DOCSLIB.ORG

Project ENABLE Stimulate Sustainable Freight Transport Systems with Latin American Countries

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Project ENABLE Stimulate Sustainable Freight Transport Systems with Latin American Countries SEVENTH FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME Coordination and Support Actions (Supporting) Grant Agreement No: 233910 Project ENABLE Stimulate Sustainable Freight Transport Systems with Latin American countries Deliverable 2.1 Best Practices Handbook Version: Final Date: 23rd of December 2010 Dissemination level: Public Deliverable code: D2.1 Deliverable D2.1: Best Practices handbook PROJECT INFORMATION Title: Stimulate Sustainable Freight Transport Systems with Latin American countries Acronym: ENABLE Grant Agreement no: 233910 Programme: 7th Framework Programme Funding Scheme: Coordination and Support Actions (Supporting) Start date: 1st September 2009 Duration: 24 months Web site: www.enable‐project.net CONTROL SHEET Version history Version Total Date Main author Contributors Summary of changes number Pages 1.0 5.6.2010 Antti Permala, Jarkko Lehti‐ nen 2.0 24 June Antti Permala, Jarkko Lehti‐ 2010 Karri Rantasila nen 3.0 119 8 Sept 2010 Antti Permala Input from D1.1 Karri Rantasila (draft) 4.0 125 21 Dec. Antti Permala Input from D1.1 (final) 2010 Karri Rantasila and 1st conference Abstract The deliverable D2.1 of the ENABLE project documents the European Best Practices that provide solutions to intermodal logistical challenges and barriers in Argentina and Brazil. The selected Best Practices are based on the analysis of existing intermodal situation in target countries. The cases allow building up a picture of the main development lines of logistics corridors in LA. All the presented parties (companies, operators, LSPs, IT providers and policy makers) are essential stakeholders for building up a well‐functioning logistics network. Approval Name Date Prepared VTT 21st December 2010 Reviewed CERTH/HIT 22nd December 2010 Authorized CERTH/HIT 22nd December 2010 Circulation Recipient Date of submission European Commission 23rd December 2010 December 2010 page 2 Deliverable D2.1: Best Practices handbook EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The focus of ENABLE project is in co‐modal and intermodal freight transport. This pos‐ sesses fundamental importance in developing competitive alternatives to road trans‐ port. As roads are being increasingly overloaded, intermodal transport can offer reliable and cost‐effective transport mode in an environmentally conscious manner. EU is Brazil's biggest trading partner, accounting for 22.5% of its total trade. Brazil is the single biggest exporter of agricultural products to the EU, accounting for 13% of total EU imports. Also Argentina is a big exporter of agricultural goods to the EU, as well as Eu‐ rope is Argentina's second export market after Brazil. In addition, EU is the biggest for‐ eign investor in Argentina and Brazil respectively. The backbone of the EU's future bilat‐ eral trade relations with Argentina and Brazil will be a wide‐ranging EU‐MERCOSUR As‐ sociation Agreement. This Agreement aims at the creation of a free trade area. Based on the analysis of existing situation in Argentina and Brazil, findings of project forums and logistics performance indicators, the main logistical challenges and needs for improvements in Brazil and Argentina are addressed and discussed. After identifying the problems, the European intermodal innovations and best practices, mainly devel‐ oped in projects of PROMIT, Viacombi and Bestlog and by European Intermodal Associa‐ tion, are employed to provide solutions to logistical challenges in Latin America. General approach to best practices has been: • Benchmarking the European Intermodal best practices • Looking for sustainable concepts, industrial innovations, and intermodal solu‐ tions • Classification and clustering the best practices • Review of innovations and ideas • Analyzing the organization of innovation process and business models of ser‐ vices • Transferability to other situations or framework conditions. The current intermodal status in LA has guided the selection of best practices that are further divided into five categories according the type of the case: 1) Company Cases, 2) Operator Cases, 3) Logistics Service Cases, 4) Information Technology Cases and 5) Pol‐ icy Strategies. Despite