Green STRING Corridor - 7 elements for a greener transport corridor Öresund - Hamburg
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Green STRING Corridor 7 elements for a greener transport corridor Öresund – Hamburg
Title: Definition of a green STRING corridor
Date: December, 2012
Client: Sandrina Lohse, Region Zealand
Produced by: Oxford Research A/S
Falkoner Alle 20, 4.
DK-2000 Fredriksberg C
Denmark
www.oxfordresearch.dk
Project leader: Jakob Stoumann
Experts/Team: Sidsel Kvist
Derek Light
2
Content
Chapter 1. Introduction ..................................................................................5
Chapter 2. Defining and describing the STRING Corridor ..............................7
2.1 Defining the STRING corridor ................................................................ 7
2.1.1 What is a transport corridor? ...................................................... 7
2.1.2 What is the STRING Corridor? .................................................. 10
2.2 Infrastructure, hubs and terminals ....................................................... 12
2.2.1 Road system........................................................................... 13
2.2.2 Railways ................................................................................ 17
2.2.3 Sea transport.......................................................................... 22
2.2.4 Flight connections ................................................................... 26
2.3 The actors in the corridor.................................................................... 29
2.3.1 Public actors ........................................................................... 32
2.3.2 Major transport and logistics providers and buyers ...................... 34
2.3.3 Terminal providers .................................................................. 35
2.3.4 General stakeholders ............................................................... 36
2.3.5 Summing up ........................................................................... 37
Chapter 3. Definition of a green STRING Corridor .......................................40
3.1.1 What is a Green corridor? ........................................................ 40
3.1.2 Institutionalising green concepts within the STRING corridor ........ 45
3.1.3 Concept Integration – Aligning and validating the Green STRING
Corridor concept .................................................................... 47
3.1.4 Implementation ...................................................................... 53
3.1.5 Conclusion: Greening the String corridor .................................... 54
Chapter 4. List of reference ..........................................................................55
3
4
Chapter 1. Introduction
Connecting the largest Scandinavian transport hub with the one of the biggest global
harbours in Europe, the STRING corridor, which runs from the Oresund Region to the
metropolitan area of Hamburg, is certainly one of the most important transport corridors
of northern Europe. With the construction of the fixed link between Denmark and Ger-
many across the Fehmarn Belt, an important missing link for developing a cohesive
transport corridor between Sweden, Denmark, and Northern Germany will be removed.
This will, no doubt, lead to a significant increase in transport along the STRING cor-
ridor.
Though well consolidated feeder routes currently exist between the harbours of Oresund
and Hamburg, freight transport along the STRING corridor is largely dominated by trucks
while passenger transport is largely based on flights. Seen in the light of the European
Commission‟s vision to achieve a more climate and energy friendly transport sector,
among others by reducing carbon emissions from the sector with 60% by 2050, a major
challenge is how to promote and develop a green STRING corridor.
The creation of a green STRING corridor requires much more than the development of
physical infrastructure. Developing green innovative and intermodal transport solution is
just as much about changing mind sets and facilitating cooperation between the
many diverse actors that govern, finance, and manage facilities and operations within the
corridor.
Given this context, Region Zealand and Region Scania, together with nine other partners
from the Oresund Region, have launched the Intereg project ‘Green STRING Corri-
dor’. The project aims to facilitate increased cooperation between public as well as pri-
vate actors in the corridor and to prepare business and decision-makers for the specific
opportunities and conditions that exist for developing climate-friendly logistic and trans-
port solutions in the STRING corridor.
This report is an introductory study that defines and describes the STRING corridor
and outlines a vision for a green STRING corridor. The report is divided into two major
parts. The first section is focused on providing a definition and description of the
STRING corridor, involving a mapping of the corridor‟s basic geography, infrastructure
and freight volumes. Given that the corridor is made up of actors who play an important
role in shaping the corridor, these institutions and agents will also be described in part
one of the report.
In part two of the report, a vision of a green STRING corridor is outlined. Once
again, the purpose is to establish an understanding of how the general concept of a
green corridor can be applied to the STRING region, thus creating a solid point of depar-
ture and clear direction for the forthcoming work in the Green STRING Corridor project.
The report is based on desk research and reviews of existing reports as well as qualita-
tive interviews with central stakeholders from various institutions, authorities, and firms
that influence or are influenced by the development in the STRING corridor and/or area.
5
PART I 6
Chapter 2. Defining and describing the
STRING Corridor
2.1 Defining the STRING corridor
The purpose of this section is to provide a basic definition and description of the geogra-
phy and main characteristics of the STRING corridor, drawing on a general definition of a
transport corridor and applying it specifically to the STRING corridor.
2.1.1 What is a transport corridor?
A transport corridor can be defined as the concentration of freight (and passenger) traffic
between major hubs along main lines and by relatively long distances of transport1. To
create a corridor, or for a corridor to emerge, the right resources need to be available –
understood as infrastructure and transport systems – as well as sufficient demand for
transport within a given area2.
A transport corridor is made up of a political and institutional level. These levels interact
to drive the development of a corridor. This interaction determines the planning and
implementation of physical infrastructure,
Figure 2.1: TEN-T Core Network
such as roads and railways, as well as coor-
dination and regulation of daily traffic and
transport flows. It also includes setting the
more general framework for the corridor in
terms of regulation and taxation. Political
authorities and institutions can also play a
role in the development within a corridor by
providing targeted innovation program and
supportive knowledge and educational insti-
tutions.
At the EU level, the creation of efficient
and cohesive transport corridors is
supported by the TEN-T (Trans-European
transport Network) program. The idea be-
hind the TEN-T is to ensure the establish-
ment of a single, multimodal transport net-
work that integrates land, sea and air trans-
port networks throughout the European Un-
ion. Traditionally, most of the transport in-
frastructure in the EU has been developed
under national policy premises, and have thus not been coordinated sufficiently in order
to create a coherent European transport system.
1
Inspired by Communication from the Commission Freight Transport Logistics Action Plan (COM(2007) 607
final)
2
IBU Øresund (2010): Øresund-Femern – en grøn logistikkorridor?
7
The TEN-T is also meant to support the creation of an efficient internal European market
by allowing goods and people to circulate quickly and easily between Member
States and assuring international connections3.
