List of Contents List of Figures List of Tables List of Abbreviations
1.2 Objective of the Work
1.4 Structure of the Thesis
2 The Seaport and its Characteristics
3 The Transport of a Container from a Seaport to the Hinterland
3.1 The Definition and Delimitation of the Hinterland
3.2 The Hinterland Traffic in Germany
3.3 Challenges in the Hinterland Traffic
3.4 Requirements of the Customers
3.5 Actors of the Hinterland Transport
3.6 ISO Container
3.6.1 Typical Used Container
3.6.2 Advantages and Effects of the Containerization
4 The Transport Modes of Containerized Hinterland Traffic
4.1 Containerized Hinterland Transport by Train
4.1.1 Block Train
4.1.2 Single Wagon Load
4.2 Containerized Hinterland Transport by Truck
4.3 Containerized Hinterland Transport by Barge
5 Cost Modeling fora Containerized Hinterland Transport
5.1 Types of Costs
5.2 Overview of Theoretical Transport Costs by Train
5.3 Overview of Theoretical Transport Costs by Truck
5.4 Overview of Theoretical Transport Costs by Barge
6 Determination of Transport Costs for the Route Rotterdam-Duisburg
6.1 Transportation Costs by Rail
6.1.1 Transshipment Costs Seaport
6.1.2 Main Line Operation Costs by Rail
6.1.3 Transshipment Costs Hinterland Terminal
6.1.4 Total Costs Train
6.2 Transportation Costs by Truck
6.2.1 Transshipment Costs Seaport
6.2.2 Main Line Operation Costs by Truck
6.2.3 Total Costs Truck
6.3 Transportation Costs by Barge
6.3.1 Transshipment Costs Seaport
6.3.2 Main Line Operation Costs by Barge
6.3.3 Transshipment Costs Hinterland Terminal
6.3.4 Total Costs Barge
6.4 Analysis and Evaluation of the Case Example
List of Sources
List of Figures
Figure 1 : Different Variants of FCL/LCL Transport
Figure 2: Overlapping Hinterland of Two Ports
Figure 3: Natural Boundary of the Hinterland by a Mountain
Figure 4: Monopoly Position of a Port
Figure 5: Modal Split of Containerized German Hinterland Traffic in
Figure 6: “6r“ Rule - Main Objectives of the Logistics
Figure 7: Worldwide Containerized Trade from 2000 to 2010 in Mill. TELI
Figure 8: System Sketch of a Direct Train
Figure 9: System Sketch of a Shuttle Train
Figure 10: System Sketch of the Junction System
Figure 11: Representation of Costs per Transport Section
Figure 12: Representation of Overall Transport Costs
List of Tables
Table 1: Performance Criteria of Transport Modes
Table 2: Profile on Performance of Rail Freight Traffic
Table 3: Summarized Characteristics of Direct and Shuttle Trains
Table 4: Summarized Characteristics of Single Wagon Load
Table 5: Profile on Performance of Truck Freight Traffic
Table 6: Profile on Performance of Barge Freight Traffic
Table 7: Cost Model for a Containerized Transport from the Seaport to a Hinterland Terminal by Train
Table 8: Cost Model for a Containerized Transport from the Seaport to a Hinterland Terminal by Truck
Table 9: Cost Model for a Containerized Transport from the Seaport to a Hinterland Terminal by Barge
List of Abbreviations
Abbildung in dieser leseprobe nicht enthalten
A typical feature of the rapidly advancing globalization is the containerization in freight transport. The invention plus insertion of standardized and stackable containers led to the great influence of maritime logistics in international trade as the containers could reduce transport costs as universal loading units significantly.
Up to 2009, when shipping lines and terminal operators had to record a drastic drop in container volume due to the financial crisis, the worldwide annual container turnover was characterized by constant growth. In the meantime, the maritime sector has recovered from the setback and with regard to their container transshipments, ports achieve record numbers. Further removals of trade barriers will lead to an increasingly intensification of international trade so that container traffic is continue to grow.