of the differences in EU and LA logistics systems, the key findings of EU Best Practices are extendable to LA and allow one to understand the development paths of LA logistics. The key findings of best practices to be transferred to LA include: • Arranging logistics chain by using intermodal transport • Business models, service concepts and operational principles of intermodal transport operator • Business model and service concept of intermodal logistics network • Connecting port‐ and shipping operations to logistics network by utilizing in‐ formation technology Chosen cases allow together to build a picture over the main development lines of logis‐ tics corridors in LA. All the parties presented above (companies, operators, LSPs, IT pro‐ viders and policy makers) are essential stakeholders for building up a well‐functioning logistics network. December 2010 page 3 Deliverable D2.1: Best Practices handbook ABBREVIATIONS AEO Authorized Economic Operator BP Best Practice CA European Coordination Action CCD Coca Cola Drikker DB Deutche Bahn DBS Deutche Bahn Schenker CO2 Carbon Dioxide CT Combined Transport ICT Information and Communication Technologies IT Information Technology ITU Intermodal Transport Unit JIT Just‐In‐Time EDI Electronic Data Interchange EIA European Intermodal Association IMMTA International MultiModal Transport Association KN Kuehne+Nagel KPI Key Performance Indicator LA Latin America LDC Local Distribution Centers LCL Less than Container Load LPI Logistics Performance Index LSP Logistics Service Provider PCS Port Community System RORO Roll‐on/roll‐off SECU StoraEnso Cargo Unit SLA Service Level Agreements UIRR International Union of Combined Road‐Rail Transport Companies TEU Twenty‐foot Equivalent Units 3PL 3rd Party Logistics 4PL 4th Party Logistics December 2010 page 4 Deliverable D2.1: Best Practices handbook CONTENTS 1. Introduction _______________________________________________________________________________9 1.1. ENABLE Project _____________________________________________________________________9 1.2. Aims of Best Practices analysis ____________________________________________________9 1.3. PROMIT Project ___________________________________________________________________ 10 2. Intermodal transport in Europe________________________________________________________ 12 2.1. EU Intermodal Policy and Actions _______________________________________________ 12 2.2. Related organizations_____________________________________________________________ 14 2.2.1. EIA____________________________________________________________________________ 14 2.2.2. UIRR __________________________________________________________________________ 15 2.2.3. IMMTA _______________________________________________________________________ 15 3. Approach _________________________________________________________________________________ 16 3.1. Methodology_______________________________________________________________________ 16 3.2. An outlook of the EU‐LA logistics environment ________________________________ 16 3.3. LA intermodal status______________________________________________________________ 18 3.4. EU Intermodal status _____________________________________________________________ 22 3.5. Criteria and classification of Best Practice cases _______________________________ 23 4. Best Practice cases ______________________________________________________________________ 31 4.1. Company Cases____________________________________________________________________ 31 4.1.1. Volvo _________________________________________________________________________ 31 4.1.2. StoraEnso ____________________________________________________________________ 35 4.1.3. Coca Cola_____________________________________________________________________ 43 4.2. Operator Cases ____________________________________________________________________ 48 4.2.1. Hupac ________________________________________________________________________ 48 4.2.2. Rhinecontainer ______________________________________________________________ 53 4.2.3. BoxXpress Germany_________________________________________________________ 57 4.2.4. Polzug ________________________________________________________________________ 61 4.2.5. Construrail___________________________________________________________________ 64 4.2.6. Corman_______________________________________________________________________ 67 4.2.7. HUB Zahony _________________________________________________________________ 70 4.2.8. BILK Combiterminal ________________________________________________________ 74 4.3. Logistics Service Cases____________________________________________________________ 78 4.3.1. DB‐Schenker_________________________________________________________________ 78 4.3.2. Kuehne&Nagel_______________________________________________________________ 85 4.3.3. Cargo Domino _______________________________________________________________ 90 December 2010 page 5 Deliverable D2.1: Best Practices handbook 4.4. Information Technology (IT) Cases______________________________________________ 95 4.4.1. Port Infolink _________________________________________________________________ 95 4.4.2. Short Sea XML _______________________________________________________________ 99 4.4.3. Valenciaport IT Platform __________________________________________________103 4.5. Policy strategies __________________________________________________________________110 4.5.1. German terminal policy____________________________________________________110
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 689 Part 174—Carriage by Rail
    Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Admin., DOT Pt. 174 (a) When the test flame is in the ‘‘off’’ posi- hicles, freight containers, and bulk pack- tion, the test portion ignites and sustains ages. combustion; 174.83 Switching placarded rail cars, trans- (b) The test portion ignites while the test port vehicles, freight containers, and flame is in the test position for 15 s, and sus- bulk packagings. tains combustion for more than 15 s after the 174.84 Position in train of loaded placarded test flame has been returned to the ‘‘off’’ po- rail cars, transport vehicles, freight con- sition. tainers or bulk packagings when accom- panied by guards or technical escorts. NOTE TO PARAGRAPH 6 OF THIS APPENDIX: 174.85 Position in train of placarded cars, Intermittent flashing may not be interpreted transport vehicles, freight containers, as sustained combustion. Normally, at the and bulk packagings. end of 15 s, the combustion has either clearly 174.86 Maximum allowable operating speed. ceased or continues. In cases of doubt, the material must be deemed to sustain combus- Subpart E—Class I (Explosive) Materials tion. [Amdt. 173–241, 59 FR 67517, Dec. 29, 1994, as 174.101 Loading Class 1 (explosive) mate- amended by Amdt. 173–255, 61 FR 50627, Sept. rials. 26, 1996; 66 FR 45381, Aug. 28, 2001; 68 FR 75747, 174.102 Forbidden mixed loading and stor- Dec. 31, 2003; 69 FR 76179, Dec. 20, 2004; 71 FR age. 78634, Dec. 29, 2006] 174.103 Disposition of damaged or astray shipments. 174.104 Division 1.1 or 1.2 (explosive) mate- PART 174—CARRIAGE BY RAIL rials; car selection, preparation, inspec- tion, and certification.
    [Show full text]
  • 680 Part 174—Carriage by Rail
    Pt. 174 49 CFR Ch. I (10–1–09 Edition) to test. Because of the possibility of loss of (g) If sustained combustion interpreted in volatile constituents, the sample must re- accordance with paragraph 6. of this appen- ceive only the minimum treatment nec- dix is not found, repeat the complete proce- essary to ensure its homogeneity. After re- dure with new test portions, but with a heat- moving each test portion, the sample con- ing time of 30 s. tainer must be immediately closed tightly to (h) If sustained combustion interpreted in ensure that no volatile components escape accordance with paragraph 6. of this appen- from the container; if this closure is incom- dix is not found at a test temperature of 60 plete, an entirely new sample must be taken. °C (140 °F), repeat the complete procedure with new test portions, but at a test tem- 5. PROCEDURE perature of 75 °C (167 °F). In the case of a ma- Carry out the determination in triplicate. terial which has a flash point above 60 °C (140 WARNING—Do not carry out the test in a °F) and below 93 °C (200 °F), if sustained com- small confined area (for example a glove box) bustion interpreted in accordance with para- because of the hazard of explosions. graph 6. of this appendix is not found at a (a) It is essential that the apparatus be set test temperature of 5 °C (9 °F) above its flash up in a completely draft-free area (see warn- point, repeat the complete procedure with ing) and in the absence of strong light to fa- new test portions, but at a test temperature cilitate observation of flash, flame, etc.