The TEN-T Core Network is made up of nodes and links of high strategic importance
including the main ports and airports (gateways) (see figure 2.14). The TENT-T is multi-
modal and includes „hard‟ and „soft‟ infrastructure as well as management:
“The trans-European network shall comprise transport infrastructure, traffic management
systems and positioning and navigation systems and the transport infrastructure shall
comprise road, rail and inland waterway networks, motorways of the sea, seaports and
inland waterway ports, airports and other interconnection points between modal net-
works5.”
Within the TEN-T Core Network, a number of proposed Core Network Corridors exist (see
figure 2.2). The corridors are characterised by:
enhanced multimodality
the continuation of existing corridors, to the greatest degree possible
starting/ending points in Core Network ports
passing through at least three Member States
3
http://ec.europa.eu/transport
4
TEN-T projects that are already completed are coloured green, whereas those that have yet to be finalised,
are black
5
East West Transport Corridor II (2010): Green Corridor Manual (Draft). Governance and management models
for a transnational, green, freight transport corridor, p. 15.
8
Figure 2.2: Core Network Corridors in TEN-T Core Network
As the above outline demonstrated, there seems to be a fairly common and agreed defi-
nition and characterisation of what make up a transport corridor: a transport corridor is a
geographical connection between major transportation hubs with a relatively
high concentration of (freight) traffic. It is made up of a practical level (infrastruc-
ture, transport demands and transport systems) and a political/strategic level (states,
regions, municipalities).
9
2.1.2 What is the STRING Corridor?
STRING is the political cooperation between Hamburg and Schleswig- Holstein in Ger-
many, Capital Region of Denmark and Region Zealand in Denmark, and Region Scania in
Sweden. These regions constitute what is called the STRING area.
The development of a STRING corridor is a part of the political project of creating more
coherence, cross-border cooperation and trade within the STRING area. The STRING
corridor is first of all a political concept. The vision is to create a strong and efficient
transport corridor from the Copenhagen-Malmo area to Hamburg running through the
region of Zealand in Denmark and connecting to Schleswig Holstein in northern Germany
by the coming fixed Fehmarn link. In Sweden, the STRING corridor also covers the con-
nections between Malmo and Helsingborg (which again connects the STRING corridor
with Gothenburg and Oslo) and the north-east connections towards Älmhult and Stock-
holm.
Though foremost a political vision and idea, the STRING corridor already exhibits
the ‘corridor characteristics’ of connected infrastructure and a concentration
of transport flows along main lines. Compared to other Scandinavian and European
corridors, the traffic and goods flows are quite limited, however, and freight remains
limited to road transport (and ferry between Denmark and Germany) because of the
current lack of a fixed railway connection between southern Zealand and Schleswig Hol-
stein.
Furthermore, looking at the European level, the STRING corridor is just a small piece of
the wider European transport network. More specifically, the STRING corridor comprises
a short yet very important stretch of the TEN-T corridor that goes from Helsinki in
Finland all the way to the southernmost part of Europe, identified as the Helsinki – Val-
letta corridor (see figure 2.36).
6
STRING (2012). A modern transport system between the Oresund Region and Hamburg.
10Figure 2.3: The STRING Corridor is a vital part of Railway Corridor 5 Helsinki
– Valetta
The main points of gravity in the STRING corridor are Hamburg and the integrated Co-
penhagen-Malmo area, which includes the Copenhagen Airport. Both areas are large
metropolitan areas with important transport hubs and multimodal terminals, with high
concentrations of people and economic activities.
Other major transport hubs along the STRING corridor include Helsingborg and Lübeck,
which are important regional harbours and are well connected by road and rail. In Den-
mark, the port of Køge and town of Høje Taastrup also play important roles in the re-
gional transport system, feeding into the STRING corridor. Finally, Rødby in Denmark and
Puttgarten in Germany function as strategic nodes in the corridor in spite of their limited
size and small population, because of the ferry line connecting the two towns. Looking at
the wider STRING area, other major transport hubs include Rostock and Kiel in Germany
and Trelleborg and Ystad in Sweden7.
7
IBU Øresund (2010): Øresundsregionen som internationalt transportknudepunkt. Sammenfatning på delopga-
ver 1 – 4.
Wichmann-Matthheissen, Ch., et al (2011): Den faste Femern Bælt-forbindelse: Regionale udviklingsperspekti-
ver.
11Gothenburg is technically not a part of the STRING corridor. However, in practice, a sig- nificant volume of freight in the STRING corridor is generated from the port and multi- modal transport hub of Gothenburg because of a relatively high concentration of produc- tion and consumption. Gothenburg is Scandinavia‟s largest container port but is situated slightly outside the STRING area, north of Helsingborg. Nevertheless, many actors in the STRING corridor describe Gothenburg as a de facto hub and node within the STRING corridor. While the STRING corridor functions to some extent as a corridor, the construction of the fixed link between Denmark and Germany across the Fehmarn Belt will clearly strengthen the corridor by facilitating more cohesive and flexible transport networks between Swe- den, Denmark, and Northern Germany. The expectations are therefore that the fixed Fehmarn link will strengthen the STRING areas‟ characteristics as a transport corridor since it will increase its accessibility, offer multimodal modes and concentration of goods flows even more around the main lines between Hamburg and Copenhagen-Malmo. By connecting the largest Scandinavian transport hubs with Hamburg, one of the biggest global harbours and transport hubs in Europe, the completion of the Fehmarn link will make the STRING corridor one of the most important transport corridors of northern Europe (see figure 2.3). 2.2 Infrastructure, hubs and terminals There are differences in infrastructure, both hard and soft, across the existing sections that make up the corridor. Some feeder routes exist between Copenhagen-Malmo, Helsingborg, and Hamburg that link to long-haul rail routes. However, the STRING corri- dor is heavily dominated by road transport. Moreover, freight makes up a high share of total traffic, and there is a significant imbalance in out- and inbound freight transport. This imbalance is due to the fact that the cities of Copenhagen and Malmo, with high population density and almost no industrial production, are large consumer areas with high demand for consumer goods such as foodstuff, electronics, medicine, clothes, and cars. The imbalance is most significant in Copenhagen and Region Zealand, while the slightly greater concentration of industrial production in central and southern Sweden creates some outbound freight transport requirements. The Hamburg area is different from the other parts of the STRING corridor. The region is characterised by significant levels of inbound and outbound freight transport due to the city‟s status as international hub (the port of Hamburg) for overseas container traffic (see figure 2.4). Furthermore, Hamburg remains an important industrial area, with such indus- tries as chemicals, electronics, machinery and refined oil products8. 8 Povl A. Hansen, (2012): The Green STRING Corridor and transport development. Roskilde Universitetscenter og Green STRING Development. Not published. 12
Figure 2.4: Basic characteristics of The STRING Corridor
– Transport specialisations Malmo and Sothern
Sweden
Copenhagen Area
Mainly road transport,
Road transport and air: but also multimodal
transports.