Rising container throughput at seaports also has effects ashore. Nowadays, ports have more and more problems to manage goods streams between seaport and hinterland in an efficient way. After unloading the containers from vessel, it is the objective to transport the freight as quickly and cost-effective as possible to the final destination. However, congestion at seaport terminals, caused by a rising number of containers, inhibits this aim. Increasing sizes of ships can exacerbate the bottleneck situation at seaports. Whereas ocean carriers of the first generation could load up to 1.000 containers, nowadays, vessels with a capacity of 21.000 TEU are ordered.1 Therefore, an efficient container distribution to the hinterland is becoming increasingly difficult. If the forecasts (doubling of the container volume until 2030) of the German Ministry for Traffic and Digital Infrastructure regarding container traffic prove correct, the described problems will be intensified in the future so that transport infrastructure will not be able to handle the quantities of containers.2
It is therefore all the more important to strengthen hinterland connections of seaports to ensure a smooth transportation. In order to minimize constraints of the single transportation modes, intermodal transport is gaining in importance. Combined transport units the advantages of each carrier and helps relieving roads and reducing emissions of goods traffic. Consequently, inland ports with their terminals represent nodal points and are increasingly the focus of a hinterland supply chain. On the way to the hinterland terminal, each transport mode has different cost factors and even expanses for the transshipment of containers are dependent on the carrier. As a result, it is a complex decision to choose the right vehicle for the transport which can ensure on the one hand a fast and on there other hand a cost effective transportation.
1.2 Objective of the Work
In the scope of this thesis, the transport modes of hinterland transportation are analyzed with regard to their benefits and disadvantages. This analysis does not only show their compatibility with hinterland traffic but also their cost factors on the way from a seaport to the hinterland. It is shown which phases a container is passing as well as which expanses are entailed by these operations.
As a first step, a large theoretical basic knowledge shall be created. Therefore, all locations and operators of the supply chain for a hinterland container are introduced, general requirements as well as processes and problems are presented, too.
After presenting the transportation means and their expanses, the developed cost model is applied on an example. The case example shall illustrate single characteristics of each transport mode and shows the proportion of costs.
Finally, the total transport costs for the selected route are determined and the transport modes can be compared again. Moreover, a recommendation for the carrier choice of this example is given. This recommendation is specially focused on the aspects costs and time which represent the most important factors in the logistics sector.
A sound literature research forms the basis for the theoretical part of this thesis. Here, standard literature, discussion papers as well as reports of research institutes and academic contributions of acknowledged scientists are mainly used in order to inform the reader about the current topic.
Ensuring highest actuality, the major part of data relates to recent results of researches of the German Government. The responsible ministries have commissioned researches that show the development, current status and future scenarios of the german hinterland traffic to measure goods volumes and needed resources.
The developed cost models are mainly based on already existing models. However, these are supplemented independently by adding cost factors for the specific transport of hinterland containers. Consequently, a case example is created to apply the designed cost model on reality. The objective of the example is to underline advantages and constraints of each transport mode with respect to their expanses and give the reader a brief insight into the several stations of a hinterland supply chain.
1.4 Structure of the Thesis
This dissertation for the study course “Mobility and Logistics“ (B.Sc.) - faculty of Communication and Environment - is divided into seven chapters. The first chapter represents the introduction, which shall give a brief insight into the topic and structure of this thesis.
Chapter 2 includes information about the seaport itself and the maritime logistics in general. Various forms of seaports as well as layout structures are shortly discussed, moreover current trends of the container traffic are presented.
The major part of basic knowledge, which is needed in order to know the function and importance of the hinterland, is presented in chapter 3. starting with the definition and delimitation of a hinterland, challenges and actors of the supply chain are subsequently presented. In addition, the current hinterland traffic of Germany is discussed and shows the most important ports for the german economy. The chapter is rounded off with an insight into the history and effects of containerization, which plays a significant role in the maritime logistics.
