are likely to be significantly affected by the implementation of the master plan, the likely evolution of the environment in the area, the existing and relevant environmental problems THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION MAIN OBJECTIVES established at international, Community and national level and evaluation of how the East Med MoS take into account these objectives THE LIKELY SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS OF EAST MED MOS ON THE ENVIRONMENT, based on the identification of the main parameters of the evaluation THE MEASURES TO PREVENT AND REDUCE ANY SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE EFFECTS ON THE ENVIRONMENT MAIN MEASURES FOR THE MONITORING OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

Motorways of the sea aim at creating new integrated transport chains that should be more sustainable and commercially more efficient than road-only transport, providing alternatives to road transport and permitting a substantial modal shift of freight from congested roads to key combined “land-maritime routes”; thus the focus of the environmental assessment is on the identification and analysis of main effects that the routes identified by the Master Plan might have on the environment.

When relevant and possible, the aforementioned items have been addressed at a “corridor level”, focusing on the specific corridors presented within the Masterplan: in particular, quantitative environmental benefits (likely significant effects on the environment) have been estimated for each one of the 7 new routes that are expected to generate a modal shift. The environmental benefit have not been calculated for the Taranto – Igoumenitsa and the Pireaus–Limassol corridors since there is not actual modal shift in these cases (please refer to Chapter 2 for further details on the estimation of modal shift). Qualitative environmental aspects (i.e. outline of MoS environmental aspects, environmental protection objectives, measure to prevent), being more general, “transport–mode-related” and less “corridor-related”, are investigated at a Country or area level.

Deliverable 5.2 5-269 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

5.2 Outline of MoS main environmental aspects

Main economic, social and environmental problems that the short sea shipping promotional policy is expected to address consist in fast growth of heavy road transport and related congestion, accidents and pollution. Furthermore, the efficiency and sustainability of the mode are in focus.

Short sea shipping, thanks to its potential in terms of compatibility with the environment, combating the congestion affecting several roads, and limiting costs, has a chance to increase its importance in the European intermodal transport system, with a promising future. Actually sea shipping is relatively friendly: emissions of greenhouse gases per amount of transport work are low compared to other modes. On the other hand, in absolute terms, greenhouse emissions from shipping are significant and growing due to the increase in the global trading of goods. Sea shipping is then an important source of air pollutants, and especially in coastal areas and harbours with heavy traffic, the contribution of shipping emissions to air pollution is substantial.

In spite of these remarks, the development of short sea shipping, compared to the growth of other transport modalities, can positively contribute to the control and reduction of environmental negative emissions.

5.3 Relevant aspects of the current state of the environment in the East Med Area (environmental characteristics and main problems to be addressed)

The Mediterranean is actually the largest European sea, shared by 427 million people living in the 22 countries and around it and visited by about 175 million more every year.

Despite nearly 30 years of international efforts to protect the sea, the Mediterranean remains fragile and continues to deteriorate as environmental pressures increase. These pressures include pollution from industry, shipping and households as well as the loss of open areas and the destruction of coastal ecosystems like forests to make way for construction. On current projections, 50% of the Mediterranean coastline may be built up by 2025. Overall, environmental degradation is estimated to be costing the equivalent of more than 3% of gross domestic product each year in some North African countries.

The Mediterranean area, and coastline in particular, is a resource that need to be protected: the implementation of the East Med MoS Master Plan and the enhancement of motorways of the sea in the area, by reducing road traffic in coastal zones could contribute to the preservation of such a precious resource. Several efforts have already been carried out in order to protect the richness of the Mediterranean environment.

Deliverable 5.2 5-270 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Internationally, it has been recognised that human activities need to be managed at an ecosystem level if they are to be effective in halting or reversing environmental degradation. However, a lack of coordination between existing global and regional commitments and mechanisms prevents this from happening. The EU has, therefore, reconsidered the way it deals with environmental protection. The application of the Natura 2000 ecological network to the marine environment is a significant example of the EU developments intended to protect marine and coastal ecosystems.

Establishing a coherent network of ecologically representative and well-managed protected areas should be a key element of the ecosystem-based approach to managing and safeguarding the marine environment, including improving the sustainability of fisheries. The implementation of the Habitats and Birds Directives requires designation and adequate management of marine sites as part of the Natura 2000 network. However, progress in fulfilling this has been slow, in particular when comparing it to what has happened on land, and may be insufficient for 'full implementation' of these directives. By 1 December 2006, EU-25 had designated 4 133 purely land-based SPAs (Special Protection Areas under the Habitats Directive) and 19.614 purely land-based SCIs (Sites of Community under the Habitats Directive), but only 484 marine SPAs and 1 248 marine SCIs. Focusing on the core area of the study, there is a high concentration of protected coastal zones.

