Electrifying the future Rotterdam’s’ Trucks

(1)

Table of content

2014

Maarten van Lieshoud, Wietske van der Kamp, Joao Luca Horta & Bram Popkema Interdisciplinary project

Electrifying the future

Rotterdam’s’ Trucks

(2)

Abstract

As the port of Rotterdam is the biggest of Europe it produces a fairly large amount of CO2 emissions.

Emissions from the port of Rotterdam mostly come from the transport of containers by road. These emissions provide a deterioration of the environmental conditions. This research focussed on the decrease of atmospheric CO2 by changing the trucks that drive in and out the Rotterdam port. Different

information sources are used to figure out which way of transport is the most sustainable. By combining these information with the needs and possibilities for the population and authorities there is a possible solution for the CO2 emissions by making the traffic less polluting.

(8)

1. Introduction

During an interview in 2010, someone asked Stephen Hawking: “Which scientific discovery or advance would you like to see in your lifetime?”, and Stephen replied: “I would like nuclear fusion to become a practical power source. It would provide an inexhaustible supply of energy, without pollution or global warming.” Nuclear fusion it is still not a practical power source but there are other improvements in our daily lives that can reduce pollution and global warming.

Human population is growing exponentially, along with the demand for energy in the transport system and “Image 1” shows us that transportation in the Netherlands is the second most energy consuming sector existing.

Image 1 - Megatons of Oil Equivalent (Mtoe) is variable based in the quantity of energy liberated from burning crude oil (International Energy Agency, 2008).

An increase in population demands more transport capacity for materials and products and means an increase of CO2 emissions. Worldwide, transport is the second biggest generator of CO2 emissions as

shown in Image 2, right after electricity and heat generation from fossil fuel combustion (International Energy Agency, 2012).

(9)

Image 2 - Carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuel combustion (International Energy Agency, 2012).

That is why it is necessary to change the transport energy sources to renewables and reduce carbon dioxide (CO2) and other Greenhouse Gas emissions (GHGs) in the years to come.

The population needs efficient, cheap and secure transportation that reduces the climatological changes and general air pollution. As the executive director of the International Energy Agency, Claude Mandil said in 2005: “Oil and gas supply security and climate change continue to represent prominent

challenges for all countries. They are particularly pressing in the transportation sector, which still relies almost exclusively on oil. Reducing the dependence on hydrocarbons and the emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) is becoming increasingly urgent.” (Prospects for Hydrogen and Fuel Cells, 2005, p. 3) The Netherlands has an important position in the industrial scenario of the continent due to its geographical location and the Rotterdam port it is one of the main entrance points to Europe through the ocean, being the second biggest port in the world, after the Shanghai port. Image 3 shows that most of the energy produced in The Netherlands is still generated from non-renewable sources, such as gas and oil.

(10)

Image 3- Supply-Demand Balance of energy sources in The Netherlands (International Energy Agency, 2008).

The transportation of materials and products through ports all around the globe is basically made with diesel trucks. Those trucks are also an expressive part of transportation in Rotterdam, a significant contributor to CO2 emissions. The government and private companies around the port of Rotterdam

have a major role in that subject, how can they help reduce CO2 emissions? What other technology

could be used in trucks? Also accounting for trucks that use experimental technologies there are the following options: gasoline fuel, propane, diesel, biodiesel, compressed or liquefied natural gas, ethanol, hydrogen, and electricity. This led to the following research question: "What improvements in truck transportation going in and out of the Rotterdam port can reduce their CO2 emissions, with the investments of private companies and the government, also supported by the community?"

(11)

2. Theoretical Framework

To so research to sustainable investments in the port of Rotterdam, a proper theoretical background knowledge is needed. Due to the interdisciplinary approach of this research there is a very diverse theoretical framework. Knowledge from technical, economic view and social issues are elaborated in the following paragraphs.

Enhanced Greenhouse Effect is the main cause of Global Warming, responsible for the extreme climate changes, stronger storms, increase of the oceans medium temperature and the extinction of several species are a few of the consequences (Gurney, K.R. ; 2001). One of the solutions for the Enhanced Global Warming would be Sustainable Development, based on two important concepts, renewable energy sources and energy efficiency, reducing greenhouse gases emissions (Egelston, A.E. ; 2013). Sustainable Development is interdisciplinary, there is Economic Sustainable Development, Environmental Sustainable Development and Social Sustainable Development, that is the reason a good number of theories and ideas approached in this work are similar, have common ground.

It is important to first illustrate what the definition of public and private goods are. This definition is necessary to distinguish what goods the Rotterdam port consist of. What is considered a public good and what is considered a private good. This is best explained if first the characteristics of the private and the public sector are distinguished. These sectors are viewed as two mutually exclusive parts of the

economy. The general views on the private and the public sector are different. The fundamental aspect of the private sector is determined through the market where the fundamental aspect of the public sector is determined by the actions of governmental institutions in the form of public services. The private sector is established by a market system that focuses on competitive prices for buying and selling. This market system includes economic relationships which ensure that the prices stay at a competitive level. In the public sector an integrated command structure exists. This structure ensures that when public services are provided all relevant personnel are accountable to a single chief executive (Mcginnis, 2010).

When defining if something is a public or a private good, key concepts emerge which are important to classify a good as public or private. The key concepts for a public good are that it should be non-rivalrous and non-excludable. The definition for non-excludability states that if the public good is supplied, no consumer can be excluded from consuming it. The definition for non-rivalry states that consumption of the public good by one consumer does not reduce the quantity available for consumption by any other (Hindrik & Myles, 2013).

The key concepts for a private good is, that it in contrast with a public good, it is excludable at no cost and is perfectly rivalrous. The transport companies are the link between the private goods they are transporting to the eventual consumers. The owners of a private good can exercise private property rights in order to prevent consumption of the relevant private good and its benefits by people who did not pay the price for it. For the transport companies the transport trucks are there private goods. Clients who are in need of transport of their own products can make a contract with these transport companies for product transportation (Mcginnis, 2010).

The SWOT framework classifies various influences on a strategy into four categories; Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats. The theory behind the SWOT analysis is commonly used to provide a clear view of the internal environment (strengths and weaknesses) and the external

(12)

approach and support in situations where decisions have to be made (Ghazinoory, 2011). Because SWOT is such a dynamic process it will reveal possibilities for an organization through a systematic approach into both positive and negative concerns.

Looking from the business discipline the SWOT analysis will be the main framework. In this case it will provide us with usable information, whereby the framework will show what sustainable and attractive improvements can be made in the Rotterdam harbour with a view on transport.

The last background theories are consisting of the social aspects who are playing an import role in whether the investment will be done or not. The willingness to pay for something to happen, or not to happen, determines for a big part the acts of companies and the government. “WTP is the maximum amount an individual is willing to pay to produce a good or service, or avoid something undesirable”, says Haneman (1991). In case the Dutch people do not have any awareness of climate change and its consequences, they will not think anything undesirable will happen, and they will therefore not be willing to pay very much. This is the same for the companies or the government, because when the people do not want to pay more for the environment, they government and the companies will not have any support for their sustainable investment. This will lead to less interest of them to invest in these sustainable change. The Willingness to Pay (WTP) is strongly correlated with the several different aspects which will be mentioned in the results section of this paper.