Chapter 4 introduces several possible transport modes for the container transport among seaport and hinterland. Different variants as well as advantages and disadvantages are presented, so that each carrier is analyzed with regard to their profile on performance.
After the transportation means are known better, the developed cost models are shown in chapter 5. Here, single cost factors are listed and clarified in the follow up. The cost model is the basis for the case example in chapter 6.
The different cost models are applied on a case example which shows every single expanse of the hinterland container supply chain for the route Rotterdam-Duisburg. Therefore, all transportation means can be compared again and all benefits as well as constraints of potential carriers are illustrated. A recommendation for the choice of transport mode concerning the selected route can be pronounced. The choice is mainly focused on the aspects time and money.
Finally, chapter 7 summarizes the studies of this thesis. A conclusion and further considerations of the author close the last chapter which also represents the end of this bachelor thesis.
2. The Seaport and its Characteristics
A seaport is a port which is located at a coast, river or canal and can be called by ships. It allows the trade between two economic areas, which are separated by the ocean. Therefore, sea ports are essential for the exchange of goods among continental and oversea utility rooms, insofar as the trade of goods is not executed by plane.3 Due to the low transportation costs, especially the maritime cargo transport made the world trade and international division of labour possible. In the meantime, more than 90 % of global trade is handled through sea freight, so that sea ports have a special status in the global supply chain.4
Starting with their location, sea ports have different characteristics in general. The classical port is the seaside port which is located directly at the ocean. Due to its position, this port is - comparatively to other port types - easy to approach and can be reached without loss of time.5 An example of a sea side port is the port of Singapore, which is currently the second biggest in the world with regard to the container volume per year.6 Moreover, there are ports which are dependent on the tide. Although these ports are open to the sea, ships have to consider ebb and flow by entering the port so that they do not run aground. A typical tide port is located in Bremerhaven where the North Sea and its tides influence the shipping traffic strongly.7
Also riverside ports are affected by their natural conditions. They are not located directly at the sea, so that the vessels need to pass a river before reaching the port in the interior of a country. This river often turns into a bottleneck which constraints the vessels transit. One example for this, is the port of Hamburg where ships need to pass the Elbe to reach the terminals.8 Lastly, there are ports that are behind locks. This construction shall help to decrease the tidal power and maintain a constant water level in the port, so that even the biggest vessels can call this destination. The port of Antwerp can be mentioned as an example, since this port is currently building another lock to increase the ship handling capacity.9
But not only the location is decisive for a port, also the infrastructure plays an important role. First of all, the terminals are classified according to the handled goods. Typical terminals at a port can represent:10
-Terminals for liquid bulk (e.g. oil, chemical products)
-Terminals for pourable bulk goods (e.g. coal, iron ore)Off Shore Terminals
-Terminals for General Cargo (e.g steel, wood)
-Ro/Ro Terminals (e.g. cars)
-Heavy Lift Terminals (e.g. cranes, engines)
Since the handled goods can react with each other, minimum distances in the terminal planning have to be considered. Coal for example, has to stick a minimum distance to general cargo (200m), chemical (300m) or passenger terminals (400m).11 In the framework of this paper, the focus will however be on the container terminals. First of all, maritime container terminals require a lot of space for the storage and provision of containers. The terminals usually provide storage facilities for both, loaded and empty containers. Loaded containers are stored for relatively short periods while waiting for onward transportation, whilst unloaded containers may be stored for longer periods, awaiting their next use. Containers which are normally stacked for storage, can either contain a FCL (Full Container Load) or LCL (Less than Container) load. In the standard case, the container is loaded by the sender and is opened and unloaded by the final recipient. This supply chain represents a FCL movement.12 Alternatively, the freight can be shipped in consolidated containers. If the goods to be sent do not fill a whole container, the conventional packed cargo is carried to a container freight station. Here, the shipment is stowed with other movements that have the same receiving port where it gets deconsolidated again.13 Due to the LCL movements, also low volume can be transported out effective.