• Import and distribution of consumer
goods (electronics, food, medicine etc.) RoRo in Trelleborg.
• Import of consum-
er goods (electron-
ics, cars etc.)
• Some exports
(machinery, wood
Hamburg Area and paper prod-
ucts)
Multimodal global transports:
• Long haul, feeder and
distribution
• Container and bulk
• Both imports and exports Southern Zealand & Northern Germany
• Exports: chemicals, cobber Mostly transit areas with few hubs and little
and steel, machinery, elec- specialisation in transports and logistics.
tronics, refined oil
2.2.1 Road system
The main road system in the STRING corridor is part of the TEN-T network, made up of
the E-numbered roads. The most important road in the STRING corridor is the E47, which
runs from Helsingborg to Lübeck, where it merges with E22 towards Hamburg. Further-
more, the road system consists of smaller but significant roads such as the road connect-
ing E6 in Sweden with the important RoRo (Roll on/Roll off) port of Trelleborg.
Overall, the road system in the STRING corridor is well developed and characterised by
motorways with two or more lanes in each direction. Figure 2.5 (below) outlines the main
roads in the STRING corridor on the Swedish and Danish side. On the German side, the
north/south line in the road system starts at Fehmarn with a federal road B207 (motor-
way quality) until Heiligenhafen (just South of Fehmarn), subsequently turning into the
motorway A1 that runs via Lübeck, Hamburg, Ruhr Area, and ending at Saarbrückencen-
tral.
13Figure 2.5: Main road system in the STRING corridor The corridor contains well-known bottlenecks. Studies and interviews consistently point to congestion problems around the cities of Malmo, Copenhagen, and Hamburg. On the Danish side, congestion is prominent on the motorways around Copenhagen and during rush hour on the roads going south (Køge Bugt Motorway). Furthermore, the Oresund motorway between Sweden and Denmark has seen congestion in recent years. Conges- 14
tion problems are expected to increase and extend into northern Zealand and the HH-
connection9.
On the Swedish side, bottlenecks and congestion problems are mainly related to E6 to
and from Malmo and around Gothenburg. The congestion problems in southern Sweden
are serious since the international traffic in the region is significant. The total amount of
freight flows between Sweden and Denmark includes 32 million tonnes per year, with 41
% flowing through Denmark; i.e., crosses the Oresund Bridge or the HH-connection. The
rest of the traffic is distributed across ferry routes, such as Trelleborg – Rostock. In re-
sponse to this congestion, the Swedish government has designated a number of routes
for priority investment to upgrade capacity10.
In Germany, a number of routes play a central role in the North/South connection in the
STRING corridor, including motorway A1, Heilinghafen - Hamburg – Saarbrücken, the
motorway A7 Flensburg - Hamburg - Hannover - Munich. For the West/East connection,
this includes the motorway A20 and A22 along with the planned extension of motorway
A20. The nodes of Hamburg and Hannover are heavily utilised. In Hamburg, the most
critical situation is the A7 corridor, with the Tunnel 57 crossing below the river Elbe and
the crossing with the A 23 ("Nord-West-Kreuz"). Furthermore, the current Fehmarn
Sound Bridge represents a bottleneck with the highest congestion occurring during the
summer holidays11. Related to this, the B207 from Fehmarn to Heilinghafen, a federal
highway with only two lanes and significant congestion, of which only a part can be
turned into a motorway due to the local businesses/farmers12.
The road system in the STRING corridor plays a significant role in shaping freight traffic
since the corridor is heavily dominated by road transport13. This is partly due to short
distances and the low cost of road transport, as well as lack of rail capacity.
Road transport volumes are expected to increase until 2030, while the fixed Fehmarn link
will further increase the volume of cargo to be transported by road. A prognosis from
2012, for example, foresees that the level of transport by rail will only increase very little
and freight transport on road will continue to increase until 2030 (see example in figure
2.714).
9
STRING (2012): Bottlenecks in the infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe.
10
STRING (2012): Bottlenecks in the infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe.
11
STRING (2012): Bottlenecks in the infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe.
12
Lohse and Jespersen (2010): The Perception of the Fehmarnbelt connection among German stakeholders.
13
Transportministeriet (2011): Danmark som transportland i det internationale transportsystem.
14
STRING (2012): A modern transport system between the Öresund Region and Hamburg.
15Figure 2.7: Volumes of freight transport development EU-27
However, there is some disagreement with this forecast, as the qualitative interviews
suggest that the opposite might be true – that a larger share of freight will be trans-
ported by rail due to the fixed Fehmarn link, reinforced by the general belief that regula-
tion and taxes on road transport and the expenses related to crossing the Fehmarn link
will improve the competitiveness of rail. For instance, the biggest railway carrier in Den-
mark and Germany, DB Schenker, believes that 75% of their cargo handling in Scandina-
via will be by train whereas the share today is less than 50% 15. Moreover, the coming
regulations on sulphur emissions in the Baltic Sea in 2015 might move trucks from the
Trelleborg and Malmo RoRo ferry routes to the fixed Fehmarn link and the motorway
through Zealand and Copenhagen16.
Ultimately, uncertainties remain about what will happen when the fixed Fehmarn link
opens.
2.2.1.1 Road transport centres
A number of road transport centres exist in the STRING corridor. Since most of them are
privately-owned and are very diverse in set-up and size, it is difficult to describe them in
general. Most of the larger freight forwarders use their own terminals, which make data
of freight flows and volume difficult to access. However, privately owned terminals han-
dle the majority of the road-based cargo. For example, one of the biggest Nordic ship-
pers, DSV, has their main terminal located in Landskrona, in southern Sweden.