(13)

3. Methodology

The information needed for this research was gathered by multiple different research methods. All of the disciplines need different types of research. From an environmental engineering perspective a lot of literature study has to be done. This is done through a comparative case study of transportation in the port of Rotterdam to compare different kinds of energy use, as in-depth study on the technological part, and a study on the technological possibilities and progress in sustainability in transportation. From a human geographer point of view research was done regarding the support of the people on sustainable investments. This will be done partly through literature research, and partly on a self-made

questionnaire among the Dutch population concerning sustainability and the willingness to pay for it. From an economists’ perspective it is necessary to gain information whether the investments will be profitable. This will be done through literature research and an interview with members of the Port of Rotterdam. From the business point of view a SWOT-Analysis of the port of Rotterdam and the electric trucks will be done to gain insight in the economic possibilities, chances

and constraints of the project.

To create a common ground between the different disciplines, we used a technique of organization. In this way we connected the different insights and perspectives of our different disciplines on our concept to get a fully integrated research. The main subject of this research is the possibility of the implementation of a sustainable good, which has multiple different aspects that all are connected to each other. To visualize these

connections we can create a clear understanding of the integration. The visualization on the right side of this page stands for our total project. The truck represents the truck itself of course, and along with it all the

technical issues of the project. But this project would never be happen if

there was no public willingness to do anything about climate change. This willingness is the roots of the project, represented by the grass in the picture. But for an investment like this, the economic climate has to be right, otherwise such an investment will never be made. This is represented by the atmosphere in the picture. And of course the project has to be guided on a specific way on the right track, where comes in the business part. This is represented through the road. If one of these factor is missing, the whole project will not be an issue. They all have to be there, all have great impact and all are strongly connected to each other.

All the different disciplines demand several different methods of research. To avoid the research to be a multidisciplinary research in which all the disciplines are handled separately, it was decided to combine and organize the methods. In this manner, all the different disciplinary information needed will be collected through one scope. Practically this means the group made an interview setup in which all the disciplines where included. The same counts for the questionnaire; 25 questions where partly

economical, partly socially, partly based on technological preference and partly from a business perspective. Since we constructed the interview and questionnaire together, we succeeded in creating an interdisciplinary approach. By combining our interests and knowledge for gathering information, and formatting this through the actual results, the output of the research is automatically generated

(14)

As mentioned above, to gain profound information during this research we interviewed two people. These people were representatives of important actors in the port of Rotterdam. The first interview was done with Wilco van der Lans, Business developer Industry & Energy of the port of Rotterdam, and the second interview was done with Pim de Wit, Project Leader Sustainable Development and Cees Deelen, Program Managers Road Transportation, both also of the port of Rotterdam. These interviews extended our knowledge on the situation of the port, and gave us an insight of the practical matters of the port. To achieve a well implemented sustainable truck transportation project, someone has to invest in it. And whether it is the government or a private company, they will only invest in it when they have the support of the population. The figures of awareness of climate change and the willingness to pay to counter it has therefore been studied through literature research. Another method we used to get insight in the people opinion, is the usage of a questionnaire. Therefore, our group created a questionnaire including topics of awareness of climate change, willingness to pay and ways of investments in sustainability by the government and companies. This questionnaire has been spread through Facebook and e-mail. Because most of the respondents will be friends or otherwise connected to us, the researchers, it is highly expected the main part of the respondents will be students like us. To see whether this is true or not, we asked for an age indication. The results indeed indicated that the majority of the respondents is between 18 and 25, which could have significant influence on the outcomes. It could be possible that this age group is more or less aware of climate change than other groups, and therefore the results of this questionnaire is not a perfect representation of the opinion of the whole population, but it does give us an indication.

(15)

4. Results

Technologies Available

4.1. Fossil Fuels and Biodiesel

According to João Norberto Noschang Neto, manager of the Technological Biofuel Branch of Petróleo Brasileiro S.A. in 2012, in an average gas station you can find three types of fuels for internal combustion engines: hydrated ethanol with 95,1% ethanol and 4,9% water, gasoline with 80% gasoline and 20% anhydrous ethanol and diesel with 95% diesel and 5% biodiesel. However, between those three, only diesel, obtained around 250 and 400°C, is commonly used for big auto vehicles, such as vans and trucks. Furthermore, burning any fossil fuel, such as gasoline, propane, diesel, their blends with ethanol, natural gas and biodiesel, generate CO2. Also, using fossil fuels in Alcohol Fuel Cells, generate CO2 emissions. “Image 4” shows us the basic differences between internal combustion engines and fuel cells.

Additionally, “Image 4” shows different types of fuels that can be used with internal combustion or fuel cells mechanisms. There are more options of fuels that have little or no emissions than different types of engines with the same purpose.

(16)

4.2. Ethanol

Unlike fossil fuels and biodiesel, hydrated ethanol is a vegetable fuel used in internal combustion engines that does not generate CO2 when consumed. Main sources of ethanol are sugar cane, corn, beets, wheat and cassava. The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA) in the United States of America (U.S.A.) categorized biofuels in three classes according to their ability to reduce the total process GHGs: conventional, advanced, and cellulosic (from trees and grasses), reducing on 20, 50, and 60 percent respectively. Dr. Cole R. Gustafson (2008) showed that all U.S.A. cellulose pilot facilities were having problems on going commercial because of constraints internal and external to the biofuel industry structure, being that the only ethanol sources considered as advanced by EISA are sugarcane and sugar beets.

Since a 2012 convention for sustainable development, called Rio+20, Holland became closer to countries with appropriate weather and soil conditions for sugar cane crops. For example, Holland has been sharing techniques and expertise for energy generation from biomass with countries like Brazil (http://www.hollandtrade.com/search/ShowBouwsteen.asp?bstnum=5072&location=%2Fsearch %2FShowResults%2Easp%3Ftekst%3Dsugar%2Bcane%26sortering%3DPublicatiedatum%2BDESC %26submit%2Ex%3D0%26submit%2Ey%3D0&highlight=sugar%20cane).

What about beets? Compared to corn, for instance, beets high sugar content can double its energy production by acre. It is necessary twice as much sugar cane to produce the same energy provided by beets. Nonetheless, Maung T. and Gustafson C. stated in 2011 that biofuel production from advanced sources was a broad problem in the U.S.A. because the feed stocks were to narrow.

Besides using ethanol in internal combustion engines the fuel can also be used in Alcohol Fuel Cells, a type of Alkaline Fuel Cell (AFC) that liberates CO2 when the alcohol is consumed, but according to Rooke A., considering the CO2 intake by the growing biomass in crops, those total emissions are next to zero (Alcohol Fuel Cells as an Alternative Solution to Foreign Oil Dependence, 2014). The problem continues to be the beet production feedstocks’ availability, along with the actual high price of the cells technology, exemplified in “Image 5”.

It is important to notice that the flashpoint of ethanol, the temperature in which released vapour from a fuel ignites, is one of the highest compared to all other fuels. A high flashpoint means safety and

ethanols’ is approximately 12,8 °C.

(17)

Image 5 – Cells technology, CO32-_{is turned into CO2 and released into the atmosphere to reduce corrosion in the cell (}_Antolini_a_, E. & Gonzalez, E. Gonzalez ; 2010).

