Bornholm plays a central role in the future offshore power expansion in the
Baltic Sea and as a node between future interconnections between countries. The
necessity to store/convert surplus power puts Bornholm in position to be the first
natural energy hub. Bornholm can be not only the centre for electrical equipment
such as substations but also a centre for P2X production from offshore wind power.
The production of electrofuels through P2X technologies can penetrate the
transport sector in Bornholm, the hardest to decarbonise, starting with the highspeed ferries to Ystad and Køge, which use in Rønne Havn as their base. The
needs to comply with existing and imminent stricter regulations create the
necessity for an immediate transition, before a fleet renewal. Therefore, this study
investigates the conversion of the hydrogen, produced using offshore wind
electricity, into methanol, whose use as a fuel is mature and does not require
substantial changes to the fleet.
This report is in the context of the DMA-DTU project on Market Based Measures (MBMs) The aim of this project is to provide an overview and discussion of potential Market Based Measures under the Initial IMO Strategy for the reduction of green house gas (GHG) emissions from ships. In this context, some related developments are also seen as directly relevant to the scope of the project, mainly in the context of the possible inclusion of shipping into the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS). In 2010 an Expert Group was appointed by the IMO’s Secretary General after solicitation of member states and was tasked to evaluate as many as eleven (11) separate MBM proposals, submitted by various member states and other organizations. All MBM proposals described programs and procedures that would target GHG reductions through either ‘in-sector’ emissions reductions from shipping, or ‘out-of-sector’ reductions via the collection of funds to be used for mitigation activities in other sectors that would contribute towards global reduction of GHG emissions.
In supporting multimodal freight transport services, Activity 3.2-3 focuses on identifying the priorities of the shippers (cargo owners) in relation to intermodal logistics solutions that comprise the core of multimodality.
A literature search was performed on this subject. It identified a long list of characteristics that shippers consider necessary for efficient and effective intermodal transport. They include price, delivery time, time reliability of delivery, frequency of shipments, cargo safety and security, reliability of pick up time, ability to respond to customer needs, proactive notification of problems, etc. A number of pre-conditions
were also identified. They include the commodity type, value, density and time-sensitivity, freight distance, direction of haul (head-haul/back-haul), meaningful load factors and transhipment costs. Based on the results of the literature search, a questionnaire was designed for obtaining shippers’ assessment of their experience with intermodality, the factors driving it and the measures proposed for its promotion. It is noted that the latter subject has not been treated by the previous studies examined.
After being revised on the basis of feedback received from logistics experts, the questionnaire was promoted through shipper associations in the five study countries (Germany, Denmark, Sweden, Norway and Finland). Responses were received through an electronic survey lasted from July 2017 to June 2018. The questionnaire was also distributed in paper form to the participants of the event “Future transport and logistics in the Fehmarnbelt Region – How to be prepared for changing cargo flows” on 29 May 2018 during the Fehmarnbelt days 2018 in Malmö, Sweden. Furthermore, responses were enriched by a number of interviews from selected companies and associations.
The majority of the 33 usable responses obtained comes from Germany and Denmark. The companies that have arranged intermodal shipments during 2016 find their experience more than satisfactory.
Germans appear to be 25% happier with intermodality than their Danish counterparts, who are still satisfied. The differential is greater with regard to business types. Freight forwarders, who are more exposed to intermodal realities than shippers, display a much higher satisfaction than the latter, who fall a bit short of the satisfactory level albeit still on the positive side.
Among the reasons for going intermodal, the specific customer/supplier instructions appear to be the most important one. This finding suggests the need to identify the right decision-makers prior to designing activities promoting intermodal transportation. Competitive pricing follows suit surpassing all other quality characteristics (in Germany, it is even more important than customer preferences). This
result contradicts the findings of other studies that assign more importance to attributes such as frequency of service, reliability, etc. The appropriateness of shipment size and the convenience of transit time follow price concerns in the scale of importance. It is interesting to note that the advantages offered by intermodality in terms of low emissions and improved company image appear very low in the
importance spectrum despite the emphasis placed on them by the policy makers.
As expected, the type of business has a bearing on these priorities. Competitive pricing is the main concern of shippers, while from the freight forwarders’ perspective, customer preferences remain the decisive factor. An interesting observation is that the only occasion that environmental concerns climb higher than shipment size and transit time is when it comes to other businesses, probably pointing to the more distant positioning of this type of respondents to the realities of the market place
This report presents the results of Activity 3.2-2 of the Scandria®2Act project. It investigates the sensitivity of the Ro-Ro services along the Scandria® corridor to fuel cost fluctuations, anticipates the adverse effects of a possible fuel price hike and discusses potential mitigating measures.
Among the 77 Ro-Ro services that include at least one direct connection between two Baltic ports, the Finland-Germany connections were selected for further examination mainly because this is where the ScanMed and NSB core network corridors meet providing two major alternatives, each of which offer at least two options. In terms of abatement options available to the Ro-Ro operators, the study considers only the switching from Heavy Fuel Oil (HFO) to the compliant but more expensive Marine Gas Oil (MGO), which happens to be the only feasible solution in the short-run that does not require a substantial capital investment.
The study deployed two different approaches in meeting its objectives. The first one looked at the problem from the macro-level perspective and the analysis was based on aggregate annual statistics of the ports serving the Finland-Germany connections. A multiple regression model estimated the sensitivity of cargo flows to fuel price fluctuations. Although most of the cargo volumes exhibit a statistically significant sensitivity to fuel price, in all cases this is below 1.0, indicating a rather inelastic
behaviour. The results show that an increase in fuel price penalises the volume of lorries on the longdistance Helsinki-Germany route in favour of the shorter Helsinki-Tallinn and Hanko-Germany options. The trailer (unaccompanied) traffic exhibit a different behaviour that might relate to the pricing policies of the Ro-Ro operators in relation to this market segment.