Combi-terminals, which facilitate modal shifts between road and train, are naturally im-
portant hubs for road transport system. In the STRING area, combiterminals are located
in Høje-Taastrup, Malmo, Helsingborg, Älmhult, Trelleborg, Lübeck, and Hamburg. These
will be described in more detail in the railway section.
There is a general trend that can be observed for terminals. They tend to be fewer in
number and larger in size. In parallel, there is a tendency towards closer cooperation
15
Interview with DB Schenkler.
16
Interview with Trafikverket and Transportindustriforbundet in Sweden.
16between transport buyer and supplier. For example, a significant medical firm has turned
their strategy from many company-owned logistic facilities to a reduced number of logis-
tic centres that cooperate closely with DSV17.
Interviews have identified two potential trajectories for the location of terminal. One per-
spective believes that a limited number of new terminals will be established in the
STRING corridor when the Fehmarn link opens, located close to the city centres to take
advantage of the proximity to consumption centres where the final distribution of most
goods takes place. Terminals of this type would likely be located in southern Sweden due
to lower establishment costs compared to the area around Copenhagen and higher vol-
ume of outbound freight.
A competing perspective believes that southern Zealand and northern Germany might
experience an increase in the location of assembling and distribution centres of produc-
tion and trade companies because of cheap land prices compared to the areas around
Hamburg and Copenhagen. This would be reinforced by the fact that freight prices for
goods going out of Zealand are very low, because of the high freight imbalances in the
region18.
However, there is limited evidence to support one perspective over the other. What is
clear, however, is that an increasing number of terminals will be created and that the
location decisions will be driven by a variety of factors, making the location of future
terminals difficult to predict.
2.2.2 Railways
Significant differences in railway infrastructure exist across the STRING corridor; in short,
it seems that the biggest challenges exist in Germany while Sweden and Denmark have
launched a number of initiatives to meet future demands for railway transportation.
During the 1990s, the main railway network in Sweden was renovated and upgraded,
bringing the technical standards up-to-date. The main lines were upgraded to a capacity
of 200 km/h. Sweden is among the countries with the largest degree of electrification,
and emphasis has been placed on sustainability principles in the planning of infrastruc-
ture investment.
In spite of this, major parts of the network are suffering of capacity problems, as traffic
has increased >60% in 15 years. There are several sections where only 75% of the
trains arrive on time, and this performance has been fairly unchanged in recent years.
Among the main reason for this is the increase in freight and commuter trains. The most
significant congestion problems are in and around the cities of Gothenburg, Helsingborg
and Malmo, but the railway infrastructure between Malmo and Trelleborg and Malmo and
Ystad represent critical bottlenecks19. Furthermore, the integrated Øresound train system
is currently experiencing capacity problems. Over the next 20 years, it is expected that
inter-regional trains and long distance trains will increase from now 30,000 to 50,000
17
Grontmij & Oxford Research (2011): Baltic Logistic Hub. Presentation from Lars Syberg, Mölnlycke Healthcare
at Logistics Sjælland 2012.
18
Interview with DI Transport and DB Schenker.
19
STRING (2012): Bottlenecks in the infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe.
17daily cross-border travellers20. However, as mentioned, several upgrading projects are
underway in Sweden (see figure 2.921).
Figure 2.9: Elimination of railway bottlenecks in Scania
In Denmark, the railway network (length) has decreased by 5 % over past last ten
years. As is the case in Sweden, congestion problems in Denmark are related to urban
areas, namely, the network to and from Copenhagen and Høje-Taastrup. Bottlenecks in
the Danish railway system include (see figure 2.1022):
the rail section between Copenhagen and Ringsted, which is under construction
(it is a completely new line)
the rail section Copenhagen Central-Copenhagen Airport, which is in need of new
track and new platforms.
20
This development is partly due to the opening of the Fehmarn Belt Link and the introduction of semi-high
speed passenger trains between southern Sweden and Hamburg as well as general growth in the region.
21
STRING (2012): Bottlenecks in the infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe.
22
The red lines: no capacity left, Green lines: Capacity available. STRING (2012): Bottlenecks in the infrastruc-
ture between Scandinavia and Central Europe.
18Figure 2.10: Capacity utilisation 2010
Another serious bottleneck for the railway connection towards the southernmost part of
Region Zealand and northern Germany is the Storstøms Bridge, which connects Zealand
with the island of Falster. Banedanmark, the agency responsible for railway tracks and
signals in Denmark, recommends that further work concentrate on establishing a new
doubled tracked bridge, to avoid the link over Storstrøm causing a bottleneck in the fu-
ture when the fixed Fehmarn Belt link opens23. As described, initiatives have been initi-
ated to remove most of these bottlenecks.
In general the railway infrastructure in Germany has been declining in recent years.
Combined with growing utilization, this has lead to bottlenecks in Germany (see figure
2.1124). Hamburg represents one of the biggest bottlenecks due to high activity in the
Port of Hamburg. The railway around Hamburg is already intensively used with more
than 100,000 train units per year transporting containers and bulk to and from the port.
23
BaneDanmark (2012): Resumérapport - Handlemuligheder vedrørende Storstrømsbroen samt
www.banedanmark.dk
24
STRING (2012): Bottlenecks in the infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe.
19Figure 2.11: Total network utilisation of German rail networks 2010 The situation in the marshalling yard of Maschen, located to the south of Hamburg, is relevant. Maschen is the largest marshalling yard in Europe and there are serious bottle- necks on the railway lines leading to and from the yard. Almost all freight trains start or end at the yard when going to or leaving from Hamburg. 20
Expanding the geographical scope, the triangle of Bremen, Hanover and Hamburg have
very high utilisation levels (100 – 130 %) and, according to forecasts, the triangle is not
prepared to provide hinterland capacity for freight trains required by the ports of Lübeck
and Rostock.
Looking north of Hamburg, the line between Lübeck and Puttgarden is single-tracked and
non-electrified. Moreover, the line has restrictions on train length, which means that
trains need to be split up at the marshalling yard of Maschen, putting extra pressure on
the yard. Furthermore, the Fehmarnsund Bridge is expected to be a future major bottle-
neck since it will remain single track. There are no plans for a new link. While the maxi-
mum capacity for a single track is 90 trains per day, forecasts indicate a volume of 138
trains per day, when the link opens.