4.3. Hydrogen

Just like ethanol, hydrogen can be used in internal combustion engines and in fuel cells, such as the Proton Exchange Membrane Cells (PEMC) and the AFC. Both have the advantage to use solid electrolytes (substances that ionize in the presence of suitable ionizing solvents, such as water) and to avoid

electrolyte leakage, but AFC is cheaper and more efficient then PEMC because it does not need noble metals in its structure, has low corrosiveness and produces higher current densities (Antolini a , E. & Gonzalez, E. ; 2010).

The only product from hydrogen fuel is water, but the technology is expensive and covers only small vehicles so far. Additionally, hydrogens’ flashpoint is around -252,78 °C. A flashpoint that low is

extremely dangerous, easy to combust. The hydrogen storage cylinders in combustion engines have to be made of very strong materials to support the stress of a traffic accident and the main candidates for hydrogen mass production are also expensive technologies: “Electrolysis of Water and Biomass” and “Ethanol Reformation”.

Electricity

When it comes to electricity there are road systems that make energy available to vehicles without main electricity storage devices and vehicles with batteries that use fixed recharge stations. Which one is more

(18)

efficient, cheaper, and more secure? Is it better for the maintenance of the actual electric energy grid of Rotterdam to provide electricity to recharge stations or to construct electric road systems?

4.4. Electric Road Systems (ERS)

There are different ERS: conductive power current passage through overhead lines, through rails in the road and by inductive current passage through the road. The overhead contact lines connect to the vehicle with a pantograph (Image 6), a system similar to trains and trams with pre-determined paths, with usually low voltage of 750 V or 1500 V (Andersson, S. & Edfeldt, E. ; 2013).

Image 6 - Overhead contact lines (Andersson S. & Edfeldt E., 2013).

For truck transportation a test track was made in Germany, called Siemens’ eHighway, putting to test issues such as how will the pantograph disconnect and connect to the electric lines up to a velocity of 90 km/h in case there is a part of the road without overhead lines (with the truck going on diesel hybrid mode). It was also put to test the flexibility, size and protection of the pantograph from harsh winds and rain. However, the technology is expensive, 10.000.000 SEK/km in 2003, approximately 1.100.000,00

€/km on 06 dec, 2014.

The conductive system through rails in the road is newer than the overhead lines system. A French company called Alstom invented the system and called it Aesthetic Power Supply (APS). It has been used in a tramway in Bordeaux since 2003. Since then, various other French cities adopted the promising technology. Different approaches are being researched to adapt the conductive road rails to smaller vehicles, cars and trucks. Aesthetically, they are more subtle than overhead lines.

To prevent accidents with humans and animals, Alstom segmented the electric currents from 8 to 8 meters where the vehicles are. But another company called Elways’ lowered the rails into the ground, reducing the rails exposure, changing the current pickup device under the vehicle and segmented the line from 50 to 50 meters. The technology also counts with the possibility of self-cleaning with the constant passage of trains, cars and trucks, and with cleaning cars or self-heat systems for snowy days (Andersson, S. & Edfeldt, E. ; 2013).

Elways’ webpage accessed in 2003 by Asplund b estimated the technology price around 4.000.000-5.000.000 SEK/km, approximately 400.000,00 to 510.000,00 €/km on 25 Oct 2014 (Asplund b, 2013,

(19)

p.XX). And according to Gunnar Asplund: “The Elways-system will have an efficiency of 96%, including the losses in the transformers, alteration switches, rails and vehicle contacts. This depends on the choice of voltage and on the quality of electrical components. High quality components have a higher

investment, and in turn the transmission losses decrease.

The third system available, inductive current passage through the road, is based on an AC transformer, like a solenoid, with laminated metal in its core that uses the electric field generated from the passage of electric current through wires in the asphalt to move the vehicles without mechanical contact, see “Image 7”.

Image 7 - Inductive System, similar to a solenoiddfeldt, E. ; 2013).e (Andersson, S. & E

The energy conversion instantly reduces losses, thus the power supply is also segmented for efficiency purposes, as show in “Image 8”. Its performance depends on the air gap between the machine and the asphalt (the smaller the better) and on the iron device below the vehicle (more width equals more efficiency). The technology is not sensitive to strong weathering, but a heating mat can be used in case of freezing conditions. In comparison to the conductive road systems this is the most expensive technology of the three. Although it has never been tested in an actual transportation scenario (Andersson, S. & Edfeldt, E. ; 2013).

Image 8 - Inductive System, segmented energy to power trucks (Andersson S. & Edfeldt E., 2013). .

(20)

According to Lee et al. (2013), electric urban delivery trucks in New York, with more stops and low average speed compared to trucks on roads, were proven to be more efficient than diesel urban delivery trucks. Electric trucks emit 42-61% less GHGs in their total life cycle, they consume 32-54% less energy and their total cost of ownership is 22% less.

Electric trucks used in the New York City-Suburban Heavy Vehicle Cycle, with less frequent stops and a high average speed, still emit 19-43% less GHGs than diesel trucks in their total life cycle and consume 5-34% less energy, but cost only 1% more than their diesel counterparts over their whole lifetime, around 11-20 years with no battery change. In December, 15, 2014, diesel price in The Netherlands was almost twice the price in the United States (http://www.globalpetrolprices.com/diesel_prices/) but electricity in the kingdom in 2014 was only 0,8% more

expensive(http://www.statista.com/statistics/263492/electricity-prices-in-selected-countries/) Electric trucks may be cheaper than Diesel trucks in every scenario, in The Netherlands.

The Cost of Total Ownership (TOC) in Electric Urban Delivery Trucks: Energy Use, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and Cost Effectiveness was based on vehicles prices, electricity, recharge stations needed all over the city, their maintenance, and the vehicles correct disposal. To facilitate comparison, insurance of diesel and electric trucks was assumed to be the same.

The truck that can cover the longest distance in the market without recharging, 200 km in a maximum speed of 80 km/h is around 100.000 euros, from Smith Electric being able to carry up to 12 tons. This type of truck is sold from a company close to Rotterdam, called PC-commercials in New Castle, United Kingdom. This truck gives us a broad reach shown in “Image 9”: it can go in a straight line all the way to Belgium, Germany, France or even England, from the Rotterdam port. It is also safe to say that the trucks that go to central garages to stay the night, after 200km or less, are ideal for the full recharging of its 120 kilowatts capacity. The trucks need around 8 to 10h to recharge (Customers Service - Smith Electric, personal communication, October, 22, 2014), cheapening the process by increasing time on the road and the vehicles’ life-cycle by not stressing their batteries, charging and recharging more than the necessary (Customers Service - Smith Electric, personal communication, October, 22, 2014).

Image 9 – Electric trucks range without recharging, made through Google Earth.

(21)

5. Support of the Population

The implementation of new technologies in the transport system of the Rotterdam harbour asks for significant investments. Whether the state and companies will invest in this transport systems depends mainly on the wishes of the people and the consumers. The companies will most likely only invest in costly sustainable investments when they can make profit out of it. The state can only justify their actions when they are supported by the people. Therefore, it is necessary to see whether the reduction of CO2 to prevent climate change is of a major interest for the people, and to see if they are willing to invest for the required sustainable improvements. The questionnaire combined with other statistics will answer these questions. The results of the questionnaire can be found in appendix three.

