TOC CSC Europe Conference 2013 Review

TOC CONTAINER SUPPLY CHAIN EUROPE 2013 REVIEW

See more event photos and videos at www.tocevents-europe.com/toc-media

GLOBAL CONTAINER SHIPPING & PORTS FOCUS

More joined up thinking is the key to future success, say carriers, ports and terminals

GLOBAL CONTAINER SHIPPING & PORTS FOCUS

Vessel cascade effect has huge implications for world port infrastructure

ASIA-EUROPE CONTAINER TRADE & SHIPPING FOCUS

For headhaul and backhaul, read westbound and eastbound?

NEW PRODUCT LAUNCHES

And now for something completely new

EUROPE INTERMODAL SUPPLY CHAIN

Shippers are being let down by intermodal supply chain fragmentation and unreliability, warns Drewry

TOC CSC AMERICAS CONFERENCE REVIEW

Private sector holds the key to closing the transport infrastructure gap in North and Latin America

CONTAINER TERMINAL OPERATIONS & TECHNOLOGY

Brownfield era beckons for terminal automation

SPOTLIGHT ON ROTTERDAM

Rotterdam is active in the handling of dry bulk, liquid bulk, container and breakbulk cargo

Back in Rotterdam after 14 years for the biggest TOC Europe in historyAfter an absence of 14 years, TOC Container Supply Chain Europe returned to Rotterdam in June 2013. Over four packed days of activity, a record 4,500 visitors from 87 countries came through the doors of the Ahoy Rotterdam to network, learn and do business at the conference sessions and in the exhibition.

Adding to the occasion, Rotterdam Port Authority and the local terminal operator community staged a much-praised tour of the giant Maasvlakte 2 development, while evening reception sponsor Continental Tyres welcomed more than 800 guests aboard the Ocean Diva for a waterside view of Rotterdam’s diverse cargo handling facilities.

With three separate conference tracks – TOC Container Supply Chain, covering global container trade, supply chain and transport trends; TECH TOC, focused on container port and terminal operations; and BULK Ports & Technology – the TOC conference was also the largest and most diverse ever, welcoming 118 industry experts as speakers and panel members.

We can’t possibly do justice to the breadth and depth of content that was packed into 3 days, but in this review the TOC conference team reflects on what we consider to be some of the most crucial issues that were raised and often hotly debated. As always, we are looking forwards to seeing how the debate has evolved by the time of TOC Europe’s landmark 40th edition in London, June 2014.

IN THIS EDITION:

Page

4-7

Page

8-9

Page Page

Page

Page

Page

16

Page

22

10-12 20-21

13-15

17-19

www.tocevents-europe.com

4

GLOBAL CONTAINER SHIPPING & PORTS

More joined up thinking is the key to future success, say carriers, ports and terminalsContainer volume and vessel growth, plus new carrier alliances, will put new performance pressures on ports and terminals. Better collaboration on the seaside and landside is the key to success, said speakers at TOC CSC Europe 2013.

The fallout from the just-announced P3 vessel sharing alliance between Maersk, CMA CGM and MSC was an inevitable talking point at this year’s TOC CSC Europe. With 255 vessels, 2.6 million TEU capacity and 29 strings covering three major trade lanes, P3 is a substantive undertaking by the world’s three largest container carriers. The general consensus at TOC Container Supply Chain Europe was that it is a welcome and overdue move towards more structured capacity management.

Just how the three carriers will align over key operational issues such as port rotations and terminal selection was the subject of considerable debate in various conference sessions. Ports and terminals, it was observed, could be the most affected by P3, given the natural expectation that the three carriers will want to reap improvements in an area that represents their second largest operational cost base after bunkers and, moreover, one that has a huge impact on their overall performance. With P3 fielding the largest container ships and volumes currently afloat en bloc, the new alliance epitomises the new scale that the world’s ports and terminals now need to contend with. Despite the entrenched European economic downturn of the last five years, all projections still point to substantially greater volumes of containers over the coming decade, said keynote speaker Emile Hoogsteden, Vice President Containers, Breakbulk & Logistics at the Port of Rotterdam. The resulting challenge for the port in handling these volumes are twofold.

Adding capacity is of course essential and the port is making significant strides in this regard, particularly with the construction of the giant Maasvlakte 2 project. But perhaps an even more significant improvement will come with changing processes to allow far greater volumes of containers to be transported quickly to and from the hinterland. The aim, said Mr Hoogsteden, is to double the volume of containers managed in the hinterland, as opposed to the port, to 20 million TEU by 2030.“Port of Rotterdam wants to lift hinterland services to a higher level, both with and for the market,” he said, adding that hinterland operations need to be much more integrated into global supply chains.

One of the largest terminal operators in Port of Rotterdam is APM Terminals. Fellow keynoter Ben Vree, Europe Region CEO, noted that in 2012, global container throughput was 618 million TEU. With forecast annual

increases of 6% through to 2017, the total volume of containers passing through the world’s ports will climb to over 830 million TEU in just four years’ time, putting huge pressure on facilities around the world, especially in emerging markets.

Added to this are the new carrier vessel sharing alliances and, of course, the advent of Maersk’s Triple E 18,000TEU ships, which started sea trials this summer. These new vessels and others of similar ilk expected to follow will “redefine the port business and place new demands on port operators”, said Mr Vree. As ports face land and design constraints, larger container volumes must be accommodated through better productivity; and productivity gains will rely on automation.

Ben Vree, APM Terminals

www.tocevents-europe.com www.tocevents-europe.com

Keynote speakers Ben Vree, Europe Region CEO for APM Terminals (left) and Emile Hoogsteden, VP Containers, Breakbulk & Logistics at Port of Rotterdam (right) reflected on the new challenges of scale and productivity facing ports worldwide

5


Directly and indirectly, port efficiency and terminal productivity impact all of us

“Directly and indirectly, port efficiency and terminal productivity impact all of us – liner companies, shippers, ports and terminals themselves, economies and the environment,” said Anders Lund Kristensen, Head of North Europe Liner Operations Cluster for Maersk Line. Maersk Line, which launched its Terminal Partnering programme in 2009 to foster greater process and operational efficiency in the carrier-terminal interface, believes that the potential scope of port operations improvement is “staggering,” said Mr Kristensen. He pointed out that with 41,300 port calls and an average end-to-end dwell time of 30.4 hours, Maersk Line ships spent a whopping 1.53 million hours in port during 2012, at an estimated cost of US$2.5 billion in bunkers and terminal charges.

Pure terminal operations accounts for two-thirds of average end-to-end port stays, said Mr Kristensen, with the remaining third covering aspects such as total time between pilot waiting, steaming into berth and steaming out again. While terminal operations remain the major focus of attention, the scope for improvement in these other areas should not be overlooked.