As mentioned, most interviewed actors suggest that the fixed link between Denmark and
Germany will favour railway transport and that the share of goods transported by railway
will increase. The STRING corridor is expected to take over large parts of transit railway
freight that currently flows through Funen and Jutland. As a result, most parts of the
corridor, including the Fehmarn Belt Link, will be at or near full capacity until the opening
of double tracks in 203025.
Though the fixed link seems to favour rail, railway is expected to be used for long haul
transit transports. The total share of shorter transport taken by rail is dependent on regu-
lation, taxation, prices for crossing the fixed Fehmarn link, and the removal of existing
railway bottlenecks. However, many actors remain sceptical that railway can take over
any of the shorter distance transports, even if the price ratio between rail and road is
equalled. The expectation is that the high flexibility of road transport will be a more im-
portant parameter than price and environment when it comes to short distance trans-
ports.
2.2.2.1 Railway terminals
There are several railway and combi-terminals within the STRING corridor. The major
terminals are located in Hamburg, Malmo, Høje-Taastrup and Lübeck. Furthermore, im-
portant combi-terminals are located just outside the STRING corridor in Trelleborg,
Helsingborg, and Gothenburg due to their role as harbour links. A combi-terminal is also
located in Älmhult, from which IKEA distributes their products. Most of the major termi-
nals are located close to or at the ports and some are integrated parts of the port, such
as the terminal in Helsingborg.
Maschen Marshalling Yard just south of Hamburg is also a crucial hub for railway trans-
port in the STRING corridor. The Maschen is the largest marshalling yard in Europe and is
responsible for the handling of regional, national, and international goods trains. Impor-
tantly, it also acts as a hub for the transportation of export goods to, and imported goods
from, the ports of Hamburg and Bremerhaven, as well as traffic to and from locations in
Scandinavia. Currently, shunting operations are carried out by DB Schenker Rail, Cargo
Zentrum Hamburg.
Furthermore, the port of Lübeck has an important terminal function. Together with
Travemünde (in the STRING area), it is the most important Baltic port for traffic to and
from Scania. In 2003, HHLA Hamburger Hafen und Logistik established a new container
terminal in Lübeck which are linked by fast, direct, and regular shuttle trains to HHLA's
25
Interview The Danish Transportation Authorities and DI Transport.
21Burchardkai and Altenwerder Container Terminals in Hamburg and also to the port's big-
gest private container terminal, Eurogate.
The biggest terminals in terms of freight volume located in Denmark and Sweden are
Malmo (112,000 TEU), Høje-Taastrup (91,800 TEU), Helsingborg (65,000 TEU) and Trel-
leborg (56,000 TEU)26.
Most of the Swedish terminals are owned by Jernhusen and the terminal in Malmo is
operated by CargoNet, which has the facilities to connect trains to full sets. From Malmo
to Stockholm, the combi traffic is so effective that it is a competitive to road. As part of
the expansion of Norra Hamn in Malmo, a new terminal has been set up, though it does
not have access to railways and thus targets RoRo traffic.
The existing combi- and container terminal in Helsingborg is planned to be expanded in
2014, but the activity of the terminal is limited by congestion problems on the railway link
between Helsingborg and Åstorp. Recently, Jernhusen opened a new terminal in relation
to the Helsingborg station, with a capacity of 30,000 TEU and Helsingborg Business Re-
gion27 is planning for a dry port in Ästorp. Activity in the terminal in Trelleborg is mostly
related to the RoRo traffic on ferries to Germany/continental Europe and the Baltic coun-
tries.
The terminal in Høje-Taastrup was expanded in 2011. At the moment, authorities are
investigating the possibilities of turning the terminal into a dry port. Furthermore, the
Danish authorities are working on making the terminal more attractive28.
There are fundamental differences in the use of combi-terminals between Denmark and
Sweden, where Swedish terminals have bigger market shares compared to Denmark.
This has to do with the geographical scope of the two countries and the efficiency and
size of the terminals. Denmark is a small country with short transport distances compared
to Sweden. This results in high costs to reloading cargo from one transportation mode to
another, generating higher shares of the total transport costs29.
2.2.3 Sea transport
Within the STRING corridor, there are several important seaports, including the Port of
Hamburg, Lübeck, Copenhagen-Malmo (CMP), and Helsingborg. In the wider STRING
area, some important seaports are located in Trelleborg and Rostock.
The Port of Hamburg is by far the biggest and most important seaport in the STRING
corridor. The port is dominated by overseas transport (in- and outbound) but also by
short sea shipping and feeder traffic routes. The dominant type of cargo in the port is
container freight, which accounts for 68 % of the cargo in Hamburg30. Despite the eco-
nomic crises in Europe, the port has managed to increase its throughput over the first
26
It is 2008 numbers. IBU (2009): Knudepunkter og infrastrukturlinjer for international person- og godstrans-
port i Øresundsregionen. Øresundsregionen som internationalt transportknudepunkt.
27
Helsingborg Business Region is cooperation between municipalities in the area around Helsingborg.
28
Interview with the Danish Transport Agency (Trafikstyrelsen).
29
IBU (2009): Knudepunkter og infrastrukturlinjer for international person- og godstransport i Øresundsregio-
nen. Øresundsregionen som internationalt transportknudepunkt.
30
Povl A. Hansen (2012): The Green STRING Corridor and transport development. Roskilde Universitetscenter
and Green STRING Development. Not yet published.
22half of 2012 with growth of 2.7 %31. The growth is primarily due to exports from con-
tainer cargo (79 %) and bulk (19 %)32.
The Ports of Lübeck are the south-westernmost transhipment hub located in the Baltic
Sea and act as the central pivot in the system, especially for the traffic between the tradi-
tional economic centre in western and central Europe and the fast developing economic
region of the Baltic Sea. One of the most important factors for the success for the Port of
Lübeck is the dense departure rate of the liner services. The Ports of Lübeck offer more
than 130 departures per week, serving almost all important Baltic ports. The dominant
type of transport is RoRo, which account for 78% of the total cargo in Lübeck33. Lübeck
is a proposed part of the TEN-T core-network. Over the recent years, the port of Lübeck
has made considerable infrastructure investments to create additional marshalling yards
and intermodal terminal facilities to be prepared for the coming Fehmarn Belt Link34.