    [Show full text]
  • Key Issues in Modernizing the US Freight
    Supply Chain Policy Center A RAND INFRASTRUCTURE, SAFETY, AND ENVIRONMENT CENTER THE ARTS This PDF document was made available CHILD POLICY from www.rand.org as a public service of CIVIL JUSTICE the RAND Corporation. EDUCATION ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT Jump down to document6 HEALTH AND HEALTH CARE INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit NATIONAL SECURITY research organization providing POPULATION AND AGING PUBLIC SAFETY objective analysis and effective SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY solutions that address the challenges SUBSTANCE ABUSE facing the public and private sectors TERRORISM AND HOMELAND SECURITY around the world. TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE Support RAND WORKFORCE AND WORKPLACE Purchase this document Browse Books & Publications Make a charitable contribution For More Information Visit RAND at www.rand.org Explore the RAND Supply Chain Policy Center View document details Limited Electronic Distribution Rights This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law as indicated in a notice appearing later in this work. This electronic representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for non-commercial use only. Unauthorized posting of RAND PDFs to a non-RAND Web site is prohibited. RAND PDFs are protected under copyright law. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of our research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please see RAND Permissions. This product is part of the RAND Corporation monograph series. RAND monographs present major research findings that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors. All RAND mono- graphs undergo rigorous peer review to ensure high standards for research quality and objectivity.
    [Show full text]
  • FERRMED Wagonstudy FINAL
    R A I L W A Y G R O U P FERRMED Wagon Concept Study May 2010 Dr. Gerhard Troche Dipl.-Ing. Armando Carrillo Zanuy Royal Institute of Technology Stockholm (KTH) – Railway Group Institute of Technology Berlin (TUB) FERRMED – Wagon Concept Study Content Preface 5 1 Summary 7 2 Introduction 11 2.1 Background 11 2.2 Goal 11 2.3 How to improve competitiveness of rail freight? 12 3 Market requirements on future freight wagons 15 3.1 Introduction 15 3.2 Transport customer’s requirements 17 3.3 Traffic products for different markets 20 3.3.1 Unit trains 20 3.3.2 Wagonload traffic 21 3.3.3 Intermodal traffic 22 3.3.4 High-speed freight traffic 22 3.4 The market for intermodal transport 24 3.5 Why wagonload ? 27 3.6 Conclusions 29 4 Relevance of FERRMED Infrastructure Standards 31 4.1 FERRMED Standards and Network 31 4.2 Interoperability issues 33 5 State-of-the-Art rail freight wagons 37 5.1 Introductory comments 37 - 2 - Gerhard Troche • Armando Carrillo Zanuy 5.2 Intermodal Wagons 38 5.2.1 Sgns 60’ 38 5.2.2 Lgnss 45’, Lgnrss 90’, Lgss 52’… 38 5.2.3 Sggns 73’ 39 5.2.4 Sggmrs 104’ & Sdggmrs 104’ 40 5.2.5 Container Stack Railcar 41 5.2.6 Multi-unit Well Car 42 5.3 Long wagons 43 5.3.1 Standard North-American Flat Car for containers and semitrailers 43 5.3.2 Australian CQMY 80’-container wagon 45 5.3.3 DB Schenker Rail class Rbns 641/646 46 5.4 Wagons with low floor height 48 5.4.1 General remarks 48 5.4.2 Class SFFGGMRRSS Megafret 49 5.5 Wagons for voluminous cargo 51 5.5.1 DB Schenker Rail class Hbbins-tt 309 51 041 5.5.2 Volume wagon Hiqqrrs-vw011
    [Show full text]
  • North American Intermodal Transportation: Infrastructure, Capital and Financing Issues EQUIPMENT LEASING & FINANCE OUN DAT IO N Your Eye on the Future
    North American Intermodal Transportation: Infrastructure, Capital and Financing Issues EQUIPMENT LEASING & FINANCE OUN DAT IO N Your Eye On The Future The Foundation is the only research organization dedicated solely to the equipment finance industry. The Foundation accomplishes its mission through development of future-focused studies and reports identifying critical issues that could impact the industry. research is independent, predictive and peer-reviewed by industry experts. The Foundation is funded solely through contributions. Contributions to the Foundation are tax deductible. Equipment Leasing & Finance Foundation 1825 K S TREET • S UITE 900 WASHINGTON , DC 20006 WWW .LEASEFOUNDATION .ORG 202-238-3426 LISA A. L EVINE , E XECUTIVE DIRECTOR , CAE North American Intermodal Transportation: Infrastructure, Capital and Financing Issues EQUIPMENT LEASING & FINANCE OUN DAT IO N Your Eye On The Future NORTH AMERICAN INTERMODAL TRANSPORTATION: INFRASTRUCTURE, CAPITAL AND FINANCING ISSUES Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................................................................... 3 INTERMODAL TRANSPORTATION IN NORTH AMERICA The Intermodal Freight Transport System .............................................................................................................. 5 Deregulation of the Intermodal Transport Sector .................................................................................................... 5 North America and the Global Economy