Within the terminal itself, berth productivity is simply not increasing proportionately compared with the increase in vessel size, said Mr Kristensen. “Terminal productivity is

stagnating, while vessel size is growing!” Waiting and idle times are similar for a 2,000 TEU vessel and an 18,000 TEU vessel - hence the larger the vessel, the bigger the impact on trade. While new handling equipment and technology are important in raising productivity, huge capital investments are not the only answer to the challenge. A more ‘open book’ dialogue between carriers and terminals, with a willingness to adjust processes on both sides, can also yield significant results, he argued.

Looking to the future, “trust and value sharing” will be critical if further improvements are to be secured, added Mr Kristensen. Calling on carriers and terminals to work towards full sharing of operational data, better alignment of operational definitions and a focus on end-to-end optimisation rather than individual process steps, he said that previous port to next port optimisation would be one of the next major areas of attention.

Capt. Franck J. Kayser, Vice President Network Operations for United Arab Shipping Company (UASC), focused on the co-operation between container terminals and shipping lines in ensuring that both parties’ interests are met and highlighted the necessity of sharing risk and rewards. In today’s environment, terminal operators have to invest large sums in equipment and berths, while lines can freely move from one terminal to the other, acknowledged Mr Kayser - subject of course to there being more terminals offering similar services. On the other hand, productivity in terminals often fluctuates dramatically, forcing lines to build in huge schedule buffers that are costly to maintain. Hence both parties lose out. New contracts and shared obligations could be ways to ensure a more cost efficient operation.

“ ”



Neil Davidson, Drewry Maritime Research: “The 18,000TEU vessel has implications for all ports around the world, not just those that are going to serve them”

6

Vessel cascade effect has huge implications for world port infrastructureThe size of vessels calling across all trades is quickly increasing beyond all expectations, and we may not have seen the end of it yet, Drewry and Ocean Shipping Consultants analysts told TOC CSC Europe delegates.

Edited and reproduced with permission from original reporting by Gavin van Marle, Editor of The Loadstar. www.theloadstar.co.uk

With the first of Maersk’s Triple-E container ships, the Maersk McKinney Moller, now afloat, a new round of vessel cascading is set to test port limits around the world. What makes the latest round of mega-vessel orders different from earlier eras is that few see this as anything other than a stepping stone to a further increase in vessel sizes. Speaking at TOC Container Supply Chain Europe, Ocean Shipping Consultants Managing Director Andrew Penfold revealed that his company has been conducting research in conjunction with classification society Lloyd’s Register and a pair of unnamed shipping lines into the economies of scale offered by ships up to 24,000 TEU capacity.

“If you take the analysis up to 24,000 TEU vessels, you will see there are further cost savings to be made,” said Mr Penfold. “As there is no technical reason why 24,000 TEU ships cannot be built, if you going to build 18,000 TEU ships why not go to 20,000 TEU plus? I think we are going to see even larger ships coming in.”

The company’s research concluded that while the 18,000 TEU vessel is expected to incur total costs per day at sea of $197,198, a 22,000 TEU vessel would run up costs of $220,892 per day, while a 24,000 TEU ship would be $229,693 per day. However, the cost per slot goes down – from $10.96 per TEU per day at sea for an 18,000 TEU vessel to $10.04 for a 22,000 TEU ship and $9.57 for a 24,000 TEU vessel. In contrast, a 12,500 TEU ship is currently calculated to cost $12.43 per TEU per day at sea.

In terms of dimensions, Lloyd’s Register research concluded that a 24,415 TEU container ship would likely have a beam of 64m and a length of 479m. The Triple-E class vessels are 59m wide and 399m long – the difference with the Emma class is just one extra row of containers.

It’s only a question of time before we see the next upsizing – you may even see 22,000 TEU ships in operation as early as 2018

Neil Davidson, Ports and Terminals Senior Analyst at Drewry Maritime Research, added: “I think it’s only a question of time before we see the next upsizing – you might even see 22,000 TEU ships in operation as early as 2018.” This trend will have huge implications for ports and terminals, which are already seeing the effects of vessel cascading, as larger shippers displaced from the main routes by the arrival of even bigger ships such as the Triple-E are redeployed onto smaller trades.

“”



7

“Ports and terminals, especially in the north-south trades, are being asked to handle ships which would have appeared to be totally out of scale with the demands of the trade – that’s not because the shipping lines are being careful with where they put their ships, but because they’ve got so many of them, there’s nothing else they can do with them,” said Mr Penfold.

The average size of ships in the Asia-North Europe trade is expected to reach 11,300 TEU by the end of this year, according to Drewry, and the advent of the Jules Verne class, the Triple-E class and a host of other ultra-large container ships from other lines ultimately means that 40 ships in the 8,000 TEU category will have to be cascaded from Asia-North Europe onto other routes.

In fact, since January 2012 ships sizes have grown more steeply on the Asia-Mediterranean, Europe-East Coast South America, Asia-East Coast South America and Asia-Middle East trades than they have on Asia-North Europe, despite it being the destination of the ultra large container vessels.

14,000 TEU ships are now routinely seen in the Middle East and Mediterranean, while India handled its first 14,000 TEU vessel – the MSC Valeria in Mundra ¬– in June. The US west coast now sees 13,000 TEU vessels and South Africa is having to handle 12,500 TEU ships. The 9,000 TEU range is a common sight on both coasts of South America.

Dramatic upsizing is being forced on ports around the world – it is not just an Asia-North Europe story

“There is dramatic upsizing that is being forced on ports around the world – vessel upsizing is not just an Asia-North Europe story, it’s a global story because big ships are pushed out all around the world, and that is affecting everybody,” said Mr Davidson. “The 18,000 TEU size has implications for all ports around the world, not just the ports that are going to serve them.”

Although the growth in ship sizes on the Asia-Europe routes is in terms of vessel beam, ports on secondary routes will have to think about dredging access channels and alongside berths; building longer quay walls; and extending crane heights and outreach – and it already appears as if some terminal development plans will have to be re-thought.

Take the port of Melbourne’s planned Webb Dock as an example, where the engineering outlines foresee a 300-metre quay built with a depth alongside of 14m. It is expected to be one of Australia’s premier container facilities, but despite meticulous planning the project could be in danger of being overtaken by reality before it is even built. Mr Penfold said: “They have spent a very long time working out what would be the anticipated vessel sizes to call at the terminal, with a lot of arguments about what would be the cheapest per slot, which was concluded to be the 6,000 TEU vessel size as the country’s ship of the future. This was only three years ago. Now because of cascading I would expect to see larger vessels calling there, but coming in part-loaded.”

“”


8

For headhaul and backhaul – read westbound and eastbound?European exporters targeting markets in China and elsewhere in Asia were warned at TOC CSC Europe 2013 that the era of cheap container shipping freight rates on the ‘backhaul’ Europe-Asia leg is likely to come to an end.