5.1. Awareness of climate change

The awareness of climate change differs over time and place. According to Pelham (2003) research has shown that more than a third of the population of 128 countries in 2007-2008, have never heard of climate change. This research shows that in countries like Japan, United Kingdom and the Netherlands, over 95% of the people have knowledge of global warming. In contrast, in countries as Liberia, Niger and Egypt only less than 25% of the population have knowledge of global warming. Besides this knowledge, the countries also vary in whether the people believe global warming is caused by human activity or not. Results of the Yale University (Leiserowitz et al., 2003) show that only 63% of the Americans believe global warming is happening, and just 49% believes it is mostly caused by human activity. The 63% is significantly lower than the 90% of Dutch people who believe in global warming (TNS NIPO, 2007). These results are similar to the questionnaire conducted in this study, where 88% of the people stated they believe in global warming. Where the result of TNS NIOPE shows us that 64% of the population points out human activity as the only cause of climate change, 82% of the people of the questionnaire in this paper blame human activity for climate change. Due to these high numbers of awareness among the Dutch population, one can expect a high interest in sustainable change and the willing to pay for investments. The implementation of sustainable investments in the transport system is partly based on the willing of the people to create a better protected environment. Before this investment will be made, the figures of all these researches should be investigated by the companies and the government to see if the population will support it.

5.2. Willingness to Pay

According to Ivanova and Tranter (2004) the majority of people in advanced nations support the protection of the environment. It is, however, the question to what extent they want to pay for the protection of this environment. Results from the questionnaire from this project shows that a slight majority of 60% of the people is willing to pay more for products which are produced in a more

environmental friendly way, and that 11% does not want to pay anything more for sustainable good. All in all, it seems that most people are concerned with the environment, but is the question to how much costs they actually would make to protect it.

5.3. Role of the government

67% of the people of the questionnaire made by the group think that the government should give sustainable companies more subsidies, and 65% thinks the government should create stricter rules with regard to sustainability for the companies. These figures suggest a majority of the population believes

(22)

that the government plays an important role in sustainability, and that they are the ones who should create incentives for the companies to invest in sustainable projects.

5.4. Free Riders

When it comes to climate regulations, some people are afraid that others will benefit from their investments and effort to prevent environmental change, while they do not pay for it themselves. This situation is called the problem of Free Riders, and is introduced in the widely known article of Garreth Hardin, Tragedy of the Commons (Hardin, 1968). It can be argued that free riding is a main cause of the slow movement of environmental agreements. The questionnaire made by the group shows that 20% of the people is afraid of free-riding, and therefore they state that the Dutch government should only invest in sustainability when the rest of the world does the same. A majority of 63% is against this statement.

6. Rotterdam port public good

In this research project the researched topic is the trucks operating in the transport system of the Rotterdam port. If a transition is possible to a sustainable transport system with adjustments in truck transportation. To go from diesel trucks to electric trucks which are emitting zero CO2. The objective of the transition will be diminishing the CO2 emissions created by using trucks, transporting materials and products through the transport system of Rotterdam’s’ port.

When comparing the different kind of trucks operating in the transport business, they can be distinguish by means of usage of fuel sources. There are different categories for the trucks that are determined through the fuel sources used which consist of fossil fuels, biofuels, hydrated ethanol, hydrogen fuel and electricity. Electricity in the form of three systems which are: the overhead line system, the conductive system and the inductive current passage system. There is one other way to use electricity as fuel for trucks and that is in the form of batteries installed as power source in the transport trucks.

The comparison between the different trucks has the outcome that trucks using fossil fuels and biodiesel are generating the most CO2 emissions which is not favourable if the goal is to diminish CO2 emissions from trucks

(João Norberto, 2012). Where usage of hydrated ethanol does not produce any CO2

but has the highest flashpoint compared to the other fuels (Gustafson, 2008). Usage of

hydrogen as fuel generates as side product only water. However the technology is expensive

and is not suitable for usage by large transport trucks

(

Antolini

a

& Gonzalez, 2010). Looking at

the overhead lines system it is not suitable for the Rotterdam port because the transport

companies working in the port have many different destinations. The adjustments to the

infrastructure have to be applied to a wide area which will drive the costs for implementing the

overhead lines dramatically (

Andersson & Edfeldt, 2013). The same applies to the conductive system where rails have to be implemented in the roads that connect every destination the trucks need to deliver their products

(Asplund, 2013,). The other system is the inductive current passage which

are also implemented in the roads and is in cost the most expensive technology

(Andersson & Edfeldt, 2013). The last kind of truck investigated in is the electric truck on batteries which has a zero CO2 emission ratio.

The Cost of Total Ownership (TOC) in

Electric Trucks: Energy Use, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and Cost Effectiveness has come out on top of the best suited truck for the usage by the transport companies working in the Rotterdam port. The efficiency of the electric trucks on batteries is

(23)

the highest in comparison with the diesel trucks and the technology costs are lowest in comparison with the other electric alternatives (Smith, 2014).

So having determined that the electric truck on batteries is best suited for investment by transport companies that want to use greener trucks it is also important to understand which goods the Rotterdam port belongs to and what kind of good the operating transport companies are within the port of

Rotterdam. It is relevant to determine which areas that are involved with the transport system of the port of Rotterdam are considered a public or a private good. This is important to determine in order to understand which side, public or private, is responsible for the transport system of the Rotterdam port and the trucks operating in this area. The relevant side is going to bear the investment costs of a possible change in the current transport system of Rotterdams’ port and/or the eventual change in trucks

(Hindrik & Myles, 2013).

The essence of a public good is that if the Rotterdam port supplies a public good to one consumer, then it has effectively supplied the public good to all. The Rotterdam port can charge the initial purchaser but cannot charge any of the subsequent consumers. With regards to the infrastructure of the Rotterdam harbour, which is a public good, the initial costs for constructing the infrastructure are for the harbour itself. Now that they have paid the costs the transport companies who are able to use the infrastructure now longer have to pay for an infrastructure to transport cargo for their clients within the harbour of Rotterdam. (Pim de Wit – Projectleider duurzame ontwikkeling Cees Deelen – Programma manager wegverkeer, 2014).

The subsequent consumers are the private transport companies. They have free usage of the Rotterdam transport system, under the condition that they comply with the rules set by the Rotterdam port about usage of the transport system (Pim de Wit – Projectleider duurzame ontwikkeling

Cees Deelen – Programma manager wegverkeer, 2014)

To prevent the market from being unable to equalize the marginal valuations to achieve efficiency in the allocation of private goods it is valuable that there are several private transport companies competing with each other to achieve efficiency. The private transport companies are the private goods making use of the public good which is the Rotterdam port (Mcginnis, 2010).

With respect to the Rotterdam port the port is considered a public good that is accessible for the public. But more importantly: freely accessible to the private transport companies. The Rotterdam port can suffer from congestion. The effect of congestion is that the benefits for the consumers, the private transport companies, of the public good decreases (Hindrik & Myles, 2013). That is essential in making the restrictions the Rotterdam harbours has set for these companies. If they do not comply they can be refused to sign a contract with the Rotterdam harbour and will not be able to make use of the Rotterdam port transport system (Pim de Wit – Projectleider duurzame ontwikkeling Cees Deelen – Programma manager wegverkeer, 2014).