Figure 5-2 Coastal zone protected by Natura 2000 (%, 2006)

Source: Europe's environment - The fourth assessment – European Environment Agency

Deliverable 5.2 5-271 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

The East Mediterranean area has a great concentration of National Parks and protected Areas that could be further preserved thanks to the enhancement of an environmentally friendly motorways of the sea network.

In Greece there are 5 main types of protected areas which are administratively under the Hellenic Ministry for the Environment, Physical Planning and Public Works:

ƒ National Parks: there are 10 National Parks in Greece, covering 68,732 ha. According to law, a National Park is a forested area, which is of great interest from the point of view of wild fauna and flora conservation, the geomorphological formations, the substratum, the atmosphere, the waters and their natural environment in general

ƒ Aesthetic Forests: these are sites (forests or natural landscapes) of a particular aesthetic and tourist importance, so that the protection of fauna, flora and its particular natural beauty should be enforced

ƒ Protected Monuments of Nature: these are sites of particular palaeontological, geomorphological, and historical importance that cannot be characterised as National Parks or Aesthetic Forests. Protected Monuments of Nature can be trees or tree stands, wetlands, even rare plant species of a particular botanical, geobotanical, aesthetic and historical importance

ƒ Game Reserves and Hunting Reserves

ƒ Marine Parks.

ƒ Besides the above national categories, there are several protected areas whose importance is acknowledged at the European and international level, and which have been declared "Special Protection Areas" or "Ramsar sites".

In Italy there are 22 National Parks, and 2 more are waiting to be established. They cover on the whole a surface of one million and a half hectares, about the 5% of the national territory. Besides the great administrative variety, the national parks also differ for their management of a wide and varied territory characterized by a relevant human presence. The marine parks are also gaining an important role in the national safeguard project: they are aimed to protect in an integral manner stretches of sea and of coast (often entire islands or archipelagoes) presenting unique environmental elements and landscapes which are typical of the Mediterranean area. The Environmental Ministry is responsible for the implementation of the policies concerning the protection, development and integration of the protected areas.

In Slovenia there is a National Park of about 84,000 ha, 3 regional parks and more than 40 protected areas. The Ministry of the Environment and Spatial Planning is officially responsible for the environment, environmental policy, pollution prevention policy, biotechnology, nature protection, comprehensive environmental impact assessment and waters.

Deliverable 5.2 5-272 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

In Malta there are 28 Nature Reserves but also Sites of Scientific Importance and Areas of Ecological Importance, Bird Sanctuaries, Historical Trees having an Antiquarian Importance, and other minor protected areas.

In Cyprus there is a National Park,13 National Forests, 8 Natural Reserves and 2 Marine Reserves. The Environmental Service of the Ministry of , Natural Resources and Environment is responsible, among the others, for the implementation of government policy in the fields of natural resources and environment.

The motorways of the sea represent a cleaner, more cost-effective solution for transporting freight and will reduce congestion at the main bottlenecks on European roads. The implementation of a well established and reliable network of motorways of the sea connections in the East Mediterranean can then be considered as an important link in the chain for the protection of the Mediterranean environment. Furthermore, in order not to offset the positive effects due to modal shift, also MoS oriented infrastructural interventions should be planned with the aim of minimizing negative effects on the environment. For this purpose infrastructural interventions included in Port Authorities development plans are subject to detailed environmental impact assessment following the relevant national and EU regulations.

In recent years, European maritime transport administrations and the European shipping industry have made significant efforts to improve the environmental record of maritime transport. The EU regulatory framework has been strengthened in strict cooperation with Member States and several issues have been addressed (e.g. prevention of accidents and incidents, atmospheric emissions, ballast water treatment, ship recycling, etc.) with the aim of reaching the long-term objective of ‘zero-waste, zero -emission’ for the maritime transport.

5.4 Environmental protections main objectives

A proposal on the definition of a common environmental strategy to protect the Mediterranean Sea was made by the EU commission in 2006. The strategy's key goals can be summarised as follows:

ƒ Reduction of pollution levels

ƒ Promotion of sustainable use of the sea and its coastline

ƒ Encourage neighbouring countries to cooperate on environmental issues

ƒ Assistance to partner countries in developing effective institutions and policies to protect the environment

ƒ Involve NGOs and the public in environmental decisions affecting them.