ASIA-EUROPE CONTAINER SHIPPING ASIA-EUROPE CONTAINER SHIPPING

Maersk’s head of Asia-Europe Network, Lars Mikael Jensen, told delegates at this year’s conference that European exporters should expect to pay a greater share of the overall costs incurred by lines running strings between Asia and Europe.“I am an advocate in our company that there is no such thing as a backhaul and headhaul on Asia-Europe, they are simply eastbound and westbound,” he said. Mr Jensen explained that imports from Asia to Europe in 2010 were “basically flat” compared to Maersk’s forecast for 2014, while over the same period exports out of Europe have increased by 25%.

“Although you will never get the same amount of TEUs in both directions, the stuff that ships from Europe is, compared to Asia, very heavy, so we fill up the ships on weight capacity much earlier. Now, the rates as they are from Europe to Asia are such that you don’t deploy ships to carry waste paper – no disrespect, but you just don’t. It is the market from Asia to Europe that determines what capacity you deploy,” he observed. “However, if you then have a 25% increase in exports out of Europe then there is going to be a crunch. Not because of the TEU capacity, but because of the weight capacity.”

Mr Jensen pointed to the eastbound capacity crunch that occurred in the second quarters of 2011 and again this year, when European exporters struggled to find capacity

for a two-month period. He predicted that period could be prolonged in coming years.“If the trade capacity is not growing, then that two month-crunch becomes three months, then four months and even five months. I think that over the years to come if you are a European exporter you need to look at the eastbound leg carrying a larger part of the total cost,” he said.

Lars Mikael Jensen. Maersk Line


9Edited and reproduced with permission from original reporting by Gavin van Marle, Editor of The Loadstar. www.theloadstar.co.uk

ASIA-EUROPE CONTAINER SHIPPING

Over the years to come, if you are a European exporter to Asia you need to look at the eastbound leg carrying a larger part of the total cost

He predicted that while there will continue to be some periodical variation in pricing, the rock-bottom rates of previous years will not come back. “Rates will go up and rates will go down but I don’t think we’ll see a return to waste paper rates for $200 per TEU that we saw a couple of years ago – too many exports out of Europe have been financed by too low freight rates. Eastbound rates will have to bear a larger part of the cost – a ship comes to Europe and it has to go back. $200 is not covering part of the cost, it needs to be more balanced,” he said, adding that bunker costs have increased by $400 per tonne between 2005 and now, while Maersk burns about 1.5 tonnes per box transported from Asia to Europe. “That’s an increase of $600 per box – so to get $200 for that in eastbound could not continue.”

Clearly, the deployment of eastbound capacity will depend not just on the trade volumes coming out of Asia, but also on rate levels on the westbound leg, which Alan Murphy, Chief Operating Officer at industry analyst SeaIntel said had basically financed the low eastbound rates. Murphy added that the forthcoming general rate increases in the

westbound leg, planned to be introduced on 1 July and in most cases at the $1,000 per TEU mark, represented a “make or break” watershed for carriers.

“It is currently an untenable situation. The latest Shanghai Containerised Freight Index spot rate from Shanghai is $513 per TEU to northern Europe – in order for it to hold we need carrier resolve. We only need one to say ‘OK, I’ll drop the rate by $50’, for rates to come tumbling down again.”

Josselin Basile, Logistics Manager at recycled paper giant America Chung Nam, said: “My feeling is that it is going to be very difficult for the carriers to get the GRI because they keep putting on capacity but the trade is not growing.” However, Mr Jensen responded: “There’s no alternative; there is a resolve amongst carriers and this will go through. Will it stick? For a while. Will it stick completely? Probably not. But we are also getting into the period of the year when there is a little more flow so I am reasonably confident for the third quarter. Yes, there are big ships coming, but if you look at the overall capacity in the market in the third quarter this year compared to last year it has actually declined. The number of loops employed in the trade has declined – there is around 2% less weekly carrying capacity, and that’s what’s important, not the size of the ships.

“”

Alan Murphy, SeaIntel

Josselin Basile, America Chung Nam


10

Heinz takes the logistics lead as suppliers fail to provide the right servicesHJ Heinz’ European logistics head Tom Tillemans told TOC CSC Europe 2013 delegates that frustrated shippers are clubbing together to develop innovative green solutions to inland supply chain problems.

EUROPEAN INTERMODAL SUPPLY CHAIN

Transport operators and logistics companies are failing to provide European shippers with green supply chain options – and some shippers are becoming so frustrated they are looking to develop their own solutions. Tom Tillemans, European Head of Logistics Development at food manufacturer HJ Heinz told delegates TOC CSC Europe that a range of factors facing shippers were failing to be addressed by inland transport service operators. “Sometimes I feel as if I am the logistics service provider, rather than the shipper,” he said.

Mr Tillemans cited factors such as the predicted 20% decline in the number of truck drivers in Europe between now and 2020; rising road congestion; rising fuel prices; consumers’ increased focus on sustainable transport and shippers’ declining margins as recession in Europe continues to bite, forcing shippers to look for other options. “Everybody is under pressure; what I’m missing now is the sense of urgency,” he said.

Another impetus for new solutions was the way Heinz’s use of its own infrastructure had changed in recent years, he said: “Our factories have changed. In the past we had storage space there, but over time that has been absorbed by production lines and the machines and people operating them.”

Similarly, changing consumer behaviour has forced food producers to look for more flexible and responsive supply chains. Retailers’ propensity for promotions, for example, had completely changed the way they needed to be supplied. As a result the company has been seeking other shippers to develop “multi-manufacturer networks” that deliver directly to retailers’ distribution centres.

In this context, said Mr Tillemans, reliability of services was important, but so too was the speed of services, because that could ensure responsiveness. As a result, the company has been seeking collaboration with other producers in the Benelux region and France, where it is already in a network with seven other manufacturers which share transport to customers such as Carrefour”.

“We are not a Heineken – we don’t have 80,000 TEU to ship. We have about 10,000 45fts, but still we are not big enough, and when you are not big enough you have to seek collaboration. We are not going to wait for someone else to do that – we take the proactive approach,” he said.

However, the lack of 45ft containers remains a huge problem remains for these shippers. “In our [intra-European] case we are talking about 45ft shortsea shipping containers, and there are hardly any of those. There is an opportunity for someone,” he said, adding there has been an overemphasis in the region in setting up inland terminals without much thought as to actual cargo volumes.

The lack of 45ft containers remains a huge problem for European shippers

“In the Netherlands there is overcapacity of inland terminals. We have capacity of 5m TEU, but we only use 20% of that. Don’t invest in capacity – spend your money on other things and start using the infrastructure in a smarter way,” he said, adding that his company had done a survey into what percentage of inland terminal throughput was 45ft containers. “None of the terminals knew, and if they guess, it might be 1-2%.”One example of collaboration between shippers was

“ ”Tom Tillemans of Heinz: “We take the proactive approach”


11


the Lean Green barge programme, which has seen Heinz, Bavaria Beer and Mars launch a barge service to Rotterdam.“We started on 7 January with two lanes, and are actively selling the concept to other shippers. We have identified 350,000 TEU that could go on inland shipping rather than road.”