Private goods in the economic market are not inexhaustible. This creates a competitive market where the goods are rivalry (Mcginnis, 2010). Clients who are in need of transport of their own products can make a contract with the transport companies for product transportation from the Rotterdam port. In light of the trucks of the transport companies who are currently driving on diesel, which is an exhaustible source, it is necessary to make long term plans for driving in a sustainable way to secure the future of their company. That sustainable way could be met by investing in electric trucks which are running on rechargeable batteries. (Pim de Wit – Projectleider duurzame ontwikkeling Cees Deelen – Programma manager wegverkeer, 2014)

(24)

In table 10 and 11 there is a summarized of the contents of the definition to determine what a public and a private good is.

Table 10

Rivalrous Non-rivalrous

Excludable Private good Club good

Non-excludable Common property resource Public good

Source: Hindrik & Myles (2013). Table 11

Private goods Public goods

Relatively easy to measure quantity and quality Relatively difficult to measure quantity and quality

Can be consumed by only a single person Consumed jointly and simultaneously by many people

Easy to exclude someone who does not pay Difficult to exclude someone who does not pay Individual generally has a choice of consuming

or not

Individual generally has no choice as to consuming or not

Individual generally has a choice as to kind and quality of goods

Individual generally has little or no choice as to kind and quality of goods

Payment for goods is closely related to demand and consumption

Payment for goods is not closely related to demand and consumption

Allocation decisions are made primarily by market mechanism

Allocation decisions are made primarily by political process

Source: Mcginnis (2010).

It is important to determine if the port of Rotterdam, with the view on the transport system, is a public or a private good. The relevance to make the distinction between public or private is necessary in order to obtain insight in whether the government or the private sector has the responsibility over the Rotterdam port transport system. With reference to the definition of public and private goods, which illustrate the difference between a private and a public good, it is possible to define which of these goods the port of Rotterdam is. The knowledge that there is free access to the infrastructure of the port of Rotterdam transport system fulfils the characteristic of non-excludable. This is the first condition for being considered a public good (Jansen, 2011). The government considers the infrastructure of the port of Rotterdam as a public good, because it contributes to gain maximum market operations within the

(25)

port. It is in the view of the government that it is not allowed that specifics sectors or sides are

prohibited from the port. Given the scarcity of capacity for certain submarkets it is vital that the provided market access from a public good is guaranteed for all sectors and sides. This fulfils the second

characteristic of a public good that it should be non-rivalrous (Jansen, 2011). The transport system of Rotterdams’ port meets the requirements to be classified as a public good, which are that the good is non-excludable and non-rivalrous (Hendrik & Myles, 2013).

The transport system of the port of Rotterdam is mainly focused on shipping goods using containers. There are several transport companies operating in the Rotterdam port which are rivalrous towards each other, because the companies are competing over the transport rights of the limited number of

containers coming into the Rotterdam port. The trucks of the transport companies are private goods. These are private goods because they meet the necessary requirements (excludable and rivalrous) to be classified as a private good (Hendrik & Myles, 2013). The relevance of knowing that the transport trucks are private goods is that possible investment costs for electric trucks will be for the transport companies. A transition to electric trucks will have an economic and social effect. Transportation by the new electric trucks will have an effect on the transport costs. The social effect is that the clients who are using the transport companies demand that their goods will be transported in an environmentally friendly way, without the CO2 emissions of the diesel trucks.

7. Attractiveness for Investing in electric trucks

Now, with the essential information about the technique and about the Rotterdam Port as a public good, it is interesting to look if electric trucks are an attractive investment for the private companies operating in the Port of Rotterdam. To answer this question the group spoke with W. van der Lans, the Business developer Industry and Energy. We also spoke with P. de Wit, the project leader sustainable

development and C. Deelen, the program manager road traffic of the port of Rotterdam. The SWOT analysis was applied with the information gathered. This analysis will be explained later to find the specific information needed for this research.

The port of Rotterdam stresses the combination of economic objectives with sustainability. To differ from other ports they set higher goals regarding a better air quality. The Port of Rotterdam states that they play a pioneering role that is sometimes difficult, but will also become commercially profitable (Kolk & van der Veen, 2002). Sustainable transport, like electric trucks, seems to fit in this picture.

7.1. SWOT

To figure out if electric trucks can be realized from a business point of view, the relevant strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats from the Port of Rotterdam and the electric trucks will be discussed using the SWOT analysis. To obtain a clear overview of these strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats, there is the SWOT framework. According to Chermack & Kasshanna (2007) the SWOT analysis often is the first step in many variations of a strategic management process and is therefore the most important.

(26)

7.2. SWOT framework electric trucks

With the information gained from the interviews and with the perspectives of human geography, environmental engineering and economy completed by a literature study by Continental (2011) and Arts (2007) the SWOT framework of electric trucks showed below as Table 1 arose.

Strengths:

No Emission technology for sustainable mobility (Continental, 2011)

Low costs for electric reload (Arts, 2007)

Green image (Arts, 2007)

Weaknesses:

High costs of the battery (Arts, 2007)

Life cycle of the battery (Arts, 2007., (Continental, 2011)

Opportunities:

Legal regulations for low emissions (Continental, 2011)

Rising fuel prices (Arts,2007) New business models and

manufacturers (Continental, 2011) Public funding and investments (Continental, 2011)

Threats:

Few possibilities to reload the battery (Continental, 2011) Success of technology depending on accumulator development (Arts, 2007)

Dependency on incentives and subsidies (Arts, 2007)

Table 1: SWOT framework of electric trucks

Most of the strengths and opportunities are connected with the fact that this way of transport is seen as environmental friendly and the fact that other more polluting ways of transport will get more expensive with time.

The bottleneck of the electric trucks seems to be the technology behind the battery. Most of the

weaknesses and the threats are connected with this downside. To remove this bottleneck a development in the technology of the battery must be made.

What is interesting to see is that public funding can be seen as an opportunity but the dependency on incentives and subsidies can also be seen as a threat. If the government agrees with more incentives there will be a good opportunity created to make these trucks more feasible for transport companies. The threat is that for now, the trucks are dependent on these actions of the government.

7.3. SWOT framework Port of Rotterdam

The port of Rotterdam itself has got its own strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats that can be combined with the framework of the electric trucks to see if the port of Rotterdam finally can use electric trucks as a new way of transport. Here the SWOT framework created by Zauner (2008) was

(27)

applied. Only the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats that are relevant for this case are treated.

Strengths

Hinterland connections Size & Expansion Authority

Weaknesses Road connections

Dependent on private investors

Opportunities

Shift towards sustainable transport Trucks need to be replaced every 7 years

Threats Energy change Competition

Stakeholder environment Table 2: SWOT framework of the Port of Rotterdam (Zauner, 2008)

7.4. Strengths

A relevant strength of the Rotterdam Port are the hinterland connections. While road transport systems are seen by many as a limitation, the hinterland connections of the Port of Rotterdam are seen as a strength. This is because the road transport has got a large share in reaching nearby big cities and consumers in a short period of time (UNIPORT). The hinterland connections, which include road, rail, inland shipping and short sea/feeder shipping are even seen as a main asset of the port (Zauner, 2008). As derived from the interviews the Port of Rotterdam is expanding. The size and expansion of the port are also seen as a strength. The percentage of all containers that will be transported by trucks will decrease, but as a result of the expansion of the port, the absolute number of containers transported by trucks will increase. Looking from this point of view investing in trucks will be profitable (W. van der Lans, personal communication, November 24, 2014).