Abbildung in dieser leseprobe nicht enthalten
Figure 1: Different Variants of FCL/LCL Transport
Source: Advisory Council based on Obermaier et al. (2007), p. 313, Figure 1
Since there is a high amount of containers that need an intermediate storage within a port area, effective equipment for the movements of containers is particularly important. To ensure an efficient and fast container handling, a sufficient number of berths is essential. In connection with adequate port equipment, this combination leads to short lay times for ships and hence to an increasing competitiveness of the port. The shipping companies are required to minimize berthing times at a port since a longer stay would cause further harbor fees. Moreover, the unproductive time of the vessel would increase and the indirect costs as maintenance of the ship and care of the crew are continuing to rise which, in turn, would lead to a narrow profit margin. Therefore, the productivity of a container terminal is of high importance. The operators’ goal is to minimize the loading and unloading time by the efficient use of port equipment. Whereas container gantry cranes are responsible for transshipment processes from ship to port, straddle carriers and reach stackers are used for storage and transportation of containers within the terminal yard. So called overhead bridge cranes are then again designed for the loading onto the mode of transport which will execute the onward carriage to the hinterland.
The hinterland connection of a port is also a significant aspect and represents one of the most critical issues in port competitiveness. Since the upgrading of facilities and port equipment as well as an increased sophistication of berth planning led to reduced turnaround times of the ships, the port needs a very efficient transport infrastructure in order to manage the quantity of containers and to prevent congestion within the port area.14 In the optimal situation, the port possesses a high density inland transport network and a big range of modal options. In times of ships that have a capacity of up to 18.000 container, well developed hinterland connectivity is one of the key criteria that shipping lines, shippers and logistics providers take into account in deciding in their choice of port.15
But not only the size of ships respectively the frequency of ship arrivals and departure can constraint port operations. Also ground conditions, hydrological and oceanographic factors like wind, waves, tides and ice as well as local regulations are one of some factors that can influence the port traffic.16 Since a lot of ports can not meet these challenges, shipping companies call fewer ports but with ships that have a high container capacity.17 The called ports are becoming transshipment hubs which serve smaller ports with the feeder service.
Feeder ships which have an average capacity of 300-500 containers, distribute the containers from the transshipment hubs to smaller ports, respectively collect the loading units at smaller ports and carry the boxes then to big harbors. Due to the bundling of the container volume of and for smaller ports, almost every port is reachable by a reasonable price. Therefore, the feeder service complements maritime logistics and represents an important part of it.
3. The Transport of a Container from the Seaport to the Hinterland
3.1 The Definition and Delimitation of the Hinterland
In the course of Globalization and linked marketplaces, the supply chain of the inland container distribution to the hinterland is becoming increasingly important for shippers and logistics service providers. The trends of the worldwide economy like division of labor as well as internationalization of assembly processes lead to rising container receptions at seaports.18 As most of the containers are movements from or to the hinterland, it is widely acknowledged that ״the hinterland is the area over which a seaport draws the majority of its business.“19 Smaller portions of the goods that get shipped by container are used or produced in the immediate surrounding of the seaport. This rate is defined as the so called Loco Quote.20
Nowadays, seaports are designated as huge Hubs and gateways for intercontinental transport flow from or to the hinterland.21 The haulage of export goods to the seaport as well as the movement of the import freight is called hinterland traffic. The transports of these containers among seaport and hinterland are commonly executed by truck, barge or train. Caused by progressively growing transport volume in this logistic sector, the demand of an efficient container handling process is increased and led to inter port competition.22 Since this logistics sector is very dynamic (for example: seasonal impact, technological changes etc.), there is no feasible definition where to delimit the hinterland of a port.23 According to Jürgen Sorgenfrei (2013), the size can depend inter alia on economic factors like quantity and size of industry, speed but also on geographic circumstances that make business with certain regions unprofitable.24 Generally, the hinterland ends where the export and import operations are more attractive through another port with respect to time and cost.25 Figure 2 will illustrate the above mentioned factors regarding the potential relevant market of a seaport and its hinterland.
