Potential of modal shift Potential of modal shift to rail transport p Huib van Essen (CE Delft) Angelo Martino (TRT Trasporti e Territorio) Angelo Martino (TRT Trasporti e Territorio) TRT TRASPORTI E TERRITORIO SRL
Outline • Context • Modal shares and relative emissions • • Methodology for estimating modal shift potential Methodology for estimating modal shift potential • Capacity analysis • Literature survey • C Case studies di • GHG reduction potential of modal shift to rail • 2050 perspective • Rebound effects • Conclusions and recommendations CE Delft, 24 June 2011 2
Context • White Paper on Transport • Roadmap 2050 for decarbonising transport • • Various policy areas: Various policy areas: • Pricing policy (Eurovignet, Rail Infrastructure Charging, Energy Taxation) • Infrastructure policy (TEN T cohesion funds) Infrastructure policy (TEN-T, cohesion funds) • Regulation (CO 2 regulation, megatrucks, cabotage, speed, etc.) • Rail policy (interoperability, harmonisation, market structure) CE Delft, 24 June 2011 3
Modal split of freight transport (EU-27) 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% 0% 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Road Rail Inland Wat erways Pipelines CE Delft, 24 June 2011 4
Comparison of trend in the EU-15 and EU-12 CE Delft, 24 June 2011 5
Proj ected transport volumes per freight transport mode and market segment (billion tonne-km in 2020) 1800 1600 1400 1200 Miscell. goods 1000 Bulk 800 Cont ainer 600 400 200 0 Rail Road Rail Road <500 km >500 km S ea shipping excluded CE Delft, 24 June 2011 6
Modal split of passenger transport (EU-27) 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 Passenger Cars Railway Bus & Coach Air ot her CE Delft, 24 June 2011 7
Proj ected transport volumes per passenger transport mode and market segment (billion pass-km in 2020) 4500 4000 4000 3500 3000 >500 km 2500 100-500 km >100 km 2000 <100 km 1500 1000 500 0 0 Privat e Business Privat e Business Privat e Business Train Car Air CE Delft, 24 June 2011 8
Comparison of emissions from single modes C i f i i f i l d (estimates based on S ULTAN tool) Freight (g/tkm) Type of good 2020 2050 <500 km >500 km <500 km >500 km Rail Road Rail Road Rail Road Rail Road 13 131 10 98 6 116 5 87 Cont ainer 12 84 10 78 5 74 4 68 Bulk 13 13 141 141 10 10 105 105 6 6 124 124 5 5 93 93 Miscell. goods Miscell goods Passenger (g/pkm) Transport mode T t d 2020 2020 2050 2050 <100 100- >500 <100 100- >500 km 500 km km 500 km km km Train 46 31 25 16 11 4.7 Car (private use) 88 80 72 65 Car (business use) 150 159 122 129 Aviation Aviation 231 231 237 237 182 182 110 110 CE Delft, 24 June 2011 9
Methodology Three approaches for estimating modal shift potential: • Infrastructure capacity analysis • • Assessment of existing studies on overall modal shift potential Assessment of existing studies on overall modal shift potential • Analysis of illustrative case studies Calculation of GHG impacts: C l l i f GHG i • Combining the results of the three approaches • Using average GHG emissions per tkm per distance class • For road freight only large trucks • Transport to/ from terminals and detour effects included CE Delft, 24 June 2011 10
Infrastructure capacity analysis Two different levels of analysis: - Geographical basis : the EU-27, EU-15, EU-12, and Europe which adds to Geographical basis : the EU 27, EU 15, EU 12, and Europe which adds to EU-27, Croatia, Norway, S witzerland and Turkey. - Hierarchical level: Primary network which corresponds to ERIM network Hierarchical level: Primary network, which corresponds to ERIM network, and S econdary network, represented by the rest of the network. Three time thresholds: years 2020 2030 and 2050 Three time thresholds: years 2020, 2030 and 2050. CE Delft, 24 June 2011 11
T Two different supply scenarios for capacity diff l i f i analysis • Base scenario: current network Upgraded scenario: it takes into account the planned development, where 1. the main component is the TEN-T implementation program: • The development of the primary network at the expenses of secondary network. • The shift from single track lines to double or more tracks lines, which is seen both in the primary and secondary network. CE Delft, 24 June 2011 12
