This document summarizes a presentation given at Netherlands Maritime University on opportunities for synchromodal solutions in Rotterdam and its hinterland. The presentation discusses how Rotterdam has expanded physically over time to accommodate increasing shipping volumes. It also describes challenges around utilizing infrastructure better and reducing costs and pollution. Examples are provided of initiatives that cluster cargo flows and use alternative transport modes like rail and barge to reduce road congestion. Integrated information systems and cooperation between stakeholders are identified as important success factors for efficient synchromodal transport networks. The role of various players like port authorities, transport companies and shippers is also discussed.

1. Netherlands Maritime University
Rotterdam and its hinterland
Opportunities for Synchromodal solutions
October 18, 2012

2. Copyright message
© STC-Group © Port of Rotterdam
This presentation may only be used for
non-commercial educational purposes.
No part of this presentation (including tekst, tables,
graphs and photos), may be reproduced in any form
by any electronic or mechanical means for any
commercial purpose. If used for non-commercial
education, proper reference needs to be made to
the original authors.
Authors:
STC-Group: Maurice Jansen, Cas van der Baan,
Port of Rotterdam: Donald Baan

3. Master Class Shipping and Transport
Platform for knowledge exchange between young professionals in
the maritime and port industrial cluster, in cooperation with
education, business community and (young) port association.

4. Profile
Master Shipping and Transport
“The Master Shipping and Transport program is like an
MBA, but completely maritime driven”
Nautilus International Telegraph, 2011
De Masterclasses are based on the degree program
Master Shipping and Transport

5. Objective of
the Master Program is
to ensure that
graduates can successfully
fulfill management positions
in the Shipping Industry
Objective of the Master programs

6. Welcome
Curriculum of the Master
Shipping and Transport 2013-2014
Thesis
Student counseling /Research and management skills
Port strategy design and management
Teaching cases in maritime and port related issues
Vakken binnen
domein:
AMS; CMS; HRM/
HRD
Domein:
Maritime
management
Domein:
Logistics
Vakken binnen
domein
SCM; COM; HIN,
ILO
Domein:
Finance and
economics
Vakken binnen
domein: ECO I;
ECO II; FCM-I;
FCM-II; FCM-III
Domein:
Shipping
management
Vakken binnen
domein
SBC; FLM; SBP, ISM
Domein:
Law and Policies
Vakken binnen
domein: LAW; POL;
OCM; SEC

7. Master Shipping and Transport
Netherlands Maritime University

8. Subject of today
“Rotterdam en its hinterland; opportunities for
synchromodal solutions ”

9. Speakers
Donald Baan
Port of Rotterdam
Inland Links – the power of an
intermodal hinterland network
Cas van der Baan
STC BV
Logistics concepts for the port
and hinterland

10. Cas van der Baan
STC BV
Logistics concepts for
the port and hinterland
Part 1

11. Hinterland and Synchromodality
Hinterland
Anno 1888
Synchromodaliteit
Anno 2010

12. Big, bigger, biggest from 1945 - 2005
1400 - 1800
1800 - 1900
1910 - 1940
1955 - 1966
1957 - 1970
1967 - today
2009 - today
Source: Port of Rotterdam

13. Port of Rotterdam at present
1
5
industrial area
logistics hub
metropolitan area
distribution

14. Rotterdam – Waalhaven / Eemhaven
1
Containers
Lash
Forest products
Other general cargo
Source: Port of Rotterdam
1920 – 1940:
Waalhaven / Eemhaven /
Heijplaat

15. Rotterdam – Fruitport
2
Fruit
Vegetables
Concentrated fruitjuices
Source: Port of Rotterdam

16. Rotterdam – Botlek
3
Oil products
Chemicals
Agribulk
Coal
Other dry bulk
Source: Port of Rotterdam
1955 - 1966: Botlek ;

17. Rotterdam – Europoort
4
Crude oil
Chemicals
Ore
Agribulk
Ro-Ro
Source: Port of Rotterdam
1957 – 1970: Europoort

18. Rotterdam – Maasvlakte
5
Containers
Crude oil
Ore
Coal
Source: Port of Rotterdam
1970 Maasvlakte (1)

19. Source: Port of Rotterdam
Rotterdam – Maasvlakte 2
5
First users: container terminals

20. Port of Rotterdam - Development agenda
Port Plan 2010
Published in 1993
Plan to develop MV2
Development of Distriparks
Upgrading Port rail connection
Involvement of all stakeholders
Published in 2004
Reclamation, building and exploitation MV2
Redevelopment of City ports
Sustainable port industry cluster management
Improvement highway A15
Port and city development in balance
Rotterdam Climate Initiative
-Realising Global Hub and Europe’s Industrial Cluster; Global
hub: Efficiency improvement of logistics chains; EIC: transition
towards bio-based industry, energy port and further integration
with Antwerp chemical cluster; Improving accessibility; Green
zones, reduction of nuisance; Innovation & decisiveness
Port Plan 2020
Port Compass 2030
Source: Port of Rotterdam, 2011

