Latvian Maritime academy

All shipments having the same origin and destination points and moving on the same mode are notnecessarily in transit for the same length of time due to the effects of weather, traffic congestion, numberof stop-offs, and diffences in time to considate shipments. Transit time variability is a measure of theuncertainty in carrier performance [8]. The Klaipeda port has more than 80% of the cargo flows from orto Belarus, due to the distance between Klaipeda and Minsk: cargo transportation by rail 450 km (Table1). From Ventspils to Minsk the length of railway line is 600 km, the distance is 1.3 times longer.Moreover, transporting cargo from KSS to the territory of Belarus, more favourable railway rate isestablished. Thus, the cargo from KSS to the territory of Belarus is much faster and cheaper intransportation, and it attracts the cargo flows from this country, comparing to the Ventspils port on thisroute.The creation of favourable conditions is achieved by endeavouring to make the port area itself asaccessible as possible (maintaining the draught of channel, etc.) and by minimising the length of a shipstay in the port ( communication technology, etc.) but also by controlling external influencing factors asmuch as possible [6]. Intermodalism changes the nature of port investment. Ports are used to invest for thebenefit of the entire country [7]. So, the ports of Klaipeda and Venspils make development plans, forexample, the Klaipeda port has been implementing the project of building LNG terminal (2010-2014)which will help port to attract more flows of cargo [10]. Based on the capacity of the terminal theelements of the terminal should be chosen: quay length and depth at the berths, terminal equipment, etc.[15].So, the similarities of the ports of Klaipeda and Ventspils which make influence on liquid cargohandling, are geographical location, purpose and liquid cargo handling companies, the differences arestatus, liquid cargo quay depth, area of the liquid cargo tank capacity and rail distance to Minsk.Statistical analysis of liquid cargo volume in port of Klaipeda and VentspilsThe statistical analysis of flows of liquid cargo in the ports of Klaipeda and Ventspils was comparedbetween indicators of descriptive statistics (average minimum, average maximum, and median), base andthe chain statistical indicators. These parameters describe trends in the growth of liquid cargo flow. Theassessment rates set target from 2003 to 2012 period. Base year was selected in 2003, because this yearthe flow of liquid cargo was similar (Figure 2), and since 2004 the cargo flow has begun to change.Figure2. Comparison of liquid cargo flows [10, 19]The flow of liquid cargo in the Klaipeda port during the period of 2003-2007: decreased – in 2007compared with 2003 turnover decreased by 27%, but in Ventspils – increased by 8% (Figure 2). The totalhandling of liquid cargo in the port of Ventspils is 23% higher than the volume of handling of liquidcargo in the Klaipeda port. The situation has changed since 2008: results of liquid cargo handling in theperiod from 2008 to 2012 in the Klaipeda port have been growing rapidly – increased by 32% comparedwith 2007 and just in 2012 liquid cargo flows slightly decreased. In the period of global economic crisis,economy of Lithuania and Latvia had the emergence in 2008. The liquid cargo in the Ventspils portdecreased significantly (30%) in 2008-2010 (from 17,864.8 to 14,062.8 thousand tons). However, visiblegrowth trend of liquid cargo flows in the Ventspils port during 2011-2012: from 14,982.8 to 16,690.3thousand tons, but the cargo flows in the Klaipeda port remains higher (Figure 2).38