Provided that Port 1 and Port 2 handle the same commodities (in this case : container), the hinterland of seaports can overlap. Whereas hinterland a belongs to Port 1 and hinterland c can be assigned to Port 2, from an economic point of view, end customers of the region b can select between both sea ports. Therefore competition occurs and the ports spend money for sales as well as commercials to conquer the market in this region.26
But not only the infrastructure of a harbor and the resulting transport accessibility of the hinterland can be essential for customer as well as freight forwarder.
Also the routes of the shipping companies are decisive. If a port cannot offer a shipping service within a specific time period, the customer in region b may find it at an other seaport. Consequently, the import respectively export process could be handled by this harbor to secure a smooth supply chain.
Figure 3 shows that also geographic circumstances can influence the form and size of a ports’ hinterland. A natural barrier like a mountain prevents that the two ports are in competition with each other. A good rail or road access via the mountain could be not profitable, so that the potential hinterland of Port 1 is downsized on a natural way.27 Nevertheless this harbor can have the same or even more annual handled containers than Port 2 with its hinterland. Not only the size but also big cities and their industrial grade determines the economic potential of a hinterland.28
A monopoly status is given, if an area only has access to one (major) port. This market situation is merely existent on an island, where the whole surface is the hinterland of the seaport.29 The pictured situation of figure 4 probably can be found on Iceland, where feeder ships transport containers from other ports to Reykjavik, or on Malta where even big vessels stop at the port of Marsaxlokk.30
3.2 The Hinterland Traffic in Germany
Due to the worldwide increased container turnover, well developed hinterland links are an important factor of inter port competition. This aspect opens up access to economic regions and is decision-relevant in the port selection of shipping companies.31 Especially in Germany, where economically strong regions like Bavaria and the Ruhr area are not located directly at the sea, a good transport infrastructure is of great importance. Therefore, not only roads, inland waters as well as railway networks have to be established - also transshipment terminals must be dimensioned for the inland distribution of the containers to ensure a smooth handling. Thus, a rising turnover amount at the seaports has also impact on the distribution of goods to the German hinterland.
In the recent past, Hamburg and the Bremen ports as well as Rotterdam and Antwerp were among the biggest container ports in Europe.32 In 2014, Rotterdam had a huge container turnover of circa 12.3 million containers.33 Consequently, the so called northern-range ports have the greatest significance to the german hinterland traffic. Approximately 85 % of the total hinterland traffic is handled by these ports.34
Graphic 2.2 shows the distribution of the transport modes regarding the german relevant hinterland traffic. Since Antwerp and Rotterdam are often the first ports of call, both harbors are of high interest for german companies, especially regarding the import of goods. Notable is the high percentage of barge transport. Due to the physical proximity and the natural conditions, particularly the Ruhr area refers to this transport mode. Because of efficient connections among Antwerp as well as Rotterdam and the well developed inland ports in the
West German states, both harbors have a high share in this transport sector.35 Whereas German states among the Rhine are mainly handled via the Benelux ports, Hamburg and Bremerhaven have a high market share in East and South Germany.36 37 As a result of the geographical distance, container transports to these regions are mostly executed by train. The high percentage of truck carriage at the port of Hamburg firstly can be explained by an above-average Loco Quote. This is because especially in the metropolitan area Hamburg, a lot of packing enterprises settled down which generate a significant container volume.38 Also the surrounding states like SchleswigHolstein and Lower Saxony are almost exclusively served by trucks.39
3.3 Challenges in the Hinterland Traffic
The transport volume of containerized maritime traffic is characterized by strong growth. The rise in container turnovers, caused by the progression of international goods traffic and the increasing sizes of container ships, has direct effects on the seaports as well as on the hinterland traffic.