Network length development in 2020 and 2030 Network length development in 2020 and 2030 in the upgraded scenario Aggregate 2008 2020 2030 Total Single Double Total 1 track 2 tracks Total 1 track 2 tracks line track track length (km) (km) length (km) (km) length lines lines (km) (km) (km) (km) (km) Europe Europe 230,776 230 776 138,842 138 842 91,934 91 934 230,776 230 776 132,407 132 407 98 369 98,369 230,776 230 776 123,553 123 553 107 223 107,223 EU-27 212,108 122,794 89,314 212,108 116,542 95,566 212,108 107,941 104,167 EU 15 EU-15 150,569 150,569 79,253 79,253 71,316 71,316 150,569 150,569 74,261 74,261 76,308 76,308 150,569 150,569 72,835 72,835 77,734 77,734 EU-12 61,539 43,541 17,998 61,539 42,281 19,258 61,539 35,556 25,983 Primary y 48,464 , 12,116 , 36,348 , 52,341 , 9,421 , 42,920 , 55,482 , 8,479 , 47,002 , S econdary 182,312 126,726 55,586 178,435 122,985 55,450 175,294 115,074 60,220 CE Delft, 24 June 2011 13
Evolution of average capacity use in the base Evolution of average capacity use in the base scenario The theoretical capacity of the network (in train-km per year) is calculated by applying a standard daily capacity to each section of the rail network: • • 70 trains/ day for single track lines 70 trains/ day for single track lines • 200 trains/ day for double tracks lines To calculate the capacity use, the theoretical capacity is compared with the traffic demand (= passenger train-km plus the number of freight train-km) average number of yearly train-km Current capacity utilization = theoretical capacity of the corresponding line theoretical capacity of the corresponding line sections CE Delft, 24 June 2011 14
Evolution of average capacity use in the base Evolution of average capacity use in the base scenario 100% 90% 80% 80% 70% 2008 60% 50% % 2020 40% 2030 30% 20% 10% 0% CE Delft, 24 June 2011 15
Evolution of average capacity use in the Evolution of average capacity use in the upgraded scenario 100% 90% 90% 80% 70% 2008 60% 50% 2020 40% 2030 30% 20% 20% 10% 0% CE Delft, 24 June 2011 16
Evolution of average capacity use on the six Evolution of average capacity use on the six main corridors in the upgraded scenario 100% 90% 90% 80% 70% 60% 2008 2008 50% 2020 40% 30% 2030 20% 20% 10% 0% r A r B r C r D r F r E otal Corridor Corridor Corridor Corridor Corridor To Corrido CE Delft, 24 June 2011 17
Conclusion on capacity analysis U Useable capacity in EU-27 upgraded scenario (year 2020) bl it i EU 27 d d i ( 2020) Capacity use Max capacity use ratio Wh l Whole network t k 52% 52% Primary Network 57% 80% S econdary Network 49% 65% Corridors (total) 69% 90% • The current network can accommodate part of the growth potentials, • The current network can accommodate part of the growth potentials depending on the allocation of freight and passenger transport • Planned investments and the installation of ERTMS • Planned investments and the installation of ERTMS signalling systems on the signalling systems on the corridors can significantly expand their capacity CE Delft, 24 June 2011 18
Estimates for growth potential rail freight S tudy Measures studied Scope Rail growth Full market opening, EU 100% Vasallo and interoperability, international Fagan (2005) focus and productivity-enhancing infrast ructure a Theoretical potential a 90% EU EEA (2008) b Potential from a practical b 7% perspective (BGL) 131-211 billion Euro investment in EU core 8-15% FERRMED infrast ructure & quality of supply (66% GDP) (2008) TEN network construction EU 12% NEA (2004a) ( ) a Road pricing based on MAUT a 14% Germany ZEW (2008) b 24% b 60% higher speed Road pricing based on MAUT Netherlan 3-4% PRC (2007) ds Full internalisation EU 10% IMPACT (2008) Full internalisation EU 10-32% Significance (2009) Doubling / tripling of oil price g p g p EU 6% HOP! (2008) ( ) CE Delft, 24 June 2011 19
Explanation of differences in traffic volumes E l i f diff i ffi l between US and EU-15 (2000) S ource: Vassallo and Fagan, 2005 CE Delft, 24 June 2011 20
Overview of cases Freight: • Transport of fresh produce • • Modal shift in S Modal shift in S witzerland witzerland • Port-hinterland transport • Improved interoperability • MAUT i G MAUT in Germany and in Austria d i A i Passenger: • High-speed rail versus (low-cost) airlines • Transport to and from train stations • Rail business card • Estimated potential of upscaled cases CE Delft, 24 June 2011 21
Recommend
More recommend