This follow up paper concerns relational contracts in the maritime industry from a legal, game theoretical, and strategic perspective. The paper discusses the purpose of a relational contract, the specific legal characteristics in a relational contract, and draw up economic explanations of the relations among the clauses in relational contract. Strategy and game theory are used to explain the output of negotiations and explain how to behave if to obtain joint utility in a contractual relationship in the maritime industry.
The value chains for offshore oil and gas and offshore wind are both basically driven by the demand for energy. This is heavily dependent on a number of factors including the price of various energy sources and the policy making of the states which influence legislation, indirect subsidies and direct investments. At the center of both value chains are the energy companies. The energy companies have a number of suppliers and sub suppliers which provide a range of equipment and services to the offshore operations. The supply industry is characterized by horizontal cooperation (between suppliers at the same level) and vertical cooperation (between suppliers in different layers). Finally the suppliers and the energy companies are supported by a number of companies which are usually not considered as part of the offshore sector but are important none the less. These companies provide a number of services including includes legal advice, financing, insurance etc. The two value chains have a number of activities in common. Both include (1) a tender and concession phase where the energy company obtains the right to explore and produce energy from the authorities. (2) An exploration phase where the physical location is examined and the installation is planned. (3) An installation phase where the equipment is produced and transported to the site where it is installed. (4) An operation phase where the energy is produced or the energy source is extracted and (5) a decommissioning phase where the field is abandoned. Most suppliers are positioned in several links of one or both value chains, at various levels (direct supplier, sub supplier, 3rd tier supplier etc.) and providing a variety of services. A supplier can move to new positions within the value chain. The increased servitization is a good example. Traditional manufacturers are often 2nd or 3rd tier suppliers in the installation phase. But by providing after sales services these companies also become direct suppliers to the energy company in the operations phase. Finally a supplier can have different positions in different geographical markets. A supplier can thus be a direct (1st tier) supplier in one market but needs to go through a local contractor (as a 2nd tier supplier) in another market – even if the provided service is exactly the same in both cases.
This report has examined the concept of value creation in the maritime chain of transportation. A maritime transport chain can best be conceptualized as a network through which carriers (e.g. shipping companies and haulage providers) and third parties (e.g. terminal operators, freight forwarders, brokers and agents) provide services for the movement of cargo provided by shippers. The main actors in the maritime chain of transportation are the carriers who add value to the shipper by moving goods from areas with excess supply to areas with excess demand. In this process a number of (independent) third parties may provide a number of services. The shipper and/or carrier will employ these agents if the rise in costs is more than compensated by the value of the service. The third parties can thus only exist if they provide value added services to the carrier and/or to other third party service providers. From a financial perspective value is created when a business earns revenue that exceeds the expenses. In many sectors, however, value is increasingly being created by more intangible drivers such as research, innovation, branding, ideas and networks which usually provide indirect rather than direct benefits (Kaplan & Norton, 2004a; 2004b). This is also the case within maritime logistics. According to Johansson et al. (1993) third parties may add value through (1) improve the level of service, (2) quality, (3) cost and (4) time reduction. The chartering agent’s network and market knowledge allows him to speed up the search time and match process for shippers and carriers (time reduction). The port agent’s local network allows him to speed up port operations (time reduction) and make the necessary arrangement on behalf of the carrier (service). Freight forwarders may take over part of the production chain and provide services which manufacturers don’t consider their core business (service). This includes assembly, quality control, customizing and packing of goods, pest control and after sales services. Third party ship management companies may reduce costs through economies of scale (cost reduction) and increase quality of crew and equipment maintenance through specialization (quality). Just to mention a few. While the report has investigated the concept of value creation, the question of value capturing has not been addressed in this study. Value capturing depends on the individual transactions between the actors in the chain. A port agent may add value to a carrier by securing smooth port operations and thus reduce waiting time. The added value may, however, be captured by a freight forwarder who forces the carrier to lower the price or more likely be distributed among several actors. The business model literature may provide a fruitful lens for exploring this in greater depth. The maritime chain of transportation is becoming increasingly complex and involves an increasing number of actors. The services of some actors are furthermore overlapping. Inland haulage can thus be provided by shippers, freight forwarders, independent liner agents, in-house liner sales offices, or by an independent haulage provider. Freight forwarders are increasingly overtaking functions in the value chain from manufacturer etc. In order to successfully navigate this network is it important to have an overview of the chain of transportation at a more general level
We present a solution method for the liner shipping network design problem which is a core strategic planning problem faced by container carriers. We propose the first practical algorithm which explicitly handles transshipment time limits for all demands. Individual sailing speeds at each service leg are used to balance sailings speed against operational costs, hence ensuring that the found network is competitive on both transit time and cost. We present a matheuristic for the problem where a MIP is used to select which ports should be inserted or removed on a route. Computational results are presented showing very promising results for realistic global liner shipping networks. Due to a number of algorithmic enhancements, the obtained solutions can be found within the same time frame as used by previous algorithms not handling time constraints. Furthermore we present a sensitivity analysis on fluctuations in bunker price which confirms the applicability of the algorithm.
We introduce a decision support tool for liner shipping companies to optimally determine the sailing speed and needed fleet for a global network. As a novelty we incorporate cargo routing decisions with tight transit time restrictions on each container such that we get a realistic picture of the utilization of the network. Furthermore, we show that it is possible to extend the model to include optimal time scheduling decisions such that the time associated with transshipments is also reflected accurately. To solve the speed optimization problem we propose an exact algorithm based on Benders decomposition and column generation that exploits the separability of the problem. Computational results show that the method is applicable to liner shipping networks of realistic size and that it is important to incorporate cargo routing decisions when optimizing speed.