 |
| The Port of Rotterdam |
Transporting
containers across most of Europe from northern ports is currently
cheaper and more sustainable than via southern ports such as Koper,
Genoa and Constanta despite their shorter transit times to Asia,
Panteia, a consultancy said.
The northern ports will
become even more competitive as Europe seeks to reduce the environmental
impact of supply chains, according to the report commissioned by the
Rotterdam Port Authority and Deltalinqs, a Dutch industry association.
“The Northern European ports perform well because many large container vessels
call here and much of the hinterland transport is done by inland
shipping and rail. This provides for a relatively small ecological
footprint” said Allard Castelein, chief executive officer of the
Rotterdam Port Authority.
“The report also shows that
further improvement is possible, especially by using LNG (liquefied
natural gas) as a transport fuel and making logistics more efficient
through IT. These are two important challenges for the coming years.”
Mega-ships
with capacities of up to 20,000 twenty-foot-equivalent units, which
have much lower carbon dioxide emissions per container than 10,000 TEU
ships, call more frequently at northern hubs than at the smaller
southern European ports “because more goods are shipped to and from this
densely populated region.”
The report concludes that
imposing a Sulphur Emission Control Area, currently restricted to the
North Sea, the English Channel and the Baltic Sea, to the Mediterranean
will not impact the market share of European ports.
The
major shippers and logistics firms interviewed by Panteia said price was
the most important factor in choosing ports followed by service and
reliability, with sustainability not seen as an important criterion.
“Sustainability is a deal maker, but not a deal breaker, yet,” the Rotterdam Port Authority said.
The Panteia report contrasts with the findings of a recent study by Drewry Supply Chain Advisors that said the traditional gateway ports in Northwest Europe no longer hold all of the trump cards on the Asian container trades.
The
cheapest option to ship a container from China to southern Germany was
via Rotterdam and Hamburg, but only by a margin of $150 and $100,
respectively, against Koper in Slovenia, which has a three-day transit
time advantage.
“As such we believe Shanghai-to-Munich
via Koper is a true Best-Route contender for shippers with time
sensitive cargoes,” Drewry said.
Southern European ports
will also become more attractive as freight rates to the Mediterranean,
which have traditionally been higher than those to northern Europe,
have recently become cheaper than those on the longer haul.
South
European intermodal operators are also developing “exciting and
competitive” concepts that will be boosted when the trans-Alpine
Gotthard rail tunnel opens in June.
“More shippers will
look to route via southern gateway ports as the maritime price
differential equalizes and intermodal connectivity improves,” Drewry
said.
While Rotterdam, Europe’s top container hub, is
bullish about its ability to see off the challenge from upcoming
southern European ports, other northern gateways are less confident of
maintaining their market share.
Antwerp recently urged
Rotterdam, its closest rival, to join forces to meet the challenge of
China’s growing investment in the southern European waterfront that
could lure container traffic from the Le Havre-Hamburg range.
The
two ports could build joint storage facilities for Asian cargo bound
for central and Eastern Europe, the Belgian port’s CEO Eddy Bruyninckx
suggested. “We each play our part, but it would be wise to join forces
to ship goods to Poland, the Czech Republic and Hungary,” he told Dutch
newspaper Financieelle Dagblad.
“China wants to lessen
its dependence on northern European ports,” Frans Paul van der Pullen,
an analyst at the Clingendeal Institute, told the paper.
“China
will eventually be able to ship products to central Europe more quickly
via southern ports than through Rotterdam or Antwerp.”