Another strength indicated by Zauner (2008) is the authority of the port. The authority of the port is really open minded and cooperative. For the realization of electric trucks in the port this can be a major advantage. The interviews also confirmed this, because the interviewees made clear that if sustainable projects can be realized by the private companies, they are willing to cooperate (W. van der Lans, personal communication, November 24, 2014).

7.5. Weaknesses

Even though the road connections are seen as a strength, the quality of these road connections is seen as a weakness, because trucks are hindered a lot by traffic congestions at peak times (Zauner, 2008). Europe is an urban area, where traffic is seen as a common problem. To get to the precise destination it is necessary to use trucks even if these trucks are sometimes impeded by traffic congestions (C. Deelen, personal communication, November 24, 2014).

The dependency on private investors can also be seen as a weakness, because even if the Port of Rotterdam would want to use electric trucks, it is up to these private investors to invest in these trucks (Zauner, 2008). The weaknesses and threats shown in Table 1, which are the high cost of the battery, the

(28)

life cycle of the battery and the few possibilities to reload the battery, counteract the decision of investors to invest in electric trucks (P. de Wit, personal communication, November 24, 2014). The low costs for electric reload (Arts, 2007) has the opposite effect.

7.6. Threats

Zauner (2008) states that one of the main threats for the port of Rotterdam will be the energy change. There will be an upcoming change in energy sources from fossil resources to non-fossil resources. (explain, bron). Even though the port of Rotterdam is focussing on sustainability, currently it is mostly dependent on oil. This threat can be reversed into an opportunity by the use of electric trucks, because rising fuel prices are seen as an opportunity of electric trucks (Table 1). As mentioned before, the government, the port of Rotterdam and the transport companies work together to reach a common goal, namely to boost the ports leading position in the energy transition as mentioned above (The Port Vision 2030).

Furthermore, the competition of the port is also an important factor. The real competitors of the port of Rotterdam are located in Germany (Hamburg) and Belgium (Antwerp) (Zauner, 2008). This means that the government of The Netherlands has got nothing to say about their competitors, because the government cannot exercise power in other countries. Hereby the port of Rotterdam can create a competitive disadvantage (W. van der Lans, personal communication, November 24, 2014).

The stakeholder environment can also be seen as a threat, because it is hard for the stakeholders to be an attractive source of labour and on to create a cleaner environment (Zauner, 2008).

7.7. Opportunities

The most relevant opportunity is the increasing attention towards sustainable transport (Zauner, 2008). This transition to sustainable energy and production will provide opportunities for the long term. The Port of Rotterdam is located in a densely populated area, so the opinion of the inhabitants of the Netherlands and specifically of the people living in the surroundings of the port are very important for a competitive advantage. This is because nowadays there is a high level of positive attention towards sustainability (Zauner, 2008) This opportunity is mainly connected to the implementation of electric trucks, because the strength shown as the ‘’green image’’ in the SWOT framework of electric trucks (Table 1) match this overall opportunity for the Port of Rotterdam itself.

The program manager road traffic mentioned that trucks need to be replaced every 7 years (C. Deelen, personal communication, November 24, 2014). This left a very interesting field open for our project. The transport companies need to make an investment in trucks anyway, so why not in electric trucks? The problem is that companies can not invest in something new every 7 years. This will be too expensive, so they need to be sure they invest exactly at the time that electric cars drive in the most efficient way. The business developer Industry and Energy and the project leader sustainable development stated that if the batteries of the trucks, which are also shown in the SWOT framework of the electric trucks as weaknesses, will get more effective, electric trucks will become a good investment for transport companies (W. van der Lans, personal communication, November 24, 2014).

7.8. TLN

(29)

TLN, the transport company that is the main truck-provider of the port of Rotterdam, is already providing electric trucks. Now, these trucks are only provided to a few companies. The trucks that were delivered by TLN are mainly urban delivery trucks. Since this year they started providing electric trucks that can drive a range of 200 km (van der Heijden, 2014). This shift towards electric trucks indicates that it is a quickly developing project. The only bottleneck for the companies is the battery, but much research is being done to improve these. When the batteries get lighter they will also increase in capacity. Only then long distances will be driven with fully electric trucks and then these trucks will become an attractive investment for the transport companies and thereby for the Port of Rotterdam (Bos et al, 2014).

(30)

8. Conclusion

It seems like the support of the Dutch population is bigger than ever. A large majority of the people is aware of climate change, and willing to do something about it. They also say that they are willing to pay more sustainability and the production of these trucks. However, it is questionable whether or not they actually will pay for these changes. They mostly think the government should invest in these projects and give incentives for the companies to invest in sustainability.

Today, hydrated ethanol can be used safely in trucks that already run 100% on ethanol, however they can only offer a 50% total process reduction on GHGs compared to diesel trucks, in the other hand, electric battery trucks offers an optimistic margin between 43 (Heavy Vehicle Cycle) to 61% (Urban Delivery Vehicles), without the need to increase beet production or import sugar cane.

ERS and battery trucks offer an ideal zero CO2 emissions in a scenario of 100% renewable sources of energy, however, the energy consumption to install ERS with its’ vehicles and maintenance is higher than in the case of electric trucks with its’ recharge stations. In Electric Road Systems for Trucks (Andersson S. & Edfeldt E., 2013), four scenarios were created for Sweden:

1) Governmental influence and interest for ERSs high, large amounts of oil available 2) Governmental influence and interest for ERSs high, shortage of oil

3) Low governmental influence and interest for ERSs, large amounts of oil available 4) Low governmental influence and interest for ERSs, shortage of oil

In all those scenarios, energy use, CO2 emissions and the profitability from the haulage contracting companies were noticed and the authors came to the conclusion that ERS were not profitable in distribution cases. ERS and electric trucks are both secure options, but electric trucks implementation and maintenance is more efficient, for a better price.

The proper technology to end CO2 emissions are electric battery trucks, they are efficient, they cost only 1% more than the commonly used diesel trucks in the worst scenario, they are safe, and with the right source of electricity, such as solar or wind generated, growing renewable technologies on Hollands’ economy, population can have a glimpse of future zero CO2 emissions.

Furthermore, in “Image 10” there is the Total Primary Energy Supply in The Netherlands, from 1973 to 2030. The Dutch and the rest of the world need to hope for a continuation or expansion in the use of renewables to generate electricity and a reduction in the use of coal and gas for the same purpose in the kingdom, especially after the 2020s election in Holland a possible shift on environmental policies. Only that way it is possible to cut the CO2 emissions made by electric trucks all the way from its source.

(31)

Image 10 - The Netherlands Total Primary Energy Supply (International Energy Agency, 2008).

With the support of the population and with the present techniques it seems that the implementation of electric trucks in the Port of Rotterdam is very well feasible, but it is still up to the transport companies to decide if they want to invest in electric trucks. These transport companies want to provide a clean way of transport, but on the other hand they only want to make profitable investments. The outcome of the SWOT analysis showed that the development of the effectivity of the battery is very important for the transport companies. This is because the trucks are a big investment, so if the transport companies are going to invest in the trucks they want to make sure it is done at exactly the right time.

Seeing that TLN, the transport company that is the main truck-provider of the port of Rotterdam, already started to supply these trucks shows that investing in these trucks is actually feasible.