The shipper-driven LeanGreen barge programme has identified 350,000TEU that could shift from road to inland shipping

The programme seeks to develop five additional lanes around the Benelux region and into Germany, with one between Emmerich and Rotterdam now launched. The service has daily sailings during the week with two barges going to and from Rotterdam, one with a capacity of 45 45fts, and the other with capacity of 24 45fts.

“We are looking to get to critical mass and develop those lanes and perhaps go for bigger ships or greater frequency – and then you have a sustainable supply chain. It’s relatively easy to convince other shippers to join.” Mr Tillemans said that outbound utilisation to Rotterdam was 70%, with empties coming from Rotterdam, and denied that using larger barges of 200 TEU capacity would help the supply chain, despite the lower per unit transport cost.

“We need to have the speed and responsiveness of smaller vessels – with the larger ones you don’t have the speed. At the moment it is cost neutral, with 95% of the identified flow on the ship and the 5% still on the road to ensure responsiveness to the market,” he said.

Drewry Supply Chain Advisers’ David Charlesworth said: “This is an example of shippers getting fed up waiting, and who can blame them? The supply chain is so fragmented that it’s difficult to get anyone to punch through a solution.

“It’s a lesson to all of us – if you can’t sort out your product in terms of meeting what your customer really want, rather than what you think they want, then you lose business.”

“”


12

Shippers are being let down by intermodal supply chain fragmentation and unreliability, warns Drewry


International container supply chains are failing to provide shippers with a joined-up product, increasing structural unreliability and creating lingering uncertainty over who is best placed to offer inland and intermodal services. David Charlesworth, Senior Adviser at Drewry Supply Chain Advisers told TOC CSC Europe attendees that shipping lines, forwarders, intermodal operators and even terminals have so far failed to properly work together because they still have yet to define where they collaborate and where they compete.

“When we talk about an integrated supply chain, this industry has a huge amount to do. We have carriers, forwarders and railway operators all trying to work together, but all competing for the position of lead logistics provider. That is going to be an issue going forward because it is not clear always where the best person is going to be to pull these various strands together and provide a simple, low-cost intermodal link for the customer, without it causing a lot of grief and noise along the way. We have a long way to go in collaborative working,” he said.

Mr Charlesworth identified three types of intermodal operators – traditional rail operators; terminal operators such as HHLA in Hamburg which have invested in rail operators; and shipping lines offering inland services. But he added that the latter appeared to be “opting out” of the intermodal arena, despite also occupying a central role.

With an increased number of participants comes increased risk of supply chain failure, he said. “In this mish-mash of people involved there is one golden rule,

which says that at every interface there is an opportunity for delay and additional stock holding.”

Exactly what impact those delays could have on supply chains very much depended on what goods were being carried. Mr Charlesworth gave three examples of 40ft containers imported to Germany: one with clothing and fashion items worth €180,000, one carrying furniture worth a more modest €32,000, and a third container of toys valued at €98,000.

For each consignment he assumed the following costs: pre-shipment costs of €348; freight rate from the load port in China to Rotterdam at €1,643; port of discharge terminal handling charge of €193; and €545 intermodal rail freight rate from Rotterdam to Munich, giving a total of €2,729 in logistics costs incurred by each shipment.

In the case of the furniture, the direct logistics costs represent a relatively high cost in relation to the total value of the cargo – almost 10% – which makes such shippers far more sensitive to freight rate changes. But for fashion goods, the logistics cost are a fraction of the overall value of the goods, and so the shipper has other priorities, obaserved Mr Charlesworth, such as on-time delivery, given that the value of lost sales through even one day of the goods arriving late could be significant.

“If you add a day’s transit in a planned way onto some of these goods, the cost to the customer is basically the working capital - €6-31 per day with these three goods. This is relatively low and may be one of the reasons why shippers aren’t barricading streets over the subject of slow steaming. It’s not quite as big an issue as some think.

“However, if you add a day in an unplanned way and lose sales because you’re stocked-out, it’s not €31, it’s actually the value of the goods plus margin. That is why people don’t like unreliability because here they could be looking at figures of up to €180,000,” he said.

We have carriers, forwarders and railway operators all trying to work together, but all competing for the position of lead logistics provider


“”

David Charlesworth, Drewry Supply Chain Advisors: “We have a long way to go in collaborative working”


13

Brownfield era beckons for terminal automationConverting existing facilities into automated operations is the next big challenge for the terminal industry and its suppliers, heard delegates at this year’s TECH TOC conference.


If there’s one big conclusion to be drawn from this year’s TECH TOC conference it’s that the next decade or so is going to see the introduction of more robotic handling equipment, especially for yard operations, at a wider range of container terminals than ever before, allied to a lot more process automation.

If there’s another, it’s that many of the automation projects of the future will pose very different challenges to the 30 or so automated sites already completed worldwide. Brownfield conversion projects are going to be on the rise, heard TECH TOC delegates, and they are typically not going to be easy.

“Greenfield rectangles” offer the ideal environment to create the modern high-performance container terminal, said Tom Ward, Chief Engineer at Ports America. “They are flexible, efficient, productive, capacious and easy to lay out, design and build.” But they are also “exceedingly rare”. Instead, operators like Ports America and many others around the world now face the challenge of how to impose “rectangular thinking” on existing, older sites with many “pesky constraints” as they seek to upgrade them to meet the demands of larger ships, higher productivity and increased throughput. This is going to require considerable ingenuity.

From the past to the future - through the present.

“Many terminals of the future will be built on top of terminals of the past,” observed Mr Ward. “We must adapt to big ships using big, fast, efficient cranes backed by dense, fast, efficient yards. We will have to use our existing yards and we will have to reconfigure yards while

they are operating. Effectively we will need to run ‘two terminals in one’ with parallel resources (TOS etc). We will have to flex manned and automated models. And we will have to cope with construction.”

Mr Ward cited the example of Ports America’s project to upgrade West Basin Container Terminal (WBCT) at the Port of Los Angeles, a joint venture operation with China Shipping and Yang Ming Line. This terminal literally has “nothing rectangular” about it, said Ward. Its basic long, thin shape, a split layout with a refinery in the middle (which may or may not be staying) and access requirements for its on-dock rail facility all create considerable constraints. But with the port authority now rebuilding and extending wharves, and increasing crane gauges from 50ft to 100ft, the desire is to convert WBCT into “a high performance automated facility for very big ships”

Reviewing a whole range of layout scenarios that Ports America has experimented with for the revamped site, including ASC blocks laid out both parallel and perpendicular to the quay in various block length configurations, Mr Ward said that there was “no obvious best solution” and that “unorthodox approaches were needed.” One unorthodox aspect to current thinking is the proposed use of a “zipper grid”, a concept which allows the yard/truck interface to be handled in a very compact space. The zipper grid, explained Mr Ward, uses an overhead bridge crane (OHBC) in similar fashion to an ASC, allowing boxes to be shuffled ‘over the wall’ between truck and yard. One OHBC can service six pairs of slots.

