Content. Throughput in Antwerp, Rotterdam and Zeebrugge Technological and spatial development of container facilities Current issues

Transcription

1

2 2

3 Content Throughput in Antwerp, Rotterdam and Zeebrugge Technological and spatial development of container facilities Current issues 3

4 Top container port regions in the world Container throughput in million TEU Cluster Main container ports 1985 R 1990 R 1995 R 2000 R 2002 R 2004 R Pearl River Delta Hong Kong, Shenzhen, Guangzhou Singapore region Singapore, Tanjung Pelepas Yangtze River Delta Shanghai, Ningbo Rhine-Scheldt Delta Rotterdam, Antwerp, Zeebrugge San Pedro Bay Los Angeles, Long Beach Taiwan Kaohsiung, Keelung Korean Twin Hub Busan, Gwangyang Helgoland Bay Hamburg, Bremen Tokyo Bay Tokyo, Yokohama Source: ITMMA based on individual port data of CI Online 4

5 Top 15 European container ports ( 000 TEU) TEU % 1000 TEU % 1000 TEU % 1000 TEU % 1000 TEU % 1 Rotterdam % Rotterdam % Rotterdam % Rotterdam % Rotterdam % 2 Bremen % Antwerp % Hamburg % Hamburg % Hamburg % 3 Hamburg % Hamburg % Antwerp % Antwerp % Antwerpen % 4 Antwerp % Bremen % Felixstowe % Bremen % Bremen % 5 Tilbury % Felixstowe % Bremen % Felixstowe % Gioia Tauro % 6 Le Havre % Le Havre % Algeciras % Gioia Tauro % Algeciras % 7 Felixstowe % Marseille % Le Havre % Algeciras % Felixstowe % 8 Southampton % Leghorn % La spezia % Genoa % Le Havre % 9 Zeebrugge % Tilbury % Barcelona % Le Havre % Valencia % 10 Genoa % Barcelona % Southampton % Valencia % Barcelona % 11 Marseille % Algeciras % Valencia % Barcelona % Genoa % 12 Barcelona % Genoa % Genoa % Piraeus % Piraeus % 13 Hull % Valencia % Piraeus % Marsaxlokk % Marsaxlokk % 14 Leghorn % Zeebrugge % Zeebrugge % Southampton % Southampton % 15 Bilbao % Southhamp % Marsaxlokk % La spezia % Zeebrugge % Top % Top % Top % Top % Top % Top % Top % Top % Top % Top % Top % Top % Top % Top % Top % TOTAL % TOTAL % TOTAL % TOTAL % TOTAL % (47 ports) (47 ports) (47 ports) (47 ports) (47 ports) 5

6 Cargo throughput ( 000 TEU) in the Hamburg-Le Havre range (est.) Rotterdam (NL) Hamburg (D) Antwerp (B) Bremen/Bremerhaven (D) Le Havre (F) Zeebrugge (B) Dunkirk (F) n.a. Rouen (F) Amsterdam (NL) n.a. Wilhelmshaven (D) n.a. Ghent (B) n.a. Ostend (B) Flushing (NL) n.a. TOTAL Source: data respective port authorities 6

7 Container throughput (in 1000 TEU) Container throughput in 1000 TEU Antwerpen Rotterdam Zeebrugge Antwerp - share in Hamburg-Le Havre range Rotterdam - share in Hamburg-Le Havre range Zeebrugge - share in Hamburg-Le Havre range 50% 45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Market share in Hamburg-Le Havre range

8 Container distribution in the large load centres of the Hamburg - Le Havre range, TEU 1997 and % 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 11% 31% 50% 16.0% 28% 20% Le Havre Bremen Hamburg Antwerpen Rotterdam % 100% 20% 10% 49% 27% 16% 38% 30% 37% 90% 80% 0% Europe America Africa Asia Australasia TOTAL 70% % 50% 40% 14% 31% 50% 21.5% 25% 23% 30% 20% 10% 34% 25% 16% 31% 34% 30% 0% Europe America Africa Asia Australasia TOTAL 8