Located in the STRING area is the Port of Rostock, which is dominated by bulk (59 %
of total cargo), but ferry and RoRo traffic play a major role in the port. The port has ex-
perienced growth in freight traffic during the period of 1997 to 201035 and there are sev-
eral RoRo lines between Rostock and Finland, Norway, Denmark, and Sweden, with one
RoRo line between Rostock and U.K36.
The Port of Copenhagen is a major port for the transport of cargo and for ferries,
where bulk material (e.g. construction) makes up a major part of the volume (67 %) of
freight transport37. The port is also known as a major destination for cruise ships. To
strengthen the port‟s position as the gateway to the Baltic Sea, the Port of Copenhagen
merged with the Port of Malmo in Sweden to become Copenhagen Malmö Port
(CMP) in 2001. Danish and Swedish cargo, but also other European consignments, moves
in transit via Copenhagen Malmö Port, either directly from truck, rail, or ship. Therefore,
the Copenhagen Malmo port is expected to benefit from an efficient railway link to cen-
tral Europe.
From CMP, there are several feeder routes to Hamburg and other German ports. One of
the largest feeder companies in CMP – Unifeeder - runs a Scandinavia-Germany feeder
line that provides weekly connections between Scandinavia and Germany38.
The Port of Helsingborg has major feeder routes to Hamburg. The container traffic
constitutes around 17% of the harbour‟s total freight volume while RoRo is the most
31
Port of Hamburg (2012): Strong exports ensure growth for Port of Hamburg in 2012 first half.
32
Port of Hamburg (2012): Strong exports ensure growth for Port of Hamburg in 2012 first half.
33
Povl A. Hansen (2012): The Green STRING Corridor and transport development. Roskilde Universitetscenter
and Green STRING Development. Not yet published.
34
STRING (2012): Bottlenecks in the infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe.
35
Povl A. Hansen (2012): The Green STRING Corridor and transport development. Roskilde Universitetscenter
and Green STRING Development. Not yet published. It should be noted that the Port of Lübeck ecprienced a
small decline in the period 2001 – 2005 and during 2008.
36
There are five RoRo lines between Rostock and Finland (going to Rauma, Turku, Hanko, Helsinki and Kotko)
and two between Rostock and Norway (going to Oslo and Bergen).
37
Povl A. Hansen (2012): The Green STRING Corridor and transport development. Roskilde Universitetscenter
and Green STRING Development. Not yet published
38
The Scandinavia-Germany line runs between Larvik, Oslo, Moss, Frederikstad, Gothenburg, Halmstad, Hel-
singborg, Malmö, Aarhus, Copenhagen, Bremerhaven and Hamburg at different timetables and loops.
23important business area for the port of Helsingborg, accounting for approximately 65 % of the total freight.39. Also of importance, but technically not located within the STRING corridor, is the Port of Trelleborg in southern Sweden. The port of Trelleborg is dominated by RoRo traffic, especially road freight traffic, with approximately 85 % of the total freight volume trans- ferred by truck or semi trailer in 201040. As mentioned, the Port of Gothenburg, which is not technically situated in the STRING corridor itself, is one of the de facto most important actors and hubs generating transport and business in the STRING corridor. The map in figure 2.1441 outlines feeder routes from the major ports in the STRING area, which is important in a strategic perspective. 39 IBU (2009): Knudepunkter og infrastrukturlinjer for international person- og godstransport i Øresundsregio- nen. Øresundsregionen som internationalt transportknudepunkt. 40 Povl A. Hansen (2012): The Green STRING Corridor and transport development. Roskilde Universitetscenter and Green STRING Development. Not yet published 41 IBU (2009): Knudepunkter og infrastrukturlinjer for international person- og godstransport i Øresundsregio- nen. Øresundsregionen som internationalt transportknudepunkt. 24
Figure 2.14: Feeder routes in the STRING area
The coming Fehmarn Belt Link is unlikely to significantly affect the feeder traffic within
the STRING corridor. According to Unifeeder, the fixed link will likely not lead to a decline
in their feeder traffic between Helsingborg, CMP, and Hamburg since feeder traffic will
most likely remain cheaper than truck traffic due to the extra costs for trucks crossing the
Fehmarn link.
25Furthermore, ship transportation has a competitive advantage because the container
ships can carry much more goods/cargo than trains and trucks. This means that the unit
price for transportation by ship, when it comes to containers, can normally be kept com-
petitive42. The expectation is also that the railways will not be able to absorb the in-
creased traffic caused by the Fehmarn Belt Link, which is why transport by seaway is also
expected to increase43.
A significant determinant of ship transport is the new regulation of sulphur emissions,
which is expected to influence the price level for sea transportation, potentially making
shipping a more expensive mode of transport.
2.2.4 Flight connections
The STRING corridor encompasses three main airports: Copenhagen Airport, Malmo Air-
port (Sturup) in Sweden and Hamburg Airport. The airports in Copenhagen and Hamburg
are central.
In Copenhagen Airport, almost 90 % of the traffic today is international, while of the
competing Nordic airports have around 40-50 % domestic traffic. The catchment area
covers most of Denmark and all of Southern Sweden, which accounts for 40 % of the
entire population of Sweden44. In the future, the expectations are that the catchment
area of Copenhagen and Hamburg‟s airports will further overlap because of improved
train connections (see figure 2.1545).
42
Interview with Unifeeder.
43
Interview with Trafikverket.
44
STRING (2012): Bottlenecks in the infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe.
45
STRING (2012): Traffic analysis Malmö-Hamburg.
26Figure 2.15: Catchment area for Copenhagen Airport (and Hamburg Airport)
27In general, the number of passengers in Copenhagen Airport increased between 2007
and 2011, with an exception in 2009 when the airport experienced a small decline in
number of passengers. The volume of freight declined in 2009 – 2010, but it seems that
the development has turned and the airport has thus experienced an increase in freight
volume from 2010 to 2011 (see table below). 70 % of the cargo in the airport consists of
transit goods and high value goods such as medicine, electronics, and special foodstuff.
