Ecological Transport Information Tool for Worldwide ... - Schenker

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Page 20 IFEU Heidelberg, Öko-Institut, IVE, RMCON goods and make the following assumptions: • The full load is achieved for the loaded vehicle-km with bulk goods. Additional empty vehicle-km are estimated in the range of 60 % for road and 80 % for rail transport. • The weight related load factor for the loaded vehicle-km with volume goods is estimated in the range of 30 % for road and rail transport. The empty trip factor is estimated 10 % for road transport and 20 % for rail transport. These assumptions take into account the higher flexibility of road transport as well as the general suitability of the carrier for other goods on the return transport. The assumptions are summarised in Table 11. Table 11 Capacity utilisation of road and rail transport for different types of cargo Load factor LFNC Empty trip factor ET Capacity utilisation CUNC Relation Nt/Gt CUNG Train wagon Bulk 100% 80% 56% 0.60 Average 60% 50% 40% 0.52 Volume 30% 20% 25% 0.40 Truck Bulk 100% 60% 63% Average 60% 20% 50% Volume 30% 10% 27% Source: IFEU estimations Capacity utilisation for ocean going vessels Capacity utilisation for sea transport is differentiated per vessel type. Most significantly is the differentiation between bulk vessels and container vessels, which operate in liner services. The operational cycle of both transport services lead to specific vessel utilization factors. The vessel utilization for bulk and general cargo vessels is assumed to be between 48 % and 61 % and follows the IMO assumptions /Buhaug et al. 2008/. Bulk cargo vessels usually operate in single trades, meaning from port to port. In broad terms one leg is full whereas the following leg is empty. However, cycles can multi-angular and sometimes opportunities to carry cargo in both directions may exist. The utilization factors are listed in Table 35 on page 57. Ships in liner service (i.e. container vessels and car carriers) usually call at multiple ports in the sourcing region and then multiple ports in the destination region (Figure 3). It is also common that the route is chosen to optimize the cargo space utilization according to the import and export flows. For example, on the US West Coast a particular pattern exist where vessels from Asia generally have their first call at the ports of Los Angeles or Long Beach to unload import consumer goods and then travel relatively empty up the Western Coast to the Ports of Oakland and other ports, from which major food exports then leave the United States. Liner schedules have not been considered in EcoTransIT World, but may be considered in later versions. EcoTransIT World: Methodology and Data – July 15 th , 2010
IFEU Heidelberg, Öko-Institut, IVE, RMCON Page 21 Figure 3: Sample Asia North America Trade Lane by Hapag-Lloyd AG. (Internet Site from 28.10.2009) Utilization factors for container ships (load of container spaces on vessels and empty returns) were derived by assuming an average maximum container vessel utilization of 85 % on the fuller of the two legs. This results in a general average vessel utilization factor of 65 %, averaged over the return journey. Only for large container vessels above 7000 TEU a maximum load of 90 % and a global average of 70% was assumed. 1 Vessel utilization factors may be altered in the expert modus of the tool. Some guidance on further differentiating utilization factors on the major trade lanes is given in the appendix in Chapter 6.3. Capacity utilisation for inland vessels The dominant cargo with inland vessels is bulk cargo, although the transport of containerized cargo has been increasing. For bulk cargo on inland vessels the principle needed to reposition the inland vessel applies. Thus, empty return trips of around 50 % of the time can be assumed. However, no good data is available from the industry. Therefore, it was assumed that the vessel utilization is 45 % for all bulk inland vessels smaller class VIb (e.g. river Main). Class Va RoRo and class VIb vessels were estimated to have a 60 % vessel utiliza- 1 This differs from assumptions made by the 2009 IMO study. However, the assumptions presented by Buhaug et al. /2008/ on container vessel utilization, main engine load and average load of containers are not plausible. The problem with the IMO figures are that they present the data based on t-km. Ocean carriers themselves prefer to present their emission factors based on TEU-km (BSR 2010). Our assumption is that /Buhaug et al. 2008/ applied a relatively high vessel utilization factor and low engine load but then combined it with a low container load of only 7 tonnes per TEU. Thus, studying trade flows and container loads have lead us to different conclusions, although finally the resulting emission factors come very close to those published by the IMO EcoTransIT World: Methodology and Data – July 15 th , 2010
Page 1 and 2: ifeu - Institut für Energieund Umw
Page 3 and 4: IFEU Heidelberg, Öko-Institut, IVE
Page 19: IFEU Heidelberg, Öko-Institut, IVE
Page 71 and 72:
IFEU Heidelberg, Öko-Institut, IVE
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
MEloi Ef = ((( MEs × ) × ( 1 + re
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
show all

Ecological Transport Information Tool for Worldwide ... - Schenker

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?