9 Container terminal development history The early years of containerisation in Antwerp Churchill Dock: Hessenatie-Neptunus Noord Natie Gylsen Havenbedrijf Pays etc Leopold Dock The first container gantry crane of Hessenatie-Neptunus at the Churchill Dock in Antwerp 9

10 Container terminal development - History The early years of containerisation in Rotterdam Waalhaven 1970s: start operations Unitcentre City Centre Shift of ALL containers to Maasvlakte? Not feasible! (study of 1974) Eemhaven May 1966: Quick Dispatch - Prinses Beatrixhaven August 1967: start operations ECT 1970: ECT Sea Land terminal 10

11 The handling of the first container vessels (Vessel of United States Lines) 11

12 Early solutions for container moves on terminals Source: Hinterland, no. 56, 1968 Side-loader 12

13 The straddle carrier s 1 over 3 13

14 Container terminal development -history Antwerp in the 1980s 1982: Delwaide Dock Hessenatie Noord Natie Seaport Terminals Delwaide Dock Terminal depth of 600 m 75% of total container throughput in

15 Container terminal development - history Antwerp in the 1990s: on-stream facilities 1997: Noordzeeterminal 1990: Europaterminal 1999: upgrading Hessenatie terminal at Churchill dock 15

16 Spatial distribution of container throughput in the Antwerp port area 100% % in total container throughput Antwerp 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% Scheldt Terminals Delwaide Dock Churchill dock Other terminals (multipurpose) 10% 0%

17 Container terminal development - history Rotterdam in the 1980s Maasvlakte 1984: first vessel at Delta Terminal (now DMU) City Centre 17

18 Container terminal development - history Rotterdam in the 1990s Maasvlakte 1993: opening of DSL (now DDN) Waalhaven Uniport (Morcon), Hanno Improved accessibility City Centre Plan Delta : first phase DDE 2000: first phase DDW 1990s: barge terminal, rail terminal, Distripark Maasvlakte, etc : Maersk Delta b.v. Eemhaven Extention ECT terminal Opening RST 18

19 Spatial distribution of the container throughput in the Rotterdam port area (DD = diversion distance) Rotterdam - Maasvlakte (DD = 17 km) Rotterdam - Eemhaven & Waalhaven (DD = 40) Container throughput in 1000 TEU

20 Container terminal development - History Containerisation in Zeebrugge Successes and failures of containerisation in Zeebrugge: CAST dedicated terminal in inner port: 1991: Opening 1995: CAST moves out of Zeebrugge. Terminal is now used for RoRo Flanders Container Terminal 1994: Start Flanders Container Terminal (0.6m TEU) by Seaport Terminals/Katoen Natie 2005: concession taken away after years of severe underutilization OCHZ (now CHZ) Success story 20

21 Container terminal development - history Zeebrugge in the 1990s Deepsea container terminals (lolo) 1 = OCHZ - Hessenatie/IFB (now CHZ) 2 = FCT - Seaport Terminals/ Katoen Natie ( ) 3 = CAST terminal ( ) inner port Rail terminals I = Rail terminal inner port II = Shunting yard IFB III = Rail terminal outer port

22 ROTTERDAM Today A Planning area Maasvlakte 2 a 7 6 III II b C c Diepzeecontainerterminals 1 = RST (Rotterdam Shortsea Terminal) 2 = Home Terminal - ECT (Eemhaven) 3 = Hanno + Morcon (Waalhaven) 4 = ECT (Waalhaven) 5 = Delta Dedicated North (DDE) - ECT 6 = Delta Dedicated East (DDE) - ECT 7 = Delta Dedicated West (DDW) - ECT 8 = Delta Multi-User terminal (DMU) - ECT 9 = APM Terminals Gespecialiseerde binnenvaartterminals A = Barge terminal (Hartelhaven) - ECT B = Waalhaven Terminal en Barge Center Waalhaven (Waalhaven) - Waalhaven Groep C = Holland Terminals (Botlek) - Hessenatie 2 Gespecialiseerde spoorterminals I = RSC Rotterdam (Eemhaven) - NS Cargo/GHR II = ECT terminal Maasvlakte - ECT III = Rail Terminal West - ECT Distriparks a = Distripark Maasvlakte b = Distripark Botlek c = Distripark Eemhaven I B 22