Deliverable 5.2 5-273 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

In line with the European Neighbourhood Policy and the -Mediterranean Partnership, these aims will be achieved through four main means: financial assistance from existing and already planned EU aid programmes, strengthened dialogue with the region's representatives, improved coordination with other organisations and partners, and sharing of EU experience in dealing with the problems of the Mediterranean and other regions. A key point of the EU strategy is 'Horizon 2020', an initiative to tackle the top sources of Mediterranean pollution by the year 2020 that was endorsed by leaders of Euro-Mediterranean (Euro-Med) countries at the 10th Anniversary Euro-Med Summit in Barcelona in November 2005.

The initiative is built around 4 main elements:

ƒ Projects to reduce the most significant sources of pollution. The initial focus will be on industrial emissions, municipal waste and urban waste water, which are responsible for up to 80% of Mediterranean Sea pollution.

ƒ Capacity-building measures to help neighbouring countries create national environmental administrations that are able to develop and police environmental laws.

ƒ Using the Commission's research budget to develop greater knowledge of environmental issues relevant to the Mediterranean and ensure this is shared.

ƒ Developing indicators to monitor the success of Horizon 2020.

The EU environmental policy regarding the short sea shipping is mainly focused on the reduction of ship air emission. Actually ships are fast becoming the biggest source of air pollution in the EU and unless more action is taken they are set to emit more than all land sources combined by 2020. Ships emit nitrogen oxides, sulphur dioxide and particulate matter all of which contribute to local air quality. Nitrogen oxides and sulphur dioxide contribute to the regional problems of acidification and eutrophication of ecosystems as well as to the formation of secondary particulate matter. Furthermore, nitrogen oxides and volatile hydrocarbons contribute to the formation of ozone which can travel between and is known to be the third most important greenhouse gas. In 2000, SO2 and NOx emissions from international maritime shipping in Europe amounted to approximately 30% of the land-based emissions in the EU-25. While legislation is in force to control emission from international shipping, the expected increase in the volume of ship movements will compensate the positive environmental impacts of these measures and will lead to a further growth in ship emissions. Emissions from ships are currently responsible for 10 to 20% of sulphur deposition in coastal areas, but their contribution is expected for 2020 to increase to more than 30% in large areas in Europe, and up to 50% in coastal areas.

Deliverable 5.2 5-274 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Figure 5-3 Land Based vs Shipping SO2 and NOx emissions 2000-2030

SO2-emissions 2000-2030: land-based NOx-emissions 2000-2030: land-based vs. vs. shipping shipping

Source: Susanne Ortmanns - CCB Annual Conference 2007-05-11

In order to face this problem many initiatives have been taken and rules have been set to reduce the contribution of shipping to acidification, ground-level ozone, eutrophication, health, climate change and ozone depletion.

Furthermore, within the Commission Communication realesed in January 200938 the following priorities have been identified in order to reach the long-term objective of ‘zero-waste, zero-emission’for the maritime transport:

¾ Ensure steady progress towards a coherent and comprehensive approach to reduce (GHG) from international shipping, combining technical, operational and market-based measures. The EU should actively work within the IMO to pursue the limitation or reduction of emissions of greenhouse gases from ships.

¾ Ensure that Member States are able to achieve "good environmental status" in marine waters covered by their sovereignty or jurisdiction by 2020, as required by the new Marine Strategy Framework Directive.

¾ Strengthen EU legislation regarding port reception facilities for ship-generated waste and cargo residue, improving the implementation arrangements. In that regard, ensure both the availability of adequate facilities and administrative procedures to meet the expected traffic growth.

38 Source: “Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions” Strategic goals and recommendations for the EU’s maritime transport policy until 2018, Brussels, 21/01/2009

Deliverable 5.2 5-275 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

¾ Follow up the proposals detailed in the Commission's Communication on an EU strategy for better ship dismantling and ensure the adoption of the IMO Convention on Ship Recycling and steady progress towards its future implementation.

¾ Oversee the smooth implementation of the amendments adopted in 2008 by the IMO to MARPOL Annex VI to reduce sulphur oxides and nitrogen oxides emissions from ships. This includes assessing which European sea areas qualify as Emission Control Areas, the availability of the adequate fuels and the impacts on short-sea shipping. The Commission's proposals should ensure that modal ‘back-shift’ from short-sea shipping to road is avoided.