Using the zipper grid would allow Ports America to locate the gate in the centre of the facility, giving access to ASC blocks on either side. The new automated design, which has proved itself in extensive simulation testing and financial modelling, will allow Ports America to boost throughput from 2.2m TEU presently to 3.3m TEU.

Tom Ward, Chief Engineer at Ports America: “Many terminals of the future will be built on top of terminals of the past”


14

Automated hubs get regional.

Another example of deploying automation in an unconventional setting is at the Port of Liverpool in the UK. David Huck, Port Director at Liverpool for operator Peel Ports Ltd explained how the company is now seeking to reinvent Liverpool’s venerable container handling operations (the port was one of the first in the country to enter the trade) for the modern era.

Pointing out that 65% of the UK and Irish population live within 150 miles of the port, and that 50% of imports and 65% of exports in the two countries are closer to Liverpool than traditional deep sea ports, Huck outlined Peel Ports’ goal to create a world-class regional hub for UK and Irish container trade by completely remodelling and automating its existing facilities.

Both operationally and commercially, the drivers for upgrading are compelling, said Huck. While Liverpool will never be geared to handle today’s big mainline vessels, it is still feeling the upsizing effect. “By 2015, 85 % of the global fleet will not fit into our port,” noted Mr. Huck. Regional feeder sizes are already increasing and calls at the port today can exceed 2,500 container exchanges.

With good rail and water connections, 10 major national motorways within 10 miles and access to low cost land for building water-connected regional and national distribution hubs both in Liverpool and along

the Manchester Ship Canal, Peel Ports believes that ‘Liverpool 2’ can be a new “low cost, low carbon, low congestion solution for the UK and Ireland.”

But just like Ports America with its West Basin site, Peel Ports faces a number of constraints in realizing the vision. A key challenge in Liverpool’s case is that it is a tidal port. This means that it has to turn upwards of 1,500 boxes within the tidal window. And that requires rock-solid quay crane productivity of over 30 box moves per hour. Failure to perform at this level with utter “reliability, repeatability and stability”, said Huck, would mean missing vital Irish seaport and Manchester transhipment connections, which typically have a window of less than 24 hours, as well as failing on service levels agreed for haulage. Some 65% of haulage moves at Liverpool turn within 30 minutes. 95% turn within an hour.

Compounding the tidal window challenges, Liverpool is looking to boost annual throughput capacity to over 1m TEU on a triangular facility with 17 hectares total of hard-standing. So yard handling and storage need to be simultaneously dense and highly productive to support the quay and land gate operations.


David Huck,Head of Port Operations, Peel Ports Group


15

Electrifying GeorgiaGeorgia Ports Authority (GPA) is the first port in North America to electrify its RTGs. GPA CEO Curtis Foltz told the TECH TOC conference that the port authority is converting its large RTG fleet to electric operations as part of an ongoing programme to reduce the environmental impact of operations at its Garden City Terminal in Savannah, GA. The port authority has also built 84 electric reefer racks to reduce emissions from powering refrigerated containers. GPA is the largest US gateway for refrigerated container exports and the country’s fourth largest container port overall.

“Using less to do more” is the mantra at GPA, said Foltz, and existing and planned measures will save millions of gallons of diesel fuel annually. Foltz added that GPA’s core operational strategy was to “keep capacity 20% ahead of demand”. The port authority currently has a $1.4bn capital investment plan in place for berth upgrades, equipment investment – including new super post Panamax quay cranes and more RTGs - and intermodal projects that will take capacity to 6.5 million TEU by 2022. A further US$650mn will be invested in the Savannah Harbour Expansion Programme (SHEP), which was finally approved by the US Government in October 2012 after many years of lobbying. SHEP will deepen the channel from the current

42ft to 47ft, allowing larger and fully loaded ships to call and reducing tidal delays, said Mr. Foltz.

“Constant investment in port equipment and technology is a key to operational excellence,” added Mr. Foltz.


Peel Ports believes that the solution to these various challenges - particularly to secure the reliable and consistent production needed – lies in yard handling automation, coupled with a high degree of process integration and gate technology. After 18 months of simulation work with Dutch company TBA, the company has opted for a future design including 8 Megamax STS cranes supported by automated stacking cranes (ASCs) laid perpendicular to the quay. Handling systems will be backed up by a “fully integrated terminal systems platform”, added Huck, including a vehicle booking system and port community system integrated with the TOS, which in turn will be integrated with a gate operating system, optimisation scheduler, equipment control and equipment management system.

“Given detailed simulation and modelling as a result of constraints and challenges, “Liverpool2” as a regional hub port has no choice but to automate”, said Huck. “It’s only when you undertake this modelling that you fully realise the benefits that automation can deliver in terms of differentiation of cost, service and the customer experience.”

The time to automate is now.

Michael Houen, Planning & Automation Manager for Australian ports and logistics operator Patrick Corporation, told TECH TOC delegates that “the time to automate is now.” Houen said that the company’s investment in automated straddle carriers at its Brisbane facility had yielded “significant savings across the board”, including reductions in labour costs – both operational

and management, reduced depreciation of machines and terminal, other machine-related cost savings, and less expenditure on aspects such as insurance and lighting. Patrick is now adopting Autostrads® for the current redevelopment of its Port Botany Container Terminal in Sydney, due for completion in 2014.

For existing manned terminals looking to move to automation, Houen argued that adopting Autostrads is “the simplest route to fundamental change,” offering fast deployment and low incremental cost of automation. Autostrads are also compatible with ASCs, he noted, enabling terminals to plan a phased conversion programme.

“The gap between automated and manual is too great to resist and failure to automate will result in a loss of competitive advantage,” argued Houen, adding his belief that eventually “the entire market is going to automate.”

Curtis Foltz, Georgia Ports Authority


16

BULK PORTS REPORT

Kissing cousins: containers and bulkFar from being remote relations, bulk cargo handling and containerisation are becoming more closely aligned.

This was one of the principal conclusions of the Bulk Ports & Technology seminar held in the exhibition hall at TOC CSC Europe 2013.

Tim Borteel, Commercial Manager, Bulk Business, Benelux & France, at Euroports, discussed the evolution of bulk ports through the eyes of the port operator. Euroports is one of the largest port operators in continental Europe handling some 73 million tonnes annually with a strong focus on general cargo and dry bulk. The group has 21 terminals in Europe, plus one in China.

Among the trends in the bulk supply chain outlined by Mr Borteel was a shift to dealing with the direct producers of certain commodities, rather than intermediaries such as traders. This could be ascribed to a prior period of speculative trading that had led to significant stock write-offs and financial losses for some trading companies. A consequence of this has been the growth in the number of smaller cargo shipments as access to capital has restricted cargo sizes. In response Euroports as a terminal operator has adapted by meeting customers’ full transportation needs – on a pan-European scale. This includes implementing superior value-added services and recognising the impact of containerisation by installing facilities and equipment for breaking bulk cargoes into containerised shipments and managing their onward transport.