23 The Delta terminal complex at the Maasvlakte - Rotterdam DMU DDW APM Terminals DDE DDN New barge/sss terminal (under construction) Source ECT 23

24 AGV s used on DDN, DDW and DDE (ECT) Maasvlakte Rotterdam Source ECT 24

25 Container terminal development Future projects in Rotterdam Euromax terminal (first phase 2007) P&O Nedlloyd (?)/ ECT Second Maasvlakte (2013?) 25

26 Container terminal development Future projects in Rotterdam Maasvlakte II Euromax (5 m TEU; 2m TEU in first phase) Delta (Maasvlakte I) 26

27 ANTWERP (situation on January 1, 2006) 1 A B Deepsea container terminals 1 = Noordzee Terminal - HNN 2 = Europa Terminal - HNN 3 = Delwaide Dock - P&O Ports (future MSC) 4 = Delwaide Dock Home Terminal MSC/HNN 5 = Churchilldock - P&O Ports 6 = Churchilldock - HNN 7 = Hansadok - P&O Ports 8 = Deurganck Dock Antwerp Gateway P&O Ports Consortium (first phase operational since Sept. 2005) 9 = Deurganck Dock HNN (first phase operational since Dec. 2005) 10 = provisional planning zone Saeftinghe Dock 2 3 I IV 5 8 II 7 6 Barge terminals for container traffic A = Barge terminal Noordzeeterminal B = Barge terminal Europaterminal III Rail terminals for container traffic I = Cirkeldyck terminal Belgian Rail II = Zomerweg terminal Belgian Rail III = Schijnpoort terminal Belgian Rail IV = Main Hub Belgian Rail 27

28 Actual container throughput compared to forecasted throughput as reported in various economic studies conducted in the 1990s 6 5,5 5 4,5 4 3,5 3 2,5 2 1,5 1 0, Throughput in TEU Actual throughput Antwerp Port Authority (1990) Cost-benefit analysis Second Scheldt terminal (1992) OSC and Marconsult (1993) OSC (1995) OSC (1997) Verbeke et al (1996) Cost-benefit analysis container dock west - working strategy 1 (1997) Cost-benefit analysis container dock west - working strategy 2 (1997) 28

29 Deurganckdock (about 7 million TEU capacity) and proposed Saftingendock (20 berths) Deurganckdock opened in July 2005 First operations: Antwerp Gateway - Sept 2005, HNN - Dec km quay walls, 44 gantry cranes, 14.5m draft, 326 ha 7 million TEU capacity PSA - HNN ANTWERP GATEWAY 29

30 Picture of Deurganckdock November

31 Cross-section of the river Scheldt - North Sea to locks of the Antwerp port Beam shipping lane > 500 m 500 m 300 m 31 Flushing Honte Borssele Terneuzen Hansweert Valkenisse Bath Zandvliet Dock system Antwerp km North Sea

32 Zeebrugge Future extension Concession APM terminals OCHZ - HNN/CMA-CGM Capacity: 0.8 million TEU 32

33 Current issues 1. Functional interdependence and inter-port traffic 2. Structural changes in container handling market 3. Port competition and hinterland transportation 33

34 1. Functional interdependence and intra- and inter-port traffic Container exchanges over land and modal split in TEU Rotterdam Zeebrugge Total 1996 : 569,492 TEU Road: 12.4% Rail : 12.7% Inland navigation: 74.9% Total 1999: 881,000 TEU Road: 8.1% Rail: 14.8% Inland navigation: 77.1% Antwerp +55% Total 1996: 47,435 TEU Rail : 88% Total 1999: 174,000 TEU x3,6 Rail: 92% 34

35 2. Structural changes in the container handling market Scale increases in vessel size: evolution of the world cellular fleet Jan 1991 Shares Jan 1996 Shares Jan 2001 Shares Jan 2006 Shares >5000 TEU 0 0.0% % % % 4000/4999 TEU % % % % 3000/3999 TEU % % % % 2000/2999 TEU % % % % 1500/1999 TEU % % % % 1000/1499 TEU % % % % 500/999 TEU % % % % 100/499 TEU % % % % TOTAL % % % % Source: BRS Alphaliner Fleet Report, September

