Thank you. Good afternoon or good morning to those of you to the West. Welcome to the Talking Freight Seminar Series.
My name is Jennifer Symoun and I will moderate today's seminar. Today's topic is Understanding the Policy and Program Structure of National and International Freight Corridor Programs: International Scan.
Before I go any further, I do want to let those of you who are calling into the teleconference for the audio know that you need to mute your computer speakers or else you will be hearing your audio over the computer as well.
Today we'll have three presenters – Renee Sigel from the Federal Highway Administration Pennsylvania Division, Eric Madden from the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation, and Ernie Perry from the Missouri Department of Transportation.
Renee Sigel is the FHWA's Division Administrator for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. She heads an office of 40 professionals that oversees an approximately $1.4 billion Federal-aid Highway Program in Pennsylvania. Under Renee's leadership, the FHWA has been working with the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation on numerous important initiatives to improve the safety of our transportation system and the project delivery process. She serves on the FHWA Freight Council.
Ernie Perry is the Administrator of Freight Development at the Missouri Department of Transportation. Currently, he is working on freight projects to re-establish freight traffic on the Missouri River, improve freight movement on a major interstate, develop an international aviation freight hub, and increase speed and reliability on a shared-use passenger-freight rail corridor. In addition to the International Freight scan, he serves on cooperative freight research panels, and participates on AASHTO technical and policy freight activities.
As deputy secretary oversees the ministration of financial assistant grants, technical assistance pulling over $7 million annually to 130 for public use aviation facilities for airport improvement projects, -- environmental guide,
licensing inspection, if you should awareness initiative it -- and initiatives -- for maintenance and construction of track projects, relevant action and awareness initiative.
Ernie Perry is the -- he currently he is working on great projects to establish great traffic on the Missouri River, improve freight movement on a major interstate come a the establish an international freight up,
-- on a shared use passenger freight corridor. An additional to the national for a scan, he serves on ? To research panels and --
Today's seminar will last 90 minutes with 60 minutes for the speakers and 30 minutes for questions and answers. During the presentation, you may put a question in the chat area.
The presenter will not answer questions during the presentation, but I will start out to the question and answer period with a question in the box. If we run out of time, we will attempt to get a written response from the presenter.
The PowerPoint presentation you see today is available for download from the file download walks in the lower right-hand corner of your screen. It will be available online in the next few weeks, with a transcript once these are available.
The seminars are eligible for one point I AICP credits for members in order to obtain credit -- credit you must login with your last name,
or type your name in the check box I have included more detail instructions in the file box to obtain your credit.
Please notice this is not available yet on the website, that I will e-mail everyone who registered once it is available for credit. Whether you are assigned for AICP credit, please download the survey and return it to me after the webinar.
Today's topic is understanding the policy and program structure of national and international freight corridor programs, international scan. Please type questions into the chat box and they will be answered in the last half hour.
The presentation is given today jointly by Renée, Eric, and Ernie. I will start out with Renée.
And you can go ahead.
Welcome to all who are participating.
It is good to be here today. Speaking for Eric and Ernie we are all very glad that you asked to participate today.
First let me start with a little bit of explanation for those of you who are not aware of our international technology scanning program. This program is jointly funded by federal highway and ASTO.
It is used to better understand how other nations are addressing their transportation programs. We stopped at -- seek out and evaluate international practices that could improve the performance of the United States Hwy. system.
Generally I think federal highway and ASHTO sponsor several scans a year and -- it is also sponsored I the NHRP and we looked at quarterly approaching free to planning. I will start this off and turn it back and forth from Eric and Ernie.
First the objectives. Produced -- that he straightforward. We wanted to look at the institutional, organizational and administrative structure of freight corridor programs of the European corridor.
We want to see how they selected headquarters are at we are very aware they had a freight word or in the union. We wanted to know how they financed and managed these programs. We wanted to know if they had performance standards
and wanted to know how they worked with international collaboration and interacted in the private sectors stakeholders. In the US we have a lot of private-sector stakeholders.
Those were the objectives we left the United States on last August.
We had a great group of participants. 3 Federal Hwy.
representatives, Tony first -- Furst who was a cochair, -- Ernie and Eric from Pennsylvania today Ernie was cochair. We took along representatives from the 995 corridor coalition as it is well-established here in the United States.