¾ Promote alternative fuel solutions in ports, such as the use of shore-side electricity by proposing a time-limited tax exemption for shore-side electricity.

Re-launch the Commission’s ‘Quality Shipping Campaign’, by means of partnership agreements with the EU maritime administrations, the maritime industries at large and the users of maritime transport services. In that context, promote a European Environmental Management System for Maritime Transport (EMS- MT), targeting the continuous improvement of the environmental performance of shipping; consider modulation of registration fees, port dues and other charges, with a view to rewarding efforts towards greener shipping.

Deliverable 5.2 5-276 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

5.5 Likely significant effects on the environment

The main environmental effects of MoS development in the East Mediterranean consist in positive ones due to the reduction of external costs generated by the shift of goods from road to sea. These positive effects could be partly mitigated by the new infrastructures that need to be developed in order to support the enhancement of MoS in the area. For the infrastructural interventions included in Port Authorities development plans the environmental impact assessment has already been carried out following the relevant national and EU regulations. On the other hand the new projects that are at a lower level of development aren’t enough detailed yet for the carrying out of the environmental impact assessment. Anyway, the required assessment of infrastructures will be carried out by the relevant bodies in case of further development of the above mentioned new projects.

Transport activities give rise to environmental impacts, accidents and congestion, whose costs are generally not borne by the transport users. The European Commission pays particular attention to this subject and in order to summarise the state of the art as regards the valuation of external costs it has realised a comprehensive compilation of existing studies on external costs in the transport sector. This handbook39 assembles best practice methods to estimate and monetize the external costs generated by transport activities concentrating on air pollution, noise, climate change, congestion and accidents in road transport which constitutes the overwhelming share of transport external costs, but it also considers other external costs and other modes of transport. It brings together the key parameters to apply these methods as well as examples of unit values per travelled distance according to typical traffic situations. Several attempts have in fact been made to estimate external costs in the transport sector (even if so far studies on external costs have mainly concerned road transport) and further analysis are ongoing in the framework of the activities regarding EU strategy to internalise the external costs for all modes of transport. Studies generally take into consideration the following categories of external costs:

¾ Costs of scarce infrastructure and congestion40 ¾ Accidents costs41 ¾ Ai pollution costs42

39 Source: “Handbook on estimation of external costs in the transport sector - Produced within the study Internalisation Measures and Policies for All external Cost of Transport (IMPACT)”, Delft, February, 2008 40 The UNITE 2002c project concludes that there are no external congestion costs in seaport operations. GRACE D4 project estimates the additional (marginal) crew costs of a vessel having to wait to call at a port of € 185 per hour. Anyway since ports usually do not keep records of vessel waiting times the computation of relevant marginal external congestion costs in maritime transport is hardly possible 41 Generally this is not considered as a major issue for short sea shipping

Deliverable 5.2 5-277 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

¾ Noise costs43 ¾ Climate change costs44 ¾ Other external costs45

As for the modal shift generated by the MoS, the Marco Polo Programme approach has been chosen for the calculation of the environmental benefit generated by the development of the proposed routes. The assessment of environmental impacts plays in fact a key role in the Marco Polo Programme. The overall objectives of the Marco Polo Programme are in actual fact to reduce road congestion, to improve the environmental performance of the freight transport system and to enhance intermodal transport, thereby contributing to an efficient and sustainable transport system.

The calculation of quantitative benefits is based on modal shift. The benefit is calculated as the difference between the relevant external costs for the “old road route” and those of the “new modally shifted route” or between the relevant external costs for the old and those of the new service. Then the environmental efficiency (€/tkm) of the modal shift is calculated as the proportion between monetised environmental & social benefit and the modal shift realised by the action over the duration of the grant agreement.

For the purpose of this study the external costs figures adopted by the Marco Polo Programme have been used since they are comprehensive and provide detailed values for main transport modes. These values are generated by an internal study of the EC based mainly on the external research projects UNITE46 and REALISE with some additional input from transport associations. The calculation of external costs takes into account noise, pollutants and climate costs as well as accidents, infrastructure and congestion. As far as short sea shipping is concerned, this external cost figure assumes fuel of average quality and emissions from average engine performance.

Further details on the UNITE and REALISE projects can be found in the Annex. I.