Mr Borteel added that as the direct commodity producers become not just larger but also more active in their own supply chains, it is imperative for logistics partners, such as the terminal groups, to respond quicker to market changes. Bulk port operators are being forced to integrate the container into the modern bulk terminal, he added, and they are also being forced to look further than their own terminal, they need to operate as part of a wider supply chain network.

Bulk benchmarking.

Another presentation also highlighted the growing synergies between container and bulk terminal operations, but this time in terms of business processes. David Trueman, Sales Director of UK-based consultancy and software provider DBIS, pointed out that the container business has for some years recognised the benefits of industry benchmarking and data is readily available to allow terminal operators to compare themselves with industry standards. In the bulk industry most managers understand how their terminal operates and what constitutes good practice and performance, but this is often based on a ‘rule of thumb’, historical experience or the assumption that “everyone is doing their best and nobody is complaining”.

In addition, the bulk industry appears to be reluctant to share information to allow performance benchmarks to be established, he believed. An initiative by the Dry Bulk Terminals Group to establish Overall Equipment Effectiveness (OEE) as a global benchmark was poorly received by members even though the findings of a trial by five terminals proved successful. “It is good to see that the group have reassumed a benchmarking initiative at their latest meetings, however it appears that nervousness regarding the sharing of data may override the prospective benefits for the industry,” he commented.

Multi-industry benchmarks such as OEE are globally accepted standards for operational and manufacturing excellence because of their consistency. OEE is a reliable comparison of performance no matter how different the processes or activities and the industry and all stakeholders would benefit from the improvements that would be derived, Mr Trueman asserted. Using key performance indicators (KPIs) in bulk terminals would allow operators to create an environment of continuous improvement, he added. Using data to achieve even small gains in productivity or space utilisation can create large improvements to the financial bottom line. However, KPIs are only effective if the data is easily available, consistent and believable. If the bulk industry could arrive at a widely accepted industry standard benchmarking he believed this would help drive improvements across the industry and provide guidelines for new terminals in developing markets.

Bulk Ports & Technology is the latest addition to the TOC knowledge family. By providing analysis of global commodity supply chains alongside in-depth case studies of the latest in terminal operations, management and technology for the people who move and handle dry bulk shipments, this regular seminar aims to widen the scope for exchange in ideas and best practices between different cargo sectors.

There are growing synergies between bulk and container handling



17

And now for something completely newA number of port equipment and technology providers chose TOC CSC Europe 2013 to announce major product launches.

Continental Commercial Specialty Tires (CST) introduced its new range of customised tyres for port vehicles and handling equipment, including designs for straddle carriers, reach stackers, rubber-tyred gantry cranes, terminal tractors and heavy duty forklifts. The range is based largely on new V.ply technology. Combining the benefits of cross-ply and radial-ply design, V.ply is claimed to offer extremely sturdy tyres suited for the challenging port working environment.

“For port fleets, fuel is cost factor number one, and tyre replacement is cost factor number two. More than that, 20 percent of a vehicle’s fuel consumption originates in the rolling resistance of tyres”, says Dr. Michael Andreas Maertens, Managing Director of Continental CST. “With our new high quality portfolio we offer our customers in the harbour business a complete solution that increases reliability and safety. At the same time it helps to keep operating costs down and to optimize the environmental performance of their fleets.”

Watch video at: bit.ly/1cOrkXI

Gaussin Manugistique launched extensive additions to its container-handling Automotive Terminal Trailer (ATT®) system, including the Full Elec Power Pack, a lithium-ion battery system that allows users to eliminate air emissions, noise and maintenance and the Hybrid Power Pack, which combines a small diesel engine with electric generator to allow for operation in either power mode. Along with a raft of enhancements to its manned ATT range, including the formal launch of its Docking Station© and Lift System© for decoupled operations, Gaussin also unveiled its robotic Automotive Intelligent Vehicle (AIV®). Using GPS, LiDAR laser sensor and other smart navigation technologies, the AIV will offer a driverless alternative for the transport of 20ft, twin 20ft, 40ft and 45ft containers. The unmanned version is now undergoing prototype tests with a view to full commercial launch in 2014. The company said that it is also developing another new power pack based on hydrogen cell technology, which it aims to launch at TOC Europe 2014. Demonstrating an AIV equipped with Full Elec Power Pack and Dock and Lift System at the TOC Europe exhibition, Gaussin said that the new technologies combine to offer a fully-automated and electrified solution for container transport.

Gaussin also used this year’s show to sign a major deal with Turkish port and logistics operator Akan-Sel for 100 of its ATT units fitted with the new Full Elec Power Pack.

Watch video at: bit.ly/1c9Arp1

Watch video at: bit.ly/1b7AJYg

Watch video at: bit.ly/1814iaN

Watch video at: bit.ly/1cOt2IF


18

NEW PRODUCT LAUNCHES NEW PRODUCT LAUNCHES

Kalmar, the container handling equipment division of Cargotec, chose the first day of TOC CSC Europe to unveil Gloria, its new range of 5th generation reach stackers. Following on from the previous F-generation, the “G-generation” offers customers a wider choice, with four extra models in the container handling range and three extra models in the intermodal line, said the company.

The G-range incorporates a variety of new built-in safety options, including reverse warning and a personal proximity aid system. Developed using the latest ergonomic design principles, the cab has also been significantly enhanced and now offers over 90% guaranteed all-round visibility even in the worst weather conditions. Other new features include a patented side-tilting steering wheel and specially designed joystick. Kalmar said that the new elements add up to make Gloria “the most operator-friendly reach stacker on the market.”

Watch video at: bit.ly/1eEfPTq

Konecranes used TOC CSC Europe 2013 to introduce its new automated RTG (ARTG) system. Built around the company’s established 16-wheel RTG design, which Konecranes says is ideally suited to automation, the new system features a range of intelligent control and automatic navigation technology. This include a complete package of truck guidance infrastructure, allowing the machine to handle the multi-dimensional complexity of truck traffic flowing along the container stacks, a remote operating station with specially-developed Graphical User Interface (GUI), and an IT system that interfaces with the user’s terminal operating system (TOS).

The ARTG also includes an Active Load Control system designed to cope with the wide variety of surface variations inherent in RTG container yards, and with the variations inherent when a crane of this size runs freely on rubber tyres. As a result, says Konecranes, customers can start with their current yard infrastructure as they move to automated RTG operations.

With its new ARTG system, Konecranes says that it has solved the problems that have been preventing the adoption of automated RTG operation, giving owners and operators of RTG-based container terminals “a secure growth path to full automation.”

Watch video at: bit.ly/16ncLuS


19


TOC supports next generation of shipping professionalsA team from the Technical University of Delft beat fellow students from Blekinge Institute of Technology and University of Hamburg to take first prize in the inaugural PEMA Student Challenge at this year’s TOC Europe. The new initiative from the Port Equipment Manufacturers Association challenged competing student teams to come up with the best solution for inter terminal transport, a topic that was identified by PEMA and professors at the three participating universities as a growing challenge for container ports both in Europe and worldwide.