36 2. Structural changes in the container handling market Slot capacity operated by the top twenty carriers January 1980 September 1995 January 2000 November 2005 Carrier Slot cap. Carrier Slot cap. Carrier Slot cap. Carrier Slot cap. 1 Sea-Land Sea-Land AP Moller - Maersk Maersk Lines Hapag-Lloyd Maersk Evergreen MSC OCL Evergreen P&O Nedlloyd CMA/CGM Group Maersk COSCO Hanjin/DSR Senator Evergreen Group NYK Line NYK Line MSC Hapag Lloyd/CP Ships Evergreen Nedlloyd NOL/APL China Shipping OOCL Mitsui OSK Lines COSCO NOL/APL Zim P&OCL NYK Line Hanjin/Senator US Line Hanjin Shipping CP Ships / Americana COSCO APL MSC Zim NYK Line Mitsui OSK Lines APL Mitsui OSK Lines OOCL Farrell Lines Zim CMA/CGM CSAV Group NOL K-Line K-Line K Line Trans Freight Line DSR-Senator Hapag-Lloyd Mitsui OSK Lines CGM Hapag-Lloyd Hyundai Zim Yang Ming NOL OOCL Yang Ming Nedlloyd Yang Ming Yang Ming Hamburg-Süd Columbas Line Hyundai China Shipping Hyundai Safmarine OOCL UASC Pacific Int'l Lines Ben Line CMA Wan Hai Wan Hai Lines Slop capacity of top C4-index 38.6% 35.7% 41.4% 45.9% Share top 5 in top % 42.3% 47.7% 56.3% Share top 10 in top % 67.5% 71.7% 73.9% Source: compiled from BRS Alphaliner and Containerisation International 36

37 2. Structural changes in the container handling market Concentration at the port demand side Strategic alliances, mergers, acquisitions MSC: 2 million TEU in Antwerp Maersk Sealand: 1.5 million TEU in Rotterdam CMA-CGM: 0.4 million TEU in Zeebrugge Shipping lines enter the stevedoring business Rotterdam: Maersk Line (APM Terminals) and P&O Nedlloyd (Euromax) Antwerp: MSC (MSC Home Terminal JV with PSA HNN) Cosco Pacific, CMA-CGM and P&O Nedlloyd (Antwerp Gateway) Zeebrugge: CMA-CGM (35% in CHZ) 37

38 Felixstowe Hamburg Harwich Thamesport Bremerhaven Tilbury Rotterdam Southampton Antwerp Zeebrugge Le Havre Zeebrugge = Eurogate = Hutchison PH = PSA (incl. HNN) = P&O Ports = APM Ports Lisbon Sines (Verdere betrokkenheid PSA is een vraagteken) Algeciras (joint-venture (Port Synergy met joint CMA-CGM) venture with CMA-CGM) Source: Notteboom Dunkirk Marseilles (joint-venture (Port Synergy met CMA-CGM) joint venture with CMA-CGM) Cagliari Genoa La Spezia Cagliari (sinds eind 2002) Marsaxlokk (Port Synergy) Livorno Venice Salerno Ravenna Gioia Tauro 38

39 2. Structural changes in the container handling market ROTTERDAM 1967: founding of ECT by five stevedoring companies in order to cope with high capital requirements and risks 1992: merger ECT - Unitcentre (Delta ) 1998: new shareholder structure for ECT 2000: : Hutchison acquires shareholding in ECT 2001: : Maersk Delta bv starts operations (now APM Terminals) 2004: : Hutchison full owner of ECT 2005: : ECT acquires Uniport 39

40 2. Structural changes in the container handling market ANTWERP The first wave 1987: founding of ACT (Müller( ller-thomson Antwerp and Havenbedrijf Pays) 1988: : CMB acquires Hessenatie (combination with Gylsen) 1989: : Katoen Natie acquires Seaport Terminals The second wave 2000: : P&O Ports acquires the container activities of Seaport Terminals 2000: : P&O Ports acquires ACT/MT 2000: Hessenatie and Noord Natie announce to join forces 2001: PSA acquires a majority stake in Hesse Noord Natie (HNN)( Now PSA full owner of HNN, PSA in competition with DP World to acquire P&O Ports Antwerp Gateway consortium: P&O Ports, P&O Nedlloyd, CMA-CGM, CGM, Duisport, Cosco Pacific 40