Because we are looking from a North American perspective, we had two people from the -- but we also had people from the United States -- from Canada and Mexico.
We had a member from PTI and he was our recorder. But there is a great looking picture of a group later in the presentation.
Where did we go and why ? Our first stop was Brussels, Belgium. That is where the main headquarters of the coalition is located. We actually began and ended our trip here so we could meet with the European commission folks,
if some background and primary information and then we went out and visited the five countries . We came back and did a follow-up with the European commission. We needed clarification on additional questions
and of coarse we heard different teams from the countries from what we heard from the European commission. We wanted to confirm what we have heard. It was a great way to conduct this. We went to five countries.
The five countries were selected primarily from the standpoint of, they had multimodal corridors they selected.
They had 30 corridors. They had some key parts of these corridors.
The other way we selected these was we wanted to make share that the older member countries and new member countries were both included. And so that is why we went to Hungary and Poland as new member countries.
Ernie I will turn it over to you to give us comparison.
I am with the , and it was a fantastic trip and a great group of people.
We visited these countries to look at freight corridors and see how they fit in with the people and passenger systems and overall oddities various governments and transportation systems work together.
Especially in terms of these freight corridors. They do not work in a vacuum. When we look at demographics, we can see that it is much more dense than in the United States. There is more history, more people unless they.
Their historical locations are important, just like here in the trans--- transportation planning and development. We heard numerous teams -- times that they always read in the historical areas. -- The standard of living is pretty high
and in terms of what these people are investing, -- in the United States we are somewhere around 2% in our GDP EU range and then they developed about 4% and in China 9%.
-- There was a lot smaller cars and diesel engines.
We saw lot of Telematic and ICS use or management. We also saw a lot of focus on decarbonization and green. We saw electrician of the system and smaller vehicles and less consumption. They were also pushing freight in various modes.
We also saw people delivering freight through most of these trends push -- transportation systems do the density there. Ashe [ Indiscernible - low volume ]
In terms of the characteristics in a comparative freight movement in the US, in terms of ton miles, we can see that road and rails in the United States are both very heavily weighted with a lesser amount allocated to the waterways EU.
In the, there is the ever present Bush to green transportation. So road transportation of freight totally dominate. They also use waterways and see shipping which is 39% of their 10 miles.
And Germany come of it toll facilities do not allow trucks on the weekends unless they are carrying live animals. -- Weekend trips to grandma's were basically ruthless traffic jams.
For trucks, Tories are lower for clean vehicles, which incentivize many of them to sell off old vehicles for newer cleaner vehicles. We also saw that the environmental interest in the EU, there is a push in the freight rail
and waterways to accommodate some of the environmental ingestion.
With these mode shifts, because of the dominance of past services, these are very complicated, dense systems.
Good morning, this is Eric. I'm going to look at the key findings that we discovered on our two-week trip. It was very eye-opening. We basically layered our findings into five separate areas. All of these,
-- how is all this going to roll in the same direction, the planning process.
How do put the meat on the bones here. Sustainability is a keyword that we have here in the United States. And now we are going to see what that truly means to be EU worried implementation in terms of,
that is where the rubber meets the road. We have the planning process, and how does this actually come to fruition. And the operations of it. When it is up and running how does this truly operate and flow ?
Eric, could I ask you to speak up a little bit please ?
Sure is this better ?
Some of the findings we found in terms of the policy, this was very evident in every country we went to. There is a true unifying vision. Many things that we discovered,
they had found that most of them are competing globally with not only individual countries, but global sectors. The North American sector versus the South American sector to, --, versus China almost and South Africa.
We discovered that if they did not get to a point of having the EU be able to connect some of the dots, the connectivity, quarters almost and economic development or commerce, they had to compete as an overall sector
or us they would not be able to compete. Their overall vision and policy allowed them to see how to connect the dots of societal goals.
The member states -- they call the member states but they are individual countries come again fully realized they cannot afford to go this alone. So they bought into this a bit. And provided an overall stable OC
and put much were money on the table if they were able to do things collectively.
When you have a stable vision like that, it makes things more attractive for the private sector in terms of financing.
