Evaluating Alternatives for Landside Transport of Ocean Containers (2015) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Pages 27-48
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 27... ...
27 Approach The diversity of inland container transport options and technologies demands clear goals and flexible, performance-based evaluation criteria. Both the technology options and their claimed advantages are many and varied, as are stakeholder concerns and priorities.
|
From page 28... ...
28 Evaluating Alternatives for Landside Transport of Ocean Containers • Reduction in truck Vehicle Miles of Travel (VMT) • Changes (presumably reductions)
|
From page 29... ...
System Goals and Evaluation Criteria 29 non-commercial source. By requesting system proposals that would fulfill the environmental and transportation objectives at no cost to the ports, the RFCS effectively declared the ports to be interested in a self-supporting "turnkey" system, rather than in financing technology and system development, construction, and operation.
|
From page 30... ...
30 Evaluating Alternatives for Landside Transport of Ocean Containers as container freight movement. Only after this question has been answered is it appropriate to move onto the implications for the system as a whole.
|
From page 31... ...
System Goals and Evaluation Criteria 31 Technology evaluation criteria should focus on line-haul performance (e.g., capacity, velocity, operating cost, reliability, availability, safety, and ability to handle different container types and weights) and environmental aspects (e.g., emissions and energy use)
|
From page 32... ...
32 Evaluating Alternatives for Landside Transport of Ocean Containers Figure 3-3 diagrams the generic progression from technical and economic data through objective technical judgment to the crucial incorporation of social values and criteria.13a Another formulation is offered by Dimitrijevic and Spasovic13b with specific application to automated guided vehicle systems in container ports. They suggest four categories: • Financial impacts, including construction costs, maintenance costs, operation costs, revenues, and increase or reduction of fares for transit systems.
|
From page 33... ...
System Goals and Evaluation Criteria 33 the TBL concept in its application to the Southern California goods movement system as an approach that " .
|
From page 34... ...
34 Evaluating Alternatives for Landside Transport of Ocean Containers cost, and implementation time are, therefore, the corresponding technical criteria. Other sources promoted the port's "competitive edge" or the competitive position of the region, which typically translates into throughput capacity, cost, transit time, and reliability.
|
From page 35... ...
System Goals and Evaluation Criteria 35 application of basic research knowledge and its subsequent development and testing before implementation in the intended application and environment. • So-called "paper" concepts that have not been tested with physical or computer models or prototypes would usually be in TRLs 1 and 2.
|
From page 36... ...
36 Evaluating Alternatives for Landside Transport of Ocean Containers Preliminary review of technology and the recent round of system proposals indicate that different parts of the concepts are frequently at different TRLs. The line-haul technologies may be at one TRL while a complete system built around the technological concept might be at a much lower TRL.
|
From page 37... ...
System Goals and Evaluation Criteria 37 For an alternative container transport system, SRL5 would mean that at least the line-haul technology, the terminal designs, and the control system had also reached TRL7 or higher. SRLs 6 through 9 would be attained by progressively modeling and demonstrating the ability of proven components to work together as a system in the relevant, real, and operational environments.
|
From page 38... ...
38 Evaluating Alternatives for Landside Transport of Ocean Containers costs, which may bring average costs into a competitive range. High capital costs can, however, create an implementation hurdle.
|
From page 39... ...
System Goals and Evaluation Criteria 39 under an implicit assumption of all things being equal. With the current state of the practice such an approach is tempting because so few proposals offer any details of terminal or pickup/ delivery operations.
|
From page 40... ...
40 Evaluating Alternatives for Landside Transport of Ocean Containers System Service An evaluation of absolute or comparative service capabilities must be multi-dimensional, reflecting the full range of customer and port requirements: • Average terminal-to-terminal transit time • Average ground-to-ground transit time • Average end-to-end transit time • Average round-trip cycle time • Impacts of scale and congestion • Flexibility to adjust to peak/non-peak volumes • Flexibility to adjust to changing pickup and delivery points • Loss and damage potential • Cargo, system, and vehicle security • Adaptability to port circumstances Within the list above, much is often made of the line-haul speed advantages of Maglev technologies that minimize friction. The value of line-haul speed, however, can be offset by terminal operations and waits.
|
From page 41... ...
System Goals and Evaluation Criteria 41 small performance variations or exceptions begin to have large impacts and the peak throughput cannot be sustained indefinitely. A common rule of thumb is that attainable routine throughput (sometimes called "capability")
|
From page 42... ...
42 Evaluating Alternatives for Landside Transport of Ocean Containers • On-time end-to-end performance standard (time, +/- minutes) • Percent on-time end-to-end performance/standard deviation of transit time • Mean time between terminal-to-terminal failures • Unit-hours of delay per terminal-to-terminal failure • Total cost per terminal-to-terminal failure • Mean time between end-to-end failures • Mean time to restore service (MTTRS)
|
From page 43... ...
System Goals and Evaluation Criteria 43 declining during introduction or initial use; constant during most of its operational history; or increasing as the machine or equipment begins wearing out. In both Figures 3-5 and 3-6, the relevant questions are likely to be (1)
|
From page 44... ...
44 Evaluating Alternatives for Landside Transport of Ocean Containers be faced in Houston, South Carolina, or New Jersey. Similarly, seismic risk is more significant in Southern California or Seattle than at Gulf or East Coast ports.
|
From page 45... ...
System Goals and Evaluation Criteria 45 • Inability of a line-haul vehicle to safely carry the heaviest expected container load. • Inability of a guideway design to pass over or under an unavoidable obstacle (e.g., a river, building, or freeway)
|
From page 46... ...
46 Evaluating Alternatives for Landside Transport of Ocean Containers Emissions Emissions of criteria air pollutants (e.g., NOx, HC, PM, SOx) and greenhouse gases (CO2)
|
From page 47... ...
System Goals and Evaluation Criteria 47 • Benthic zone impacts • Fishery and wildlife impacts Mitigation Requirements Environmental mitigation costs appear as a criterion under the capital cost category, but mitigation should also be considered as an environmental evaluation criterion. One issue is the extent to which adverse environmental consequences can or cannot be effectively mitigated and must be accepted or offset instead.
|
From page 48... ...
48 Evaluating Alternatives for Landside Transport of Ocean Containers • Risk of hazmat incident • Impact of hazmat incident • Community safety requirements Security Assessment Community security issues include • Cargo/vehicle theft • Vandalism • Terrorism System and customer security was considered earlier. From a community point of view, any potential for vandalism places a burden on local law enforcement and could create a public eyesore or nuisance.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.