41 2. Structural changes in the container handling market ZEEBRUGGE : Dedicated terminal CAST : Seaport Terminals operates Flanders Container Terminal (did not get hold of concession in Antwerp!) Dec 2004: OCHZ (now CHZ) under full ownership of PSA-HNN 2005: competition between CMA-CGM and APM Terminals for concession former Flanders Container Terminal 2005: CMA-CGM acquires minority shareholding in CHZ 2006: APM Terminals will start operations 41

42 2. Structural changes in the container handling market The attitude of the port authorities Rotterdam Municipal Port Management: Model of one big player (i.e. ECT) Dedicated terminals, but preferably with shareholding ECT Antwerp Port Authority: Model of strong internal port competition Not eager to allow dedicated terminals Past practices: strong divergence between Rotterdam and Antwerp Today s practice: Market dynamics resulted in more or less same market structure Antwerp: 2 main players (P&O Ports, PSA), involvement shipping lines Rotterdam: 2 main players (ECT, APM), involvement shipping lines 42

43 3. Port competition The orange boomerang Source: Cushman & Wakefield, Healey & Baker 43

44 3. Port competition Port dynamics in the Med Med ports going north?. Algeciras. Barcelona. Valencia. Venice.. Trieste Koper Genoa.. Ravenna. La Spezia Fos Leghorn... Ancona Bar Civitavecchia. Naples Salerno.. Taranto. Cagliari. Gioia Tauro Main shipping lane. Malta.. Odessa. Ilyichevsk. Constanza Varna... Haydarpasa Armaport Kumport Thessaloniki Gemlik.. Izmir Piraeus. Mersin. Lattakia. Limassol..Tartous Beirut. Haifa Ashod. Alessandria Damietta Port Said 44

45 3. Port competition Existing and planned container ports in northern Europe Wilhelmshaven Bremerhaven Hamburg UNITED KINGDOM HOLLAND Amsterdam Felixstowe Harwich Tilbury Thamesport Southampton Zeeland Seaports Zeebrugge Rotterdam Dunkirk Gent Antwerp Le Havre Rouen FRANCE GERMANY Large load centers BELGIUM (> 1.25 million million TEU TEU throughput in 2003) in 2004) Medium-sized load centers (500,000 to 1.25 million million TEU) TEU) Small container ports (<200,000 TEU in 2003) 2004) New (proposed) terminal developments in non -hub ports: - Ceres terminal - Amsterdam (open since 2001) - Westerscheldt Container Terminal - Flushing (2009?) - JadeWeserPort - Wilhelmshaven - Wilhelmshaven - Dibden Bay Southampton (project cancelled) - Bathside Bay - Harwich - London Gateway - river Thames - Quai de Flandres - Dunkirk 45

46 3. Port competition Amsterdam & Westerscheldt Container Terminal - Flushing WCT Flushing Will be operated by PSA-HNN Still in planning phase Open in 2010? Capacity: >2 million TEU Amsterdam Operated by NYK Indented berth for 2-sided handling Open since 2001 First services in 2005 (Grand Alliance) Capacity: 0.95 million TEU 46

47 3. Port competition The market share of Rotterdam (basis= TEU in 1999) Bremen Hamburg Antwerpen Rotterdam Le Havre > 90% 70%-90% 50%-70% 30-50% 15-30% 5-15% <5% niet beschikbaar 47

48 3. Port competition The market share of Antwerp (basis= TEU in 1999) Bremen Hamburg Rotterdam Antwerp Le Havre > 90% 70%-90% 50%-70% 30-50% 15-30% 5-15% <5% not available 48