Passengers and freight flows in Copenhagen Airport and Malmo Airport
Copenhagen Airport Malmo Airport
2010 2011 2008
Passengers 21,5 Million 22,7 million 1,7 million
Freight 138,300 tonnes 141,500 tonnes 29,300 tonnes
Source: Statistics Denmark 2012 and Luftverket 2009
The volume of freight is expected to increase up to 7 % until 2030, and that an expan-
sion of cargo handling facilities will be necessary in the future. The importance of the
airport is demonstrated by the choices of DHL and Fedex, for example, companies that
have chosen Copenhagen Airport as central hubs for their businesses. Malmo Airport also
expects to see increases in freight and passenger volumes46.
More than 150 companies with over 1500 employees based within the region of the
Hamburg Airport specialise in shipping air cargo. The airport is especially specialised in
spare parts logistics, and also in the transhipment of consumer electronics, textiles,
pharmaceutical and chemical products. The Hamburg Airport provides approximately
56,000 m² of logistics facilities for air cargo companies and logistics service providers.
The air cargo catchment area covers a radius of 200 km around Hamburg Airport and
thus incorporates large areas of Lower Saxony, Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania as well
as the whole of Schleswig-Holstein and Southern Denmark47. Within the catchment area
of the Hamburg Airport, there is an annual air cargo demand of approx 250,000 tonnes48.
Given the disproportionately high growth rate in the metropolitan region of Hamburg,
growth of 5% per year is also anticipated in the next few years. The airport is thus plan-
ning to build a new air cargo centre of approximately 55,000 m² at the southern end of
the airport‟s operating area. At the moment, a development process is taking place with
freight forwarders, air cargo handling companies and airlines to ensure that the new cen-
tre is meeting the needs of the market.
Furthermore, Hamburg Airport benefits from high accessibility to road, railway, and port
connections. Hinterland infrastructure is thus in place49.
46
IBU Øresund (2010): Øresund – Femern – en grøn logistikkorridor?
47
http://www.ham.airport.de
48
The volumes for freight related to actual airport (and not the catchment area) are for 2010 around 27 tonnes
(Povl A. Hansen (2012): The Green STRING Corridor and transport development. Roskilde Universitetscenter
and Green STRING Development. Not yet published).
49
http://www.ham.airport.de
282.3 The actors in the corridor
The purpose of this section is to provide a description of the various actors and their role
in the STRING corridor, outlining their capacity to influence structures and freight flows in
the corridor. Figure 2.1650 illustrates how a transport corridor consists of different lay-
ers that are interdependent and thus mutually constitutive.
Figure 2.16: Layers in a transport corridor
The ground pillar or the „hardware‟ of a corridor consists of the physical infrastruc-
ture: roads, railways, ports, and so on. Built upon the actual infrastructure is the trans-
port system – the corridor‟s „software‟. The transport system consists of the means
and equipment necessary for the movement of goods and passengers along the infra-
structure. This is set into a coherent system and network by the many freight shippers,
haulers and terminal providers. Within the transport system, the actual freight flows
take place.
Framing the entire transport corridor and influencing both infrastructural decision, the
creation of transport systems and day to day freight flows is the general regulation of
society, including taxation on CO2 emissions, road pricing, environmental zones with
traffic restrictions, safety and security regulations regarding traffic, labour related regula-
tion, etc. An important point regarding regulation in the case of the STRING corridor is
50
Inspired by Gjesing, Hansen 2010.
29that the corridor, in spite of its limited size in a European context, is influenced by three national regulatory regimes, namely, the regulatory systems of Denmark, Germany, and Sweden. The general regulation naturally influences the demand and supply of transportation in a corridor by influencing, for example, the total cost of transport via taxation, road pric- ing, regulation of salaries and working conditions, and other factors. For example, in the case of the STRING corridor, cabotage impacts the freight flows. The price setting for crossing the Fehmarn link is another example of how general regulation influences the shaping of the corridor. Regulations, such as speed limits, maximum lengths and weight of trucks and environmental requirements to motors and emissions, can clearly influence the shape of the transport systems and freight flows None of the layers are more important or decisive than others. Also, within a corridor, the layers will naturally influence each other mutually by their patterns of de- mand and supply. As an example, freight flows will take place within a transport system, but transport systems change and adapt to the demands of freight flows. The same can be said with infrastructure. Transport systems and freight flows naturally have to follow existing infrastructural lines, though infrastructure will also continuously be adapted to existing or expected demands of freight flows and transport systems. Finally the different layers of the corridor are shaped and influenced by the complex system and network of actors in the corridor. Figure 2.17 on the following page illustrates how the actors are forming freight flows and transport systems in a corri- dor by influencing day to day decisions on routes and modes. Transport providers and transport buyers have the highest level of direct influence on day to day decisions of which routes and modes to use in a corridor. However, their decisions will always be strongly influenced by the actions of infrastructural providers as well as various external authorities. 30
Figure 2.17: Different levels on influence on actors’ day to day decisions in a trans-
port corridor
General regulation
Transport Tax
authorities authorities
Infrastructure
Transport
Transport
Terminal
providers
providers
Day to day
Level of direct influence on goods flows and decisions
transport modes in the corridor
on mode &
route
Safety/security
authorities (Transport buyers)
Infrastructure (and social partners)
authorities/providers
Climate and environment
authorities
authorities
Changing the functioning of a corridor to create a greener and more efficient corridor
requires addressing all the different layers and actors that form the corridor and influence
day to day decisions in it. Attention will now be turned to the different types of actors
within the corridor. The following actors are included in the description:
Public authorities
Major transport and logistics providers and buyers
Terminal providers
General stakeholders
Each type of actor is, in some way and to a varying degree of direct influence, part of the
institutionalisation of the corridor.
312.3.1 Public actors
An important point regarding regulation in the case of the STRING corridor is that the
corridor, in spite of its limited size in a European context, is influenced by three na-
tional regulatory regimes since the corridor connects three national states with vary-
ing institutional set-ups in terms of ministries, operational bodies, and administrative
levels that are directly or indirectly involved in the development of the STRING corridor.