21. The Hinterland
Hinterland Transport
Policy Port of Rotterdam
Challenges
Success Factors
Example Concepts
Role of Players
Opportunities for
synchromodal solutions

22. Port of Rotterdam as of today

23. Constanta:
“We share the the same hinterland”
<COURSE TITLE>

24. Source: Trademco
Shanghai:
“We share the the same hinterland”

25. Hinterland connections from R’dam

26. “Close to Major
Sales Areas in EU”
Hinterland connections from R’dam

27. Source: Cushman & Wakefield, Healey & Baker
www.internationaltransportforum.org/jtrc/DiscussionPapers/DP200810.pdf
Gravity Point
Moves Eastwards
The European ‘banana’
Industrial gravity point moving eastwards

28. Bulk
Chemicals
Bulk
FTL
Hinterland transport - unimodal

29. Rail
Road
Water
Air
Ro - Ro
Fishy-
back
Train-
truck
Air-
truck
Air -
Train
Hinterland transport - Multimodal /
Intermodal / Combined

30. Hinterland Transport
Multimodal / Intermodal / Combined

31. Shipping Lines
in the Hinterland
Maersk Line owns European Rail Services (ERS)
and has a shareholding in BoxXpress
(joint venture with Eurogate)
Hinterland Transport
Multimodal / Intermodal / Combined

32. Hinterland Transport
Multimodal / Intermodal / Combined
Rail Transport is Fighting Back?
Inbound transport to large Dutch DC’s:
Home appliances
Paper
tissues
Client’s Motivation:
• Costs reduction;
• Environmental friendly
transport.

33. Source: BCI
Synchromodal transport –
What’s the difference?
Unimodal transport
1 transport mode
Multimodal
2 or more transport
modes
Intermodal transport
Standard loading units
Comodal transport
Parallel transport
modes
Synchromodal
transport
Transport modes in
parallel in a network
Corridor Chain Network
Transport management Chain management Network management

34. Source: ECT
Synchromodal transport –
Optimising the network

35. Year: 2005 2035
Road: 59% 35%
IWT: 31% 45%
Rail: 10% 20%
Challenges:
• Enable growth and handle peaks;
• Reduce congestion, pollution etc.;
• Utilize the infrastructure better;
• Reduce costs.
Synchromodal logistics – Why?

36. Growth:
Maasvlakte II Extension
Peaks:
Larger Vessels
New logistics concepts – enabling
growth and handling peaks

37. ... And 50% of loading capacity during transport is idle
Challenges – reduce congestions

38. Think green to get (g)old
Challenges – green logistics

39. Source:
Challenges
Reduce external costs of transport

40. Challenges
Utilise the infrastructure better

41. Challenges -
reduce transhipment costs and time

42. Port-to-door cost per container
Inland vessels reach more destinations over shorter distances.
In Belgium, France and the Netherlands more than 30% of the
IWT traffic is carried over a distance less than 50km.
Challenges -
Reduce transhipment costs and time

43. 1 53 7 9
Days before Required On Site (ROS) date
Numberofordersplacedbycustomer
Road
Earlier visibility of customer order requirements creates longer
horizon for transportation planning resulting in modal shift and
thereby lower transport costs.
Orders
Current
Optimised
Rail / Barge
Challenges: Better Planning of Order
Requirements enables Modal Shift

44. Year: 2005 2035
Road: 59% 35%
IWT: 31% 45%
Rail: 10% 20%
Success Factors:
- Efficient Terminals;
- Integrated Information Systems;
- Clustering; using Corridors;
- Smart Concepts;
- Cooperation of Stakeholders.
2011
56%
33%
11%
Success factors – MV2

45. Success factors
Efficient terminals
47

46. Success factors – Barge terminals

47. Annually:
-/- 100,000 truck trips
-/- 6 mio. truck kms.
-/- 35% CO2 emission
Success factors – Barge terminals

48. ECT
Barge Terminal Maasvlakte
Success factors – Barge terminals

49. Waterland Terminal Amsterdam
Success factors – Barge terminals

50. Waterland Terminal Amsterdam
Success factors – short sea terminals

51. RSC Maasvlakte:
containers from overseas;
growth 7 % per year
RSC Eem/Waalhaven:
containers from Europe (UK!)
competition (Ferry, tunnel)
Success factors – rail terminals

52. Rotterdam Maasvlakte
Success factors – rail terminals

53. Rotterdam Eemhaven
Success factors – rail terminals

54. CityTerminal
Success factors – short sea terminals

55. Covered Tri-modal Terminal: DeCeTe Duisburg
Success factors – inland terminals

56. Trimodal Terminal: DeCeTe Duisburg
Success factors – inland terminals

57. River Information Systems
Success factors – information systems

58. Copyright © 2005 Port infolink Rotterdam.
Agent Terminal Road
haulier
Port
Authority
Port Community System
Reference tables
database
Portbase IT-platform
• Authorisation
• Translation
• Addition of information
• Security Policy
• .....
Basis Services
Melding
lading
Cargo
declaration
Data storage
Rail
operator
Barge
operator
Veterinary
Authority
Depot
Shipping
line
Customs
Declaration ship
Discharge
confirmation
Vessel data
Concise declaration
Traffic
Information
System
Forwarder
Inspection
centre
Success factors –
integrated information systems