49 3. Port competition Discontinuous character of a port s service area Kilometers Netherlands ROTTERDAM Port A Continuous hinterland Port A Discontinuous hinterland Port A 'Island' formation Avelgem ANTWERP Belgium Port B Continuous hinterland Port B Discontinuous hinterland Port B Core of the service area Middle section of the service area Outer section of the service area Maritime load centre France Source: Notteboom & Rodrigue (2005) Lux Inland terminal 49

50 Distribution per distance class of inland container transport by road Antwerpen Rotterdam >350 Distance class in km % in total hinterland transport of containers by truck

51 Container modal split for load centres in the Le Havre Hamburg range - in %, excluding sea-sea transhipment Rail Road Barge Rotterdam 14,5% 13,0% 10,0% 51,3% 48,7% 50,0% 34,2% 39,0% 40,0% Antwerp 7,8% 8,8% 9,5% 64,5% 61,3% 59,5% 27,7% 29,9% 31,0% Le Havre 14,3% 11,4% 12,4% 84,6% 85,3% 82,8% 1,3% 3,1% 4,8% Zeebrugge 34,4% 41,9% 40,2% 50,6% 48,8% 55,1% 15,1% 9,2% 4,7% Dunkirk 9,0% 13,5% 20,5% 90,0% 82,5% 76,7% 1,0% 4,0% 2,7% Hamburg 29,7% 28,7% 28,7% 70,1% 69,9% 69,8% 0,2% 1,4% 1,7% Bremerhaven 33,1% 36,0% 30,6% 65,0% 62,0% 67,3% 1,9% 2,0% 2,0% Source: data respective port authorities 51

52 Inland ports in north-western Europe (source EFIP) 52

53 Rail networks Liberalisation has increased number of container shuttle operators 10 in the Netherlands, 4 in Belgium Cherry-picking Collapse of hub-and-spoke networks (replaced by selection of direct shuttles), e.g. NEN, Qualitynet,.. 53

54 Felixstowe Hamburg Harwich Thamesport Bremerhaven Tilbury Rotterdam Southampton Antwerp Zeebrugge Le Havre = Eurogate = Hutchison PH = PSA (incl. HNN) = P&O Ports = APM Ports Lisbon Sines (Verdere betrokkenheid PSA is een vraagteken) The East-West axes of P&O Ports and HPH? -Barge and rail -Role Duisburg! Algeciras (joint-venture (Port Synergy met joint CMA-CGM) venture with CMA-CGM) Source: Notteboom Marseilles (joint-venture (Port Synergy met CMA-CGM) joint venture with CMA-CGM) Cagliari Genoa La Spezia Cagliari (sinds eind 2002) Marsaxlokk (Port Synergy) The North-South axis of Eurogate: -Rail! Boxxpress.de, Sogemar (cf. Hannibal Express) -Terminal Dortmund, Interporti Livorno Venice Salerno Ravenna Gioia Tauro 54

55 Logistics polarisation in the Benelux Kilometers Harlingen Leeuwarden Groningen Drachten Veendam Seaport in Rhine-Scheldt Delta Alkmaar Meppel Zaandam Beverwijk Amsterdam Kampen Almelo Hengelo Hillegom Netherlands Utrecht Ede ROTTERDAM Zutphen Delta seaport system with A. a/d Rijn Valburg multi-zone polarisation Gorinchem Nijmegem Oss Oosterhout Den Bosch Emmerich Zeeland Seaports Moerdijk Tilburg Gennep Duisburg Zeebrugge Krefeld Dortmund ANTWERP Helmond Venlo Ostend Deurne Neuss Duesseldorf Ghent Meerhout Genk Born Dormagen Willebroek Wielsbeke Stein Cologne Grimbergen Avelgem Brussels Bonn Belgium Liège Lille Inland Container Terminal (barge or multimodal) Growth region European Distribution (outside seaport system) Germany Valenciennes Andernach Koblenz France Source: Notteboom Lux Mertert 55

56 Future site of TriLogiPort Port of Liège Site of 100ha, including 12ha for container terminal (1850 quay) 90 ha owned by Région wallonne (Hermalle-sous-Argenteau), but since June 11, 2004 under the authority of Port Autonome de Liège. 56

57 Thank you for your attention! Any further questions: 57