    [Show full text]
  • Reference Manual on Maritime Transport Statistics
    2016 Reference Manual on Maritime Transport Statistics Version 3.0 (July 2016) 2 Reference Manual on Maritime Transport Statistics 3 Reference Manual on Maritime Transport Statistics INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................................... 7 PART I: Methodology, definitions and classifications ........................................................................................... 8 1 Scope of the Directive: main aspects ........................................................................................................ 8 2 Description of the datasets ....................................................................................................................... 9 3 Further information on the definitions and scope of the legal acts ....................................................... 14 3.1 Ports ................................................................................................................................................ 14 3.1.1 List of ports.............................................................................................................................. 14 3.1.2 Port .......................................................................................................................................... 15 3.1.3 Statistical port ......................................................................................................................... 15 3.1.4 Reporting port ........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • My Container Glossary
    CONTAINER GLOSSARY by Damir Drinković Updated 22.12.2011 CONTAINER GLOSSARY by Damir Drinković A B C D E F G H I J K L M 92 90 380 154 46 111 50 58 87 10 10 112 81 Total N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z 2.108 26 44 138 14 135 213 153 28 38 22 0 11 3 - A - AAR-600 Marking is required for tank containers meeting the requirements set forth in Section 600 – “Specification for Acceptability of Tank Containers” – found in the Association of American Railroads. ACC Abbrev. for Acceptable Container Condition. ACEP Abbrev. for Approval of a Continuous Examination Programme. Label affixed on CSC plate certifying that the container is under constant control and that all repair/inspections are done in conformity with CSC regulations. Acid Wash Use of strong cleaning agent to clean exterior of tank container and/or cladding. Active behaviour Applies to goods that have an active influence on other goods and their environment. Actual Gross Weight Total weight of the container (tare weight and its payload. Actual Payload Difference between the actual gross weight and the tare weight of container. Also Net Weight, Maximum Cargo Weight, Maximum Plated Weight. Actuator Pole Long metal bar used for closing non-easy accessible Twistlocks. Access Ladder Ladder affixed on Tank Container enabling access to upper aperture. Accessorial Charges Charges that are applied to the base tariff rate or base contract rate, e.g., bunkers, container, currency, destination/delivery. ACLAS Abbrev. for Automatic Container Landing System.
    [Show full text]
  • KAW 2 Painossa
    Kalmar around the Brazilian breakthrough Kalmar has won a tough The Generation F Cont- competition to land Champ is the market leader an order from Libra in reachstacker technology Terminais S/A of Brazil and, along with Kalmar’s reli- for 13 ContChamp DRF able workhorse, the ContMas- reachstackers to be ter, has become increasingly popular in Latin America. delivered to its container Kalmar has completed recent A GLOBAL BUSINESS MAGAZINE FROM KALMAR INDUSTRIES, NO.2/2005 terminal facilities in the deliveries of the hi-spec Cont- world Brazilian ports of Santos Champ DRF to Mexico and and Rio de Janeiro. The Venezuela. machines will have a Libra Terminais is a well- Crane lifting capacity of 45 tons respected and rapidly grow- and can stack containers ing terminal operator in the modification PPatrickatrick SStevedorestevedores confirmsconfirms 6 high. Brazilian market and, as such, challenge its decision to invest in the a serviceservice contractcontract withwith KalmarKalmar ContChamp DRF serves as Delivery of the first batch of an excellent reference to the five ContChamps will arrive at machine’s performance and Libra’s Terminal 37 and Termi- quality, explains Per Rosen- Demand nal 35 at the Port of Santos gren, Product Manager of this August. The remaining Kalmar reachstackers. eight units will be delivered in for double two batches of four, in October www.kalmarind.com/news room and November, to replace other brand rented reachstackers at Edouard Atichian is pleased with handling the performance of refurbished both Santos and Libra’s Termi- cranes at GMP Terminal Le Havre. nal 1-RIO in Rio de Janeiro.