While in the year 2005 the biggest container ship of the world could transport up to 4.700 TEU per trip - one TEU represents a twenty-foot equivalent transport unit - 10 years later the largest one can move around 19.000 TEU and for the year 2017, vessels with a capacity of 21.000 containers are ordered.40 41
However, the infrastructure of the maritime transport sector is partly not designed for such huge carriers. Because of the fact that the port of Hamburg is accessible for the new generation of container ships, a further deepening of the Elbe is necessary. So far, the harbor is strongly tide depending, so that bigger vessels can not enter Hamburg with full load.42 Moreover, in Bremerhaven the fairway of the quayside has to be expanded to enable the turning of 400m carrier.43
In the end, the oversized vessels cause rising costs for the seaports so that shipping lines can reach these destinations. On the one hand, the already mentioned infrastructure like entrances, quay walls and channel docks has to be adapted, on the other hand, the superstructure like gantry cranes need to be heightened partially.44 Due to the fact that ships become larger every year, also space problems can arise at terminals. Before the arrival of the vessel, containers for the export need to be stored within the port area, so at the appropriate time, they can be loaded on the ship without a lot of effort. Simultaneously, discharged containers of import operations require space for the intermediate storage - as only very few leave the terminal area directly.45 Therefore, the temporal and geographic concentration demands noteworthy shares of storage capacity and excellent connections of the transport modes are required to ensure a fast turnover.46
Nevertheless, due to the high transport volume a certain risk of congestion in the container handling as well as waiting time within the port area is given, which may not only lead to delays in the delivery but also to financial losses for the carriers.47 Especially road connections are overloaded and prove themselves as bottlenecks, since the transport is strongly hampered by traffic jams. Due to the international trade within the European Union and the role of Germany as a transit country in Central
Europe, lots of international shipments pass through the country and contribute to the congestion of the road network.48
In order to relieve the street infrastructure, the German government wants to strengthen inland transports by barge and by train.49 Here, one ambition is to free up capacities on the road, another one is to make the traffic system more climate and environmentally friendly.50 Consequently, the combined transport is intended to grow. However, in contrast to the truck, barges and trains are not single transportation modes. Therefore, collection and distribution processes of the containers are necessary.51 To enhance the competitiveness of these means of transport, economic aspects like additional time and costs need to be compensated through a working infrastructure.
Particularly at the main seaports, good working hinterland links for all transport modes will be important since shipping lines call less ports. When looking at the high costs which are connected with entering a harbor (for instance : maneuver, navigators, tugs), ocean carrier tend to reduce called ports within one operating area. This aspect can intensify the congestion since hinterland distances and hinterland transport costs could be increased through skipped ports.52
In the end, the rising transport volume lead to capacity bottlenecks which have an effect on the hinterland traffic. Investments in terminals and hinterland links need to be made, so that the hinterland can manage all challenges and a smooth transport among sea port and hinterland is further possible.
3.4 Requirements of the Customers
In times of Globalization and an increasing amount of container transports, logistics providers are demanded to enable a preferably uncomplicated and smooth transportation processing. According to A. Mancera et al., the most important attributes in terms of freight transport are transit time, reliability, safety, frequency and accessibility.53 The demands of clients are shown in the following, based on the “6r“ rule, which describes the six main objectives of the logistics and mainly include all mentioned transport attributes.54
Firstly, customers expect that the right product is provided. With regard to the hinterland traffic, the right container should be delivered with the arranged transport mode.
Also the right amount of containers is decisively. Particularly in the import area, the production can be aligned to the incoming goods. Therefore, a missing loading unit can have disastrous consequences for a company. In conclusion, the aspect to deliver at the right time is of prime importance. With production processes like the Just-In-Time principle, warehouse stocks are low and delays can have huge effects on the manufacturing. Consequently, in this case the client expects an early information exchange. This can begin with foreseeable delays with the estimated arrival time of a vessel. If necessary, the transported goods can be removed at an earlier port of call. Moreover, a change in the traffic carrier of the post carriage can recover lost time. Also short time complications in the supply chain, for instance caused by congestion at the terminal or traffic jams, need be notified, so that otherwise a customer can use the allocated staff and equipment (ramp,forklift truck etc.) for alternative operations.