The collaboration of the Port of Rotterdam with the government and the transport companies is a more complicated network than it seems. All parties need to agree with this development and complement each other where needed to implement these trucks in the entire Port of Rotterdam. The government can do this by creating incentives and setting long term goals. If this is achieved then implementing electric trucks in the port of Rotterdam will be an achievable and attractive project for in the future .

(32)

9. Literature

Andersson, S. & Edfeldt, E. (2013). Electric Road Systems for Trucks. (Master of Science Thesis, KTH School of Industrial Engineering and Management). Stockholm: Uppsala University Library.

Antolini a , E. & Gonzalez, E. Gonzalez (2010). Alkaline direct alcohol fuel cells. Journal of Power Sources, 2010, Vol.195 (11), pp.3431-3450.

Arts, G. J. C. M. (2007). Analysis and synthesis of hybrid truck energy management.

Blauwhof, F.B. (2012). Overcoming accumulation: Is a capitalist steady-state economy possible? Ecological Economics, pp. 84 254–261.

Bos, R., De Jonge, M., Kolpa, E., Quispel, N., Smit, B., Soekroella, I. (2014, Januari 30). Duurzame mobiliteit in de Rotterdamse haven. Retrieved November 10, 2014, from

http://www.nwba.nl/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Eindrapport-M@R.pdf Boulding, K.E. (1966). The Economics of the Coming Spaceship Earth. In H. Jarrett (ed.) 1966. Environmental Quality in a Growing Economy, pp. 3-14. Baltimore.

Button, K. (2010). Transport economics third edition. Cambridge, UK: Edward Elgar publishing limitations. Chermack, T. J., & Kasshanna, B. K. (2007). The use and misuse of SWOT analysis and implications for HRD professionals. Human Resource Development International, 10(4), 383-399.

Continental (2011, April). Electric car tire market and technology. Retrieved December 1, 2014, from

http://www.conti-online.com/generator/www/de/en/continental/automobile/themes/news/meldungen/2011_launch_ev ent/download/e_car_tires.pdf

Egelston, A.E. (2013). Sustainable Development. The Netherlands: Springer. Farrel, A. ; Plevin, E. ; Richard, J. ; Brian, T. ; Andrew, J. ; O' Hare, M. ; Kammen, D.

(2006). Ethanol Can Contribute to Energy and Environmental Goals. Science, Vol.311(5760), p.506(3). Ghazinoory, S., Abdi, M., & Azadegan-Mehr, M. (2011). SWOT methodology: a state-of-the-art review for the past, a framework for the future. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 12(1), 24-48. Gurney, K.R. (2001). Towards robust regional estimates of CO2 sources and sinks using atmospheric transport models, Nature, Vol. 415, pp. 626-630.

(33)

Gustafson, C. (2008). Financing Growth of Cellulosic Ethanol. Farm Foundation (Ed.). Transition to a Bio Economy Conferences >Environmental and Rural Development Impacts Conference p.2. St. Louis Missouri: Farm Foundation.

Hardin, G. (1968). The Tragedy of the Commons, Science, vol. no. 162 (3859), 1243-1248. Hawking, S. (2010, November, 15). 10 Questions. TIME, Vol.176(20), p.8.

Hindriks, J. & Gareth, D. M. (2013). Intermediate Public Economics second edition. Cambridge, UK: The MIT Press.

International Energy Agency (2005). Prospects for Hydrogen and Fuel Cells. Paris: OECD Publishing, 2005. International Energy Agency (2008). Energy Policies of IEA Countries: Netherlands 2008. Paris: OECD Publishing, 2009.

International Energy Agency (2012). CO2 Emissions from Fuel Combustion 2012: Complete Edition. Paris: OECD Publishing, 2012.

Ivanova, G. & Tranter, B. 2004, Willingness To Pay For “the Environment” in Cross-National Perspective. Australasian Political Studies Association Conference, University of Adelaide.

Jansen, B & Verschuure, C. (2011). Toedeling van de mate waarin het Havenbedrijf Rotterdam publiek, privaat en internationaal is. Rotterdam: Rebelgroup advisory.

Kamarudin, M. ; Kamarudin, S. ; Masdar, M. ; Daud, W. (2012). Review: Direct ethanol fuel cells. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2013, Vol.38(22), pp.9438-9453.

Kolk, A., & Van der Veen, M. (2002). Dilemmas of Balancing Organizational and Public Interests:: How Environment Affects Strategy in Dutch Main Ports.European Management Journal, 20(1), 45-54. Lee, D. ; Thomas, V. ; Brown, M. ; (2013). Electric Urban Delivery Trucks: Energy Use, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and Cost Effectiveness. Environmental science & technology, Vol.47(14), pp.8022-30. Leiserowitz, A., Maibach, E., Roser-Renouf, C., Feinberg, G., & Howe, P. (2013) Climate change in the American mind: Americans’ global warming beliefs and attitudes in April, 2013. Yale University and George Mason University. New Haven, CT: Yale Project on Climate Change Communication.

Le Quéré, C et al. (2013). The global carbon budget 1959-2011, Earth System Science Data, Vol. 5(1), pp. 165-185.

Lopes, N. (2012). Qual a diferença entre álcool, diesel, etanol e gasolina?. Retrieved in October, 23, 2014, from http://mundoestranho.abril.com.br/materia/qual-a-diferenca-entre-alcool-diesel-etanol-e-gasolina .

(34)

Maung, T. & Gustafson, C. (2011). The economic feasibility of sugar beet biofuel production in central North Dakota. Biomass and Bioenergy, 2011, Vol.35(9), pp.3737-3747.

Mcginnis, M. D. (2010). Polycentricity and local public economics Readings from the workshop in political theory and policy analysis. Michigan, United States: The university of Michigan press.

PC–Commercials website. Retrieved in October 23, 2014, from http://www.pccommercials.ie/avia-trucks/ .

Pelham, B.W. (2003). Awareness, Opinions About Global Warming Vary Worldwide, Gallup World. (Accessed 12-10-2014).

Pilbeam, K. (2013). International finance/International money. Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Palgrave Macmillan.

Rooke, A. Alcohol Fuel Cells as an Alternative Solution to Foreign Oil Dependence. Retrieved October 22, 2014, from

h

ttp://www.learningace.com/doc/4912812/c63697dffbd5d8cd63393094997f4160/alcoholbasedfuelcells

rooke.

ROTTERDAM.CLIMATE.INITIATIVE IMDB. Retrieved in October, 23, 2014, from

http://www.rotterdamclimateinitiative.nl/en .

Vizza F. /Instituti di Chimica dei Composti OrganoMetallici (2011). Energia e prodotti chimici da risorse rinnovabili mediante celle a combustible Italy: National Research Council of Italy.

The Port Vision 2030. (2011, November 11). PORT COMPASS. Retrieved November 15, 2014, from http://www.portofrotterdam.com/en/Brochures/Port-Vision-2030.pdf

TNS NIPO (2007). Klimaatverandering? Mensenwerk. Amsterdam: Nederlands Instituut voor Onderzoek van de Publieke Opinie.