The judging panel, including World Cargo News Associate Editor Paul Avery, Emile Hoogsteden, Vice President Containers, Breakbulk and Logistics at Port of Rotterdam, and Cosmin Carstea, Manager - Systems & Aplications Optimisation at DP World, praised all of the students for their innovative approaches to the challenge and for the hard work that had clearly gone into developing and presenting their different concepts.

The student teams proffered a number of technology solutions to allow up to 5 million TEU to be transported efficiently between port terminals, including automated multi-trailer systems, standard and amphibious AGVs, barges and ro-ro vessels, metro-style rail systems and even maglev technology.

Using Rotterdam’s Maasvlakte 1 and 2 terminal complexes as case studies, the 6-strong team from TU Delft scooped first prize for its proposal to use a combination of multi-trailer

system and ro-ro ferry, supported by a central IT control system to handle transport orders and flows.

PEMA plans to hold its 2nd Student Challenge at TOC Europe 2014 in London and would be very pleased to hear from any universities wishing to take part. Contact the PEMA Secretariat on [email protected] for more information.

More details of the 2013 PEMA Student Challenge, including copies of the student team presentations, can be found at:

Watch video at: bit.ly/1i8R1CJ

Watch video at: bit.ly/H6vC1R

TOC Europe debutant Orbita Engineering announced the launch of CraneOCR, a new optical character recognition (OCR) system to automate freight container identification and damage inspection during vessel loading and unloading at port terminals.

The new system provides real-time ISO code recognition for 20ft, 40ft, 45ft and twin-20ft containers being handled by ship-to-shore (STS) gantry cranes. The system uses new pan, tilt and zoom camera technology, plus advanced software algorithms, to locate and identify containers while they are in motion, ensuring that STS crane cycles are not slowed down, says the company.

CraneOCR joins Orbita’s GateSuite family of products for the automation of port and terminal access operations. The new system communicates through Orbita’s GateOS operating system, integrating with third-party terminal operating systems (TOS) and other business software using standard interfaces such as XML and Web Services to provide 100% remote handling of manifest validations,

exceptions and events. Using the Orbita GateViewer software, users can also collate land gate and sea gate statistics for advanced management analysis.

Watch video at: bit.ly/1eEg54S


20


Private sector holds the key to closing the transport infrastructure gap in North and Latin AmericaPrivate capital is the only realistic option to address a huge deficit in freight transport infrastructure funding and the public sector need to adapt to this new reality. TOC Events Content Director Rachael White reports from the recent TOC Container Supply Chain Americas 2013 conference in Miami

Has the time arrived where the need for transport infrastructure capital has outpaced the ability of most governments to fund it? Judging from debate at the recent TOC Container Supply Chain Americas 2013 conference in Miami the answer to this question, posed by one of this year’s opening presenters, is a resounding yes – and it will be private capital and enterprise that pick up the slack.

Some 400 industry executives from 30 countries gathered at the Miami Airport Convention Center on 1-3 October for the 13th edition of the annual Americas industry gathering, where big ships and the cascade effect, Panama Canal expansion, ocean carrier alliances, transhipment versus direct port calls, carrier-shipper relations, port productivity and inland container flows were all on the agenda. But it was the topic of money that dominated the proceedings.

The conference, which in apt irony opened on the morning of the US government shut-down triggered by political infighting on the budget, heard from multiple speakers that traditional public mechanisms can no longer be relied upon to fund vital infrastructure developments both in North and Latin America.

“Given the state of government finances, the consensus is that public private partnerships are the only viable solution,” said keynote speaker Walter Kemmsies, Chief Economist at Moffatt & Nichol. However, the public sector has “often struggled to be a good partner” to private enterprise and money. The challenge now for government and other public agencies is to “uncork the bottle” and facilitate the flow of private capital and expertise into ports and inland transport infrastructure,

asserted Mr Kemmsies. The issue of whether port authorities and economic development agencies will be able to coordinate their efforts to adapt to this new reality is also crucial, he added.

US needs to embrace PPP

Partnership with the private sector was one of the key themes pressed home by Bill Johnson, Director at PortMiami, host for this year’s TOC Americas. Mr Johnson told delegates that PortMiami is spending over $2 billion to get “big ship ready” for the expanded Panama Canal, including new super post-Panamax cranes, 50ft deep dredge and construction of the Port of Miami tunnel. Due to open in 8 months, the tunnel is “one of the largest PPP projects in America today,” said Johnson, with a consortium of private investors funding the $1 billion development in a design-build-finance-operate-and-maintain (DBFOM) arrangement.

Ports America, the largest US private stevedore and terminal operator, is also championing PPP. “Significant infrastructure investment in addition to what US ports and their private partners are forecasted to spend will be required to close the funding gap,” said Marlene DaCosta, VP Strategic Marketing for the company. Citing the 2013 US infrastructure report card from the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), which forecasts that $3.6 trillion needs to be spent by 2020 and gives ports a mediocre C+ rating, Ms. DaCosta said that Ports America’s recent PPP deals to fund infrastructure upgrades in Oakland and Baltimore could become a future “model for the industry”. In terms of port-centric capex committed for 2013 alone, the “big five” are Los Angeles/Long Beach at $1 billion, New York at $345 million, Houston at $220 million, Charleston SC at $157 million and Georgia Ports Authority at $100 million, she noted.

“Infrastructure funding is the critical issue for economic growth, but US ports have lost funding for system preservation projects, let alone infrastructure projects,” concurred John Martin of analysts Martin Associates. Some $64 billion needed to be pumped into the US port system over the next 5 years, he said, and with the economic crisis reducing state and municipal public funding, not enough federal money to fund dredging/deepening and other infrastructure needs, and security projects competing for cash since 9/11, private sector investment is now key.

Opening session with Walter Kemmsies and Bill Johnson


21


However, added Mr Martin, labour issues and uncertainty over navigational projects are contributing to a “high level of perceived risk in US port investment”. Combined with reduced returns and multiples compared to the heady days of 2006-7, he argued, this is leading more funds and private investors to turn their attention instead to emerging markets, including Caribbean and South America.

Brazil ‘not for the faint-hearted’

Private investment in Latin America is not without its own challenges, however, as highlighted by Michel Donner of Drewry Maritime Advisors in his update on the changing framework for Brazilian port and logistics infrastructure funding. Over the last decade, Brazilian container traffic has grown at an average CAGR of 9.5%, with port traffic reaching 8.8 million TEU in 2012, up from just under 3 million TEU in 2001. Added to this for the port sector has been the global ‘cascade effect’ displacing ever larger ships onto the Latin trades. As a result, said Mr Donner, Brazil’s road, rail and port infrastructure are now all under intense pressure, especially around harvest time, when extreme congestion and delays are the norm.