In Denmark the Ministry of Transport (Transportministeriet‟) is the highest administra-
tive level with responsibility for the development of the infrastructure and transportation
system. Directly under the Ministry of Transport is the Danish Transport Authority (Trafik-
styrelsen) that governs the public transport sector on behalf of the Danish Ministry of
Transport and is engaged in national as well as international commitments. One of its
main tasks is to act as adviser to the Ministry of Transport on matters relating to trans-
port policy and strategic development of the transport sector.
The Danish Transport Authority is not directly involved in development of the STRING
corridor but is working with development of the Corridor 3 (Stockholm – Palermo) and
Corridor B (Stockholm - Napoli). They are thus partly working with the TEN-T Corridor
Helsinki – Valletta. More precisely, in 2012 the Danish Transport Authority was appointed
chairman for the development of Corridor 3 and Corridor B with regard to the establish-
ment of ERTMS and One Stop Shop (OSS). The Danish Transport Authority thus has a
coordinating role that involves working with an implementation/action plan and an infra-
structure investment plan. The board also includes representatives from the Ministry of
Industry (Näringsdepartementet) in Sweden and from the Federal Ministry of Transport,
Building and Urban Development (Bundesministerium für Verkehr, Bau und Stadtentwick-
lung) in Germany.
A management committee has been established that is responsible for the technical and
practical tasks in relation to the development of Corridor 3. In the management commit-
tee, the Danish Transport Authority cooperates with, among others, Rail Net Denmark
(BaneDanmark), Deutche Bane, The Swedish Transport Administration ( Trafikverket) and
Oresund Bridge Company (Oresundsbroen)51.
In Sweden, the institutional set-up is slightly different. The Ministry of Industry
(Näringsdepartementet) and the Swedish Transport Agency (Transportstyrelsen) is the
highest administrative level that shapes the development of the infrastructure and trans-
port system. The Swedish Transport Agency (Transportstyrelsen) is working to achieve
good accessibility, high quality, secure and environmentally sustainable rail, air, sea and
road transport. The Swedish Transport Agency (Transportstyrelsen) has overall responsi-
bility for drawing up regulations and ensuring that authorities, companies, organisations
and citizens abide by them. The Swedish Transport Agency (Trafikstyrelsen) was estab-
lished on the 1st of January 2009 and consists of four departments (The Civil Aviation,
The Maritime Department, The Traffic Registry Department and The Road and Rail De-
partment) that are responsible for regulation and permits52.
In Sweden, one operational body, the Swedish Transport Administration53 (Trafikverket)
51
Interview with The Danish Transport Authority (Trafikstyrelsen) and
http://www.trafikstyrelsen.dk/DA/Jernbanesikkerhed/Internationalt-arbejde/Godskorridor-3.aspx
52
http://www.transportstyrelsen.se/en/About-us/
53
Trafikverket includes the former Baneverket, Vägverket, Rikstrafiken and Rederinämnden
(http://www.trafikverket.se/Om-Trafikverket/Trafikverket/Snabbfakta-om-Trafikverket/)
32is responsible for the construction, operation, and maintenance of all state owned roads
and railways. They also develop long-term plans for the transport system on road, rail-
way, sea and flight. The Swedish Transport Administration serves as chair for the man-
agement committee established in relation to the development of Corridor 3 (see section
on Denmark).
The Swedish Transport Administration‟s work on establishing the corridor is coordinated
by a secretariat that was set up solely for this purpose. The primary task of the secreta-
riat is to take part in joint corridor-related meetings and working groups, and to be re-
sponsible for ensuring that all necessary measures are taken internally, with the aim of
fulfilling the requirements of the Regulation54. Furthermore, the Swedish Transport Ad-
ministration is directly involved in development of the STRING corridor by their partner-
ship in the project and is actively involved in the development of green transport corri-
dors, including the STRING project includes, the SuperGreen research consortium, Trans-
Baltic, Scandria and EastWest Transport Corridor II55.
In Germany, the Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Urban Development
(Bundesministerium für Verkehr, Bau und Stadtentwicklung) and the Federal Office for
Freight Transport (Bundesamt für Güterverkehr) are responsible on a strategic level for
the development of infrastructure and transport system that covers all 16 federal states
of Germany. Hamburg is one of three city-states. The states have significant scope of
authority within the fields of finance, taxation and culture. Thus a number of more „local‟
bodies are of importance for the development of infrastructure, namely, the state of
Hamburg, Schleswig-Holstein, and Mecklenburg-Vorpommern.
With the enforcement of the Fehmarn Belt Treaty the Federal Government of Germany
has guaranteed the provision of hinterland infrastructure in accordance with the treaty,
which is relevant in relation to the development of the STRING corridor and area. Up-
grading the B207 is especially important to the STRING corridor. The B207 is owned by
the Federal Government, but it is The Federal State of Schleswig-Holstein that has the
mandate for upgrading the road construction in the Fehmarn area including B207.
The State Company for Road Construction and Transport of Land Schleswig-Holstein (LBV
Schleswig-Holstein) carries out the actual planning, construction, and supervision of the
establishment of B207. The work is of strategic as well as of practical importance be-
cause the B207 is the extension of the existing motorway A1 from Hamburg and thus
represents an important connection between north and south of the STRING corridor56.
Furthermore, the federal government is responsible for the development of the railway
infrastructure since it owns the full share of DB Netz A/G, the owner of the publicly
owned railway infrastructure in Germany. They are thus also responsible for upgrading
the railway in the Fehmarn region that rrepresents a big bottleneck in the STRING corri-
dor (see section on railway infrastructure 2.2.2).
The federal German public stakeholders include the Federal Ministry of Transport, Build-
ing and Urban Development (Bundesministerium für Verkehr, Bau und Stadtentwicklung)
and the Federal Office for Freight Transport (Bundesamt für Güterverkehr). These stake-
54
http://www.trafikverket.se/Om-Trafikverket/Andra-sprak/English-Engelska/Rail-Freight-Corridor-3/How-we-
work/
55
http://www.trafikverket.se/Om-Trafikverket/Andra-sprak/English-Engelska/Green-Corridors/European-
Initiatives-and-Collaboration/
56
Lohse and Jespersen (2010): The Perception of the Fehmarnbelt connection among german stakeholders.
33You can also read