Another aspect of the “6r“ rule is to deliver with the right quality. This includes on the one hand certain flexibility such as a short-term change in the transport mode but also reliability. Moreover the transport should be executed without causing damage to the freight.
Since companies can have several subsidiaries in one region, it is also important to deliver to the right place. Not every branch is able to handle container transports as for this purpose personal and special equipment is needed. Thus, a delivery to the wrong address does not only cost time but can also lead to financial problems.
Financial aspects are also playing a key role in the requirements of customers. According to the distance among seaport and subsidiary, the most effective transport mode for this route should be chosen and charged by reasonable prices. Possible charges like demurrage and storage costs should be largely prevented by the carrier since these costs are borne by supplier or receiver.
1 Brinkmann (2005) p. 67
2 German Ministry for Traffic and Digital Infrastructure (2014), p. 190
3 Schulz-Hanßen (1965), p 21
4 Federal Foreign Office (2013)
5 Maaß (2015a), p. 16
6 Statista (2014a)
7 Maaß (2015a), p. 14
8 Maaß (2015a), p 19
9 Port of Antwerp (2012)
10 Maaß (2015b), p. 7
11 Maaß (2015b), p. 5
12 Schiek (2008), p. 184
13 Obermaier et al. (2007), p. 313
14 Merketal. (2015) p. 4
15 Acciaro et al. (2013), p. 12
16 Maaß (2015b), p. 16
17 OECD (2008), p. 8
18 Grig (2012), p. 1
19 Blecker et al. (2010), p. 221
20 Stock (2014), p. 37
21 Notteboom (2008), p. 4
22 German Ministry for Economy and Energy (2016): In 2014, only the container turnover at german sea port went up by 6.1 %. Until 2030, the german government expects a further increase by about 74% regarding handled transshipment volume at german harbors.
23 Notteboom (2008), p. 4
24 Sorgenfrei (2013), p. 88/89
25 Woitschützke (2002), p. 404
26 Sorgenfrei (2013), p. 91
27 Sorgenfrei (2013), p. 89
28 Sorgenfrei (2013), p. 90
29 Sorgenfrei (2013), p 90
30 Maerskline (2016) : Marsaxlokk is part of several routes among Europe and Asia
31 FIS (2003)
32 Statista (2014b)
33 Port of Rotterdam (2016)
34 German Ministry for Traffic and Digital Infrastructure (2014), p. 145
35 German Ministry for Traffic and Digital Infrastructure (2014), p. 165 (Graphic 106) & p. 171 (Graphic 117)
36 ISL (2010)1 p. 17, Figure 7
37 German Ministry for Traffic and Digital Infrastructure (2014), p. 173, Figure 121
38 ISL (2015), p. 24
39 ISL (2010), p. 17, Figure 7
40 Hapag Lloyd (2005)
41 Die Welt (2015)
42 NDR (2014)
43 via Bremen (2015)
44 ISL (2014), p. 3
45 ISL (2014), p. 3
46 Lendner (2006), p. 5/6
47 Song etai. (2015), p. 235
48 Bretzke et al. (2012), p. 456
49 German Ministry for Transport, Building and Urban Development (2008), p. 20
50 German Ministry for Transport, Building and Urban Development (2008), p. 20/21
51 Schönknecht (2009), p. 119
52 ISL(2014), p 4
53 Mancera et al. (2016), p. 296
54 ten Hompel et al. (2007), p. 322
- Quote paper
- Niklas Eickers (Author), 2016, Development of a Cost Model for a Hinterland Container Transport from a Seaport, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/452534