With the exception of the new BTP and Embraport terminals just opening this year in the Port of Santos, there have been no new public port concessions since 2008. Instead, pure private terminals – in the shape of Itajai and Itapoa – have been the main source of new capacity injection. In their first phase, BTP and Embraport should add a much-need 1.2 million TEU capacity between them to the country’s most overstretched port, which has been running at 95% plus utilisation with average ship waiting times of 2-7 days. But both terminals have started on a “small footing”, said Mr Donner, due to labour and dredging issues – echoing Mr Martin’s observations on US ports.

Recognising the need to square the circle between international trade growth on the one hand and a jammed ports and logistics network on the other, Brazil’s new

2013 port reform bill is belatedly designed to facilitate and encourage private sector involvement, said Mr Donner. The bill is intended to untangle the current web of laws governing private and public sector involvement in Brazilian ports and logistics, which has created a very uneven playing field.

While applauding the efforts to remedy historic problems, Mr. Donner warned that there is a long way to go. Recent concessions in Brazil’s highway sector have been unsuccessful and the market has “little confidence in government agencies’ ability to deliver their part of concession agreements in a timely manner.” Some major issues, such as environmental licensing are also not addressed by the new bill. “In view of the current market mood, Brasilia will probably need to prepare tender models that are able to attract private investors by reducing perceived risk, avoiding legal uncertainties and allowing returns more in line with market expectations,” he said. In conclusion, Brazil is “a market of opportunity, but not for the faint-hearted.”

Are private port authorities the future?

“Regardless of size, all ports are grappling with how to finance expansion and modernisation. The solutions will come from the private sector and port authorities need to better understand private sector capital markets,” said Franc Pigna of port property specialist Aegir Ports. Pigna argued that port authorities around the world need to be “depoliticised” and liberated to “act like a business,” with management of port and port-related property and land portfolios being one of the main commercial roles. “Infrastructure funding will come from private capital markets and port property represents the security for expanded, low cost borrowing,” he said.

Corporatisation, as has already happened in Europe and other parts of the world, is an important step towards giving port authority management and staff the mandate to become “more entrepreneurial and competitive,” said Pigna. Aside from finance issues, he argued that port authorities are the natural ‘transport leaders’ in the logistics chain, best-positioned to manage port communities and clusters to create more efficient, broader and competitive load centres, including a more vertically-integrated and deeper hinterland.

Beyond corporatisation, Pigna said that Australia, where “the privatisation of Melbourne, Sydney and others is raising billions”, is in the vanguard of the next wave of development. Following in the footsteps of the container terminal industry, the future for the port authority sector could include the rise of private port operating groups, with the specialist skills and financial muscle to manage multi-national portfolios.

TOC Container Supply Chain Americas moves to Colombia for the first time next year, taking place in Cartagena during October 2014. www.tocevents-americas.com

The $1 billion Port of Miami tunnel is one of the largest PPP projects in America today

www.tocevents-europe.comwww.tocevents-europe.com

22

Rotterdam is active in the handling of dry bulk, liquid bulk, container and breakbulk cargo. Main dry bulk cargoes include agribulk, iron ore and scrap and coal. Main liquid bulk cargoes include crude oil, mineral oil products and LNG.

Rotterdam is Europe’s largest port, handling a total 442 million tonnes of cargo in 2012. Liquid bulk, at 293 million tonnes in 2012, makes up 66% of the total. Container traffic at 11.9 million TEU or 126 million tonnes in 2012, makes up 29%

Rotterdam’s port and industrial complex covers 10,500 hectares and stretches out 40 kilometres in length from the city along the Nieuwe Waterweg canal to the Maasvlakte area at the Hook of Holland.

http://www.portofrotterdam.com/en/Port/port-maps/Pages/port-areas.aspx

Maasvlakte 2

The new Maasvlakte 2 development will expand Port of Rotterdam’s footprint by a further 2,000 hectares and will double current container handling capacity. The first 700-hectare first phase of Maasvlakte 2 was officially opened in May 2013 at a cost of €1.55 billion - €150 million cheaper than originally estimated.

Construction of the first phase involved 240 million cubic metres of sand, 7 million tonnes of stone and 20,000 concrete blocks from the old seawall.

Construction of new automated container terminals by APM Terminals and Rotterdam World Gateway remains

on schedule and both are due to be operational at the end of next year.

Another 300 hectares of land can be added in a second phase – but only once it is warranted by demand.

https://www.maasvlakte2.com/en/

http://www.portofrotterdam.com/en/Port/port-development/Pages/maasvlakte-2.aspx

Smart energy and emissions management

As an international port and city with strong industry, Rotterdam is currently responsible for about 16% of carbon emissions in the Netherlands. If nothing is done, projected economic growth and the associated increase in industrial production, shipping traffic and road transport are expected to drive Rotterdam’s annual CO2 emissions up to 36-45 million tonnes (MT) by 2025.

One of the main objectives of the Rotterdam Climate Initiative is to emit no more than 12 MT of carbon dioxide in 2025, a 50% reduction on 1990 emissions levels. In order to achieve this target, a wide range of large-scale and innovative energy projects will be realised during the coming years with the goal of transforming Rotterdam into “The world capital of CO2-free energy”.

To manage the complex energy needs of the Rotterdam port and industrial complex -including both traditional fossil fuels and new sources of clean power including wind, solar and low-carbon generation - the port is one of the first in the world to investigate the SmartGrid concept. Working together with GE, Rotterdam is now seeking to better understand all the industrial players’ share of electricity across the port with a view to pooling and co-ordinating energy resources, possibly through the use of a virtual power plant (VPP).

http://www.rotterdamclimateinitiative.nl/en

Smart inland connections

With container flow expected to triple in the coming 25 years, creating an efficient and sustainable intermodal network of container terminals in the hinterland with intermodal services to the deep sea terminals in Rotterdam is key to handling growth. Inland Links is a major initiative between Port of Rotterdam and VITO, the Association of Dutch Inland Terminal Operators, aimed at making it easy for shippers and logistics service providers to understand the hinterland rail and barge connections that are available, select inland terminals and plan out their routes. Since its launch in May 2011, the network has extended beyond the Netherlands to cover inland terminals in Germany, Austria, Italy and other European countries.

http://www.inlandlinks.eu/

SPOTLIGHT ON ROTTERDAM

www.tocevents-europe.com www.tocevents-europe.comwww.tocevents-europe.com

23

With thanks to our TOC Europe 2013 sponsors

Missed outon TOC Europe

2013?Here’s a few things

that might help:Put next year’s dates in

your diary: 24-26 June 2014

Buy the papers online: email [email protected]

for more details

View speaker interviews on video atwww.tocevents-europe.com/toc-media

To discuss speaking opportunities atTOC Europe 2014 contact

[email protected] discuss sponsoring or exhibiting at

TOC Europe 2014 [email protected]

01

02

03

04

05

24 – 26 June 2014 | ExCeL | London | UK

Join TOC Europe 2014in London


Documents

TOC CSC Europe Conference 2013 Review