The calculation of external costs applied to a specific section of the analysed routes is based on the following value:

42 For the maritime transport, air pollutants in harbour areas are complicated to allocate 43 Generally this is not considered as a major issue for short sea shipping 44 Effects of all Greenhouses gases should be considered 45 E.g. costs for nature and landscape, costs for and water pollution, external costs in sensitive areas, costs of up-and downstream processes, additional costs in urban areas, costs of energy dependency 46 As regards total cost figures and transport accounts for different countries, UNITE (2003) is the most important study at EU-level containing transport accounts and total external cost estimates for most Western European countries.

Deliverable 5.2 5-278 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study

Specific External Specific External Costs Costs Mode of Transport (€ per vehicle- (€ per tonne- kilometre) kilometre) Road 0,70 0,035 Short Sea Shipping 0,18 0,009 Rail 0,30 0,015 Inland Waterways 0,20 0,010 Source: Appendix 3 -Marco Polo II Call 2008

The same approach has been used in order to estimate the potential environmental impact of the East Med MoS Master Plan. The environmental benefit due to the shift of 1 tkm of goods from road to sea is € 0,026. This value was applied to the modal shift (reduction of tkm transported by road) generated by the specific MoS cases illustrated in Chapter 2. Assuming an expected modal shift of about 4,4 billion tkm, the environmental benefit would be quantifiable at about € 113.000.000.

Annual max. modal Annual max. MOS potential connection shift environmental (tkm/1. benefit 000.00 0) Kavala - Limassol 420 € 10.920.000 Igoumenitsa – Koper 650 € 16.900.000 Venetia – Igoumenitsa – Patra - Corinthos 820 € 21.320.000 Ancona – Koper 550 € 14.300.000 Venice-Koper-Ploce 550 € 14.300.000 Patra-Catania 72 € 1.872.000 Malta-Venice 1.300 € 33.800.000 TOTAL 4.362 € 113.412.000

5.6 Mitigation measures to prevent and reduce any significant adverse effects on the environment

As already anticipated in previous sections, many initiatives have been taken in order to face one of the main adverse effects of sea shipping: the ship air emission problem.

One of main initiatives is represented by the Directive proposing reductions in the sulphur content of marine fuel oils (Directive 2005/33/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 July 2005 amending Directive 1999/32/EC). Marine fuel contained on average 2.7%, or 27,000 parts per million (ppm), of sulphur, compared with petrol for cars, which starting from 2007 should have 10 ppm sulphur

Deliverable 5.2 5-279 Eastern Mediterranean Region MoS Master Plan Study content. As part of its ship emissions strategy, the Commission presented in November 2002 a proposal to reduce the sulphur content of marine fuels.

Another interesting initiative aiming at the reduction of ship air emissions is represented by the “Recommendation on the promotion of shore-side electricity for use by ships at berth in EU ports” adopted by the EU Commission in 2006. Shore-side electricity means providing electricity to ships at berth in ports from the national grid instead of ships producing electricity using their own engines. This eliminates local air and noise emissions from ships' engines while at berths in port. The Recommendation is not legally binding and its main objective consists in the promotion of shore-side electricity as a means of abating ships emissions in EU ports, particularly in populated areas which suffer from poor air quality.

Also Annex VI (Prevention of Air Pollution from Ships) of the Marine Pollution Convention, MARPOL 73/78, of the International Maritime Organization (IMO) deals with air pollutant emissions from. This document contains provisions on Sulphur Oxide Emission Control Areas (Baltic Sea, North Sea & English Channel) and nitrogen oxide emissions standards for ships' engines.

The air emission problem of short sea shipping is also being addressed by industry via ship-based abatement techniques that have no adverse effect on ecosystems, are subject to appropriate approval and control mechanisms and can provide emission reductions at least equivalent to, or even greater than, those achievable using low sulphur fuel. Further details can be found in the Annex I.

5.7 Main measures for the monitoring of the environmental impact

The monitoring of main environmental impacts due to the implementation of the East Med MoS Masterplan can be carried out through the comparison of effective modal shift (based on goods transported on MoS services within the Area) with the planned one. The calculation should be based on parameters taking into account main external cost categories for the involved transport modes. The analysis carried out in this study in order to give an estimation of the East Med Mos Master Plan significant effects on the environment was based on external costs parameters used by the Marco Polo Programme, but in case of further development of studies on the evaluation of external costs in the transport sector, new and more precise parameters could be used. For further details on the values of external costs assumed by the Programme, please refer to the section 1.4 “Likely significant effects on the environment”.

Deliverable 5.2 5-280