59. Better Planning
• ECT issue some 35.000 early notifications to 200 road
transport companies / month;
• 60% of outbound containers register in advance;
• Less unnecessarily trips;
• Reduced driver time at terminal, with Cargo Card: 3/4 hour.
• Similar services for barge- and rail operators.
Success factors – integrated
information systems

60. Location of Major Juice Packers
Examples: Orange Waterways-

61. What is it?
Hinterland transport of fruit juice
from port of Rotterdam to packers
in Germany and France.
Now: 100% road transport;
better if combined with IWT?
Conclusions from pilot project:
• Quality and time are OK;
• Costs still too high;
• More efficient tank cleaning
and more clustering in Fruitport
needed.
Examples: Orange Waterways

62. Flower bulbs
Trees
Flowers,
Greenhouse fruit &
vegetables
Flowers, plants
Examples: Clustering in Agrologistics

63. Development Company Greenport Venlo: www.dcgv.nl
Investment company of provincial / local authorities.
Fresh Park Venlo: www.freshparkvenlo.nl
• Business park 130 ha.; gateway to Germany.
• Growers, Traders, Processors, Packers; Transporters.
• Sectors: Meat, Fish, Dairy, Flowers, Vegetables & Fruit.
• Near ECT Rail terminal, daily shuttle trains port of Rotterdam.
• Near barge terminal, regional airport.
Examples: Greenport Venlo

64. Rail transport in Europe of containers with plants;
Favourable conditions:
• Delivery not needed within 14 hours;
• Distance >600 kms. from Rotterdam.
Results: 97% on time delivery; 50% CO2 reduction; same product
quality; continuous monitoring of location and temp. in container via
GPS/GPRS.
www.greenrail.nu
Examples: Greenrail

65. Coordination: VGB and FloraHolland;
Growers / Exporters: Bunnik Plants, FPP (Disva), Fresh Export, HamiPlant, Hydroplant Westland,
Lemkes, Lievaart Export, Quattro Plant, Vida Verda, Waterdrinker, Zurel Planten;
LSP’s:, Van der Slot Transport, Te Baerts Transport, Unit45, GPA Trans, RSC Rotterdam, HUPAC
Intermodal, e-Logistics Control
Growers Exporters Collection Trucking Terminal Railway Terminal Trucking DC Distribution Retail
Lead Logistics Provider
Examples: Greenrail

66. Operates Tri- Modal Transport Network,
Based in Duisburg
Examples: Contargo

67. Source: ECT
Examples: European Gateway
Services

68. Source: ECT
Push to Inland Terminals
European Gateway Services

69. Transport Planner
www.europeangatewayservices.com
Input Example: Output Example:
Issues: Costs, Speed, Planning Horizon
Source: ECT
Examples:
European Gateway Services

70. Why
Inlandlinks?
• Need to have more
information on
intermodal services
and options
• To have better
access to
intermodal options
• Inlandlinks maps out
Rotterdam’s
hinterland network
and provides
information on the
package of
intermodal services
on offer. and
facilities.
Synchromodal transport - inlandlinks

71. Strong points
• Flexibility to urgency, traffic, transport availability etc.;
• Focus on time and costs; modality is not relevant;
• Loading degree in transport could increase.
Requirements
• Minimum volumes: 1 block train takes cargo of 40 trucks;
• Clustering, corridors; 2-way flows;
• Integrated information systems for booking, planning, calc...
• Costs & speed transparency for users;
• Sufficient planning horizon.
Risks
• Reliability: delays when schedules don’t match;
• Reduced speed? train & barge are slower than trucks.
Synchromodal transport - summary

72. Users Providers
Authorities
Who is doing what?
• Users organise Orange Waterways, Freshpark, GreenRail;
• Providers promote their own networks: Contargo, EGS;
• Port Authorities?
Synchromodal transport
Role of stakeholders

73. Port Authorities and Hinterland Development:
To facilitate; to make the available infrastructure visible
Source: De Langen
Role of stakeholders in hinterland logistics

74. Shipper Consignee
Forwarder Forwarder
Hinterland transport Hinterland transport
Warehouser Warehouser
Customs Customs
Stevedore Stevedore
Port, Carrier, Port
Mooie uitdaging
voor een goede
Expediteur?
Synchromodal logistics –
opportunities of forwarders

75. Netherlands Maritime University

76. Part 2
Donald Baan
Port of Rotterdam
Inland Links – the power of an
intermodal hinterland network

77. @stcnmu
Netherlands
Maritime University
www.stc-nmu.eu
How to stay in contact?
full speed ahead… with your career!
Email: info@stc-nmu.eu