    [Show full text]
  • 814 Part 174—Carriage by Rail
    Pt. 173, App. I 49 CFR Ch. I (10–1–20 Edition) NOTE TO PARAGRAPH 6 OF THIS APPENDIX: material must be deemed to sustain combus- Intermittent flashing may not be interpreted tion. as sustained combustion. Normally, at the [Amdt. 173–241, 59 FR 67517, Dec. 29, 1994, as end of 15 s, the combustion has either clearly amended by Amdt. 173–255, 61 FR 50627, Sept. ceased or continues. In cases of doubt, the 26, 1996; 66 FR 45381, Aug. 28, 2001; 68 FR 75747, Dec. 31, 2003; 69 FR 76179, Dec. 20, 2004; 71 FR 78634, Dec. 29, 2006] APPENDIX I TO PART 173—CALCULATION METHOD [85 FR 27897, May 11, 2020] 174.16 Removal and disposition of hazardous materials at destination. PART 174—CARRIAGE BY RAIL 174.20 Local or carrier restrictions. Subpart B—General Operating Subpart A—General Requirements Requirements Sec. 174.24 Shipping papers. 174.1 Purpose and scope. 174.26 Notice to train crews. 174.2 Limitation on actions by states, local 174.50 Nonconforming or leaking packages. governments, and Indian tribes. 174.3 Unacceptable hazardous materials Subpart C—General Handling and Loading shipments. Requirements 174.5 Carrier’s materials and supplies. 174.9 Safety and security inspection and ac- 174.55 General requirements. ceptance. 174.57 Cleaning cars. 174.14 Movements to be expedited. 174.59 Marking and placarding of rail cars. 814 VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:40 Nov 25, 2020 Jkt 250227 PO 00000 Frm 00824 Fmt 8010 Sfmt 8010 Q:\49\49V2.TXT PC31 kpayne on VMOFRWIN702 with $$_JOB ER11MY20.003</GPH> Pipeline and Haz.
    [Show full text]
  • The Integration of Roro Shipping in Sustainable Intermodal Transport Chains: the Case of a North European Roro Service
    sustainability Article The Integration of RoRo Shipping in Sustainable Intermodal Transport Chains: The Case of a North European RoRo Service Anastasia Christodoulou * , Zeeshan Raza and Johan Woxenius Department of Business Administration, University of Gothenburg, 405 30 Gothenburg, Sweden; [email protected] (Z.R.); [email protected] (J.W.) * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +46-31-786-6437 Received: 23 February 2019; Accepted: 30 March 2019; Published: 24 April 2019 Abstract: Roll on–roll off (RoRo) shipping represents a maritime segment that could easily form part of an intermodal transport system, as cargo does not need to be lifted in ports; it is ‘rolled’ to and from sea. This paper investigates the operation of RoRo shipping services in Northern Europe, focusing on a set of services chartered by a major shipper whose demand has a great impact on the service design, potentially affecting the frequency of departures and even stipulating the use of specific vessels. The case of cooperation between Stora Enso, a major forest company in Sweden and Finland, and the shipping company Swedish Orient Line (SOL) is analysed, giving some insight into the way these RoRo services operate and manage to integrate successfully into sustainable intermodal transport chains. Despite various initiatives taken by different stakeholders, the level of integration of shipping in intermodal transport chains has been quite slow. This paper’s results could contribute to the identification of barriers that prevent RoRo shipping from being a viable alternative to road transport for certain transport routes and assist in the discovery of policies and incentives that could lead to developing sustainable intermodal transport chains.
    [Show full text]