UNIPORT. (2014) Container Terminals Operator. Retrieved November 28, 2014, form http://www.uniport.nl/our-strengths/why-rotterdam.html

VanderHeijden, T. (2014). Elektrische vrachtauto als rijdende hub. Retrieved November 20, 2014, from http://www.tln.nl/Actueel/Algemeen/Elektrische-vrachtauto-als-rijdende-hub-aspx.aspx

Zauner, A. (2008). Strategic port planning: A case study of the Rotterdam seaport cluster applying the SWOT framework. der markt, 47(3), 130-141

(35)

10. Appendixes

10.1. Appendix I

Interview Wilco van der Lans – Business developer Industry & Energy Zou u kort willen beschrijven wat uw functie precies inhoudt?

De commerciële afdeling van het havenbedrijf. Wij kijken naar waar nieuwe kansen liggen om nieuwe business te ontwikkelen en om de huidige situatie te verbeteren. Het gaat dan om energie, efficiency, het schoner worden van de lucht vinden wij interessante dingen waardoor uiteindelijk de business hier beter wordt. Gericht op groei maar ook op het verbeteren van de bestaande business.

Wat zijn de hoofddoelen van de haven van Rotterdam met betrekking op het verduurzamen van transport?

Het komt erop neer dat veel van het transport is gericht op het schoner maken van de luchtkwaliteit. Maasvlakte 2 kon eigenlijk niet aangelegd worden, omdat het veel verkeer mee zou brengen en daardoor zal de luchtkwaliteit verslechteren. Er zijn daardoor een aantal maatregelen getroffen die leiden tot de verbetering van luchtkwaliteit. We maken heel veel gebruik van de euro 6 motoren. De schoonste motoren die er zijn. Voor binnenvaart zijn er maatregelen getroffen om langzamer te varen. Die veroorzaken minder emissies. Het doel is dat er in 2025 alleen nog maar schone schepen zijn. Voor de langere termijn speelt CO2 ook een grote rol. Daar zijn afspraken over gemaakt in het Rotterdam Climate Initiative en die zijn in de havenvisie neergelegd. Het doel is 50% minder CO2 uitstoot. Dat is behoorlijk ambitieus. Dit gebeurt onder andere door het verschuiven van modaliteit. Met binnenvaart kan je veel efficiënter vracht vervoeren dan met trucks, omdat een schip veel containers mee kan nemen. De verschuiving van truck naar binnenvaart en naar het spoor.

Kunnen ze met de schepen en met het spoor dan ook overal komen?

Nee, daar zit een optimum in. De korte afstanden zijn wel zinvol voor trucks. Kom je boven de 100 km, dan is het niet meer zinvol om met de truck te gaan.

Wat zijn de hoofd bestemmingen van het wegverkeer uit de haven van Rotterdam? (Binnen 200 km?)

Rond de 100 km. Arnhem, Antwerpen, Den Haag, Amsterdam.

Is het doel om de CO2 uitstoot van

wegverkeer te verminderen of de CO2 uitstoot totaal te stoppen?

Er zijn geen doelen over het volledig stoppen van de CO2 uitstoot.

Er is dus een duidelijke verschuiven van trucks naar meer schepen en spoor?

Er zijn bij maasvlakte 2 keiharde afspraken gemaakt dat maar 35 % van het totaal aantal containers maar over de weg mag, wat in de huidige situatie 50% was.

Zijn deze afspraken door de haven van Rotterdam opgelegd of door de regering?

(36)

Welke soorten energie zijn in uw ogen het meest aantrekkelijk voor de haven met betrekking op het transport (weg)? Waarom?

Ik ken de hoofdlijnen. Wat ik er altijd van begrepen heb is dat op dit moment de vrachtwagenmotoren vooral op diesel rijden. Je krijgt veel massa in beweging tegen relatief eenvoudige kosten. Waar wij heel erg mee bezig zijn in de haven van Rotterdam is het promoten van LNG. Dat is aardgas dat minder CO2 uitstoot dan een diesel motor. Daarnaast zien we ook wel ontwikkelingen richting elektrisch en waterstof. Bij elektrisch heb ik tot nu toe gezien dat het vermogen wat zon truck moet dragen de accu het nog niet aankan en dat dat een bottleneck is.

Elektrische trucks:

Vind u elektrische trucks zelf een goede investering voor de haven van Rdam? Waarom? (voordelen/nadelen)

Wij zelf investeren niet in trucks. Dat zijn de vervoerders die dat doen. Onze rol in dit geheel is die van gebiedsbeheerder. Wij verhuren de grond. Daarnaast zijn wij verantwoordelijk voor het afwikkelen van de scheepvaart. Formeel hebben wij niets te zeggen over wat bedrijven hier op het terrein doen. Daar zijn

vergunningen voor verleend. Wel proberen wij in overleg met partners tot de beste manieren te komen om de CO2 te verminderen. Die partijen die zich hier vestigen zien zelf ook dat het klimaat en duurzaam zijn ook belangrijk is voor hun. Het zijn belangrijke onderwerpen. Wij kijken in partnerships of we hierin stappen kunnen zetten. Er worden ook echt convenanten afgesproken om samen doelstellingen te halen. Zoals bijvoorbeeld het climate initiative is er zo een van. Specifiek over trucks lopen er geen initiatieven als we het hebben over elektrische trucks. Wel over LNG. Daarover zijn we wel in gesprek met andere partijen.

Zou het budget het toelaten om te investeren in elektrische trucks?

Het is niet onze rol om in trucks te investeren. Wat wij wel kunnen doen is dat op het moment dat de verzwaring van het elektrisiteitsnet een bottleneck vormt en dat de markt en maatschappij daarom vraagt en elektrisch rijden een goede ontwikkeling is, dan zijn wij zeker bereid om een deel van het de infrastructuur extra te financieren. Wij zullen niet het elektriciteitsnet verzwaren zonder dat die trucks er komen.

Zou het voordelig zijn om te investeren in elektrische trucks, die geen CO2 uitstoten, als het elektrisiteitsnet het

aan kan of zouden schepen en spoor dan nog steeds aantrekkelijker zijn?

Om een truck te laten rijden kost zoveel energie. Of dat nou elektrisch is of diesel. Het kost gewoon energie. Een boot die veel meer kan meenemen in 1 x is het altijd energie efficienter. Qua energiesoort maakt het dan niet uit. Ik zou nooit alleen maar op elektrisch willen inzetten puur om elektrisch te stimuleren. Wat wel een ontwikkeling is dat op de terminals op maasvlakte 2 ook veel wordt gereden met automatic guided vehicles. Tot voor kort waren dat diesel gedreven karretjes en dit zijn de eerste terminals die dat volledig elektrisch doen. Op die plek kan je regelmatig opladen. Dat zijn eigenlijk een soort trucks. 8 uur rijden en 8 uur opladen.

Als we kijken naar elektrische trucks met het doeleinde om het hier milieuvriendelijker en schoner te maken zou deze truck dan in jullie plaatje passen?

Er zijn meerdere dingen die er voor zorgen dat de luchtkwaliteit beter wordt, maar ik zou het zeker als een optie zien. Stikstof en fijnstof zijn de grootste vervuilers hier. Dat zijn de belangrijkste drijvers.

Bij bijvoorbeeld de bevoorrading van winkels zouden elektrische trucks uiteindelijk een grotere rol kunnen spelen. Ik vind elektrisch vervoer interessant vooral in gebieden waar het het meeste effect heeft en dan kom je op de trucks die kortere afstanden rijden en binnenstedelijke trucks.