There is that good-looking group that Renée referred to. That shot was taken on day 15, so we may be looking a little ragged. But this vision of a single marketplace in a single community in the EU of these 27 various countries,
was palatable. You could see it in every presentation they gave us and everybody you talk to two and visit we made. I liken it to the vision a bit drug the development of the United States interstate system.
How do we mobilize 50 states to work together. In the Eu out of you do it with 27 verse countries like -- the EU and China have learned that would have been left behind our error in investments.
They are investing in these core investment -- desperate patient methods -- we also saw the decision was not about economics but about the environment and decarbonization and sustainability.
We also saw played out that it is multimodal. They use every one of their most to make his work and provide for the passengers. Moving people is one of their priorities.
Getting back to some of their other policy visions. There was a little bit of an interesting dichotomy.
As much as they wanted to complete -- compete globally in moving freight and goods, you look at much of the infrastructure in place, either or waterways or rail. Most of that is your test for passenger traffic. It was funny,
there is a tremendous amount of water to be in the rivers around the EU. They had a very interesting way of characterizing their boat structure. You had white boats which had a very pure image.
The white vote were the ones that carry the people. And the dirty boat which were going throughout the rivers as well, they were the freight boats.
So there was a stigmatism that they're trying to get over between the white and the dirty boat. Both are critical to moving economic development or word -- forward. But it is amazing how when you see prioritization on passengers,
freight has to catch up a little bit.
Part of their -- particularly under rail, there is a harmonization as to come into effect.
The part -- privatization is the passenger. Most rail is run by smaller entities, and the operate within a country's borders.
To do anything in a long corridor aspect, the spacing between the rail changes.
It basically changes depends -- depending on who owns the rain no.
So you have to change the gale -- gauge and the electrification and that some harmonies so it is easy to get one good to transfer three or four different countries to get one and point. -- End point.
Particularly in Germany, and -- they are pretty much like our interstate system here and they are all Tolled. This is primarily done for the truckers and heavy trucks are tolled the most.
The rover is are subsidized because they are used for other transportation.
-- The realm roads are so -- the rail roads are subsidized because they are used for other transportation.
In terms of policy integration, what I saw that was made from the state perspective was as we developed authorization and possible quarter programs down the road. -- Programs down the road.
The EU tried to wrap some of the policy that are designed and formalized to direct other aspects of society. We so related incentives on logistics of how businesses were completed.
For example, -- the contracts do not include stipulations on modal share trade 34% trucks 35% Barger and 20% rail. Pricing is related to admissions. -- Not only are they collecting the toll system,
but they are trying to enforce air quality issues.
We saw examples of the point cities to get out of cars and onto public transport trade we saw how trucks are kept a certain roads on the weekends and holidays for passenger traffic priority.
This whole concept of freight holders is related to economic development, market development and the transportation system.
Let me talk a little bit about the planning assessed and I will try to pull all this together for you -- planning process and I will try to pull all this together for you.
The European commission has done some things prior to the 1990s, but that is when they really played out their first core doors -- core doors -- core doors -- corridors. That's when they came up with 12 priority projects.
It's made up their original network.
It was not based on any data, it was pretty much from 11 projects that were provided by the original member state.
Let me give you an idea. If you look at a map on the left, there are about 30 core doors in their peer -- corridors.
In 2003 added corridors to this.
You will see that it was a bottom up approach, and that the member states -- okay I am seeing -- did anyone else hear me ?
You can keep on going. I think it is just one person having problems.
They put these 30 corridors, and I prefer to call them projects, together because as you can see, some of the red lines kind of stopped mid-country.
These were self identified I a member states as their priority great projects -- freight ejects.
-- Projects. This is not based on any analytical or market-driven approach.
That was the 1990s and early 2000. In 2009, the European commission launched a new approach to let me go back real quick.
To look at what they are fighting a core network and a comprehensive network. Let me start with the core network. This is a top-down analytical approach determined at the you level -- EU level did this would be a broad,
upper-level driven system. It would be anchored on key population centers, Major. Frank -- freight generators, and would be very much based on things like freight volume, grounded in fundamental and hard facts,
and would be stable over the long term.
It would be multimodal him as far as freight movement goes. Looking at long-distance and international traffic flows, and links to existing infrastructure.
The core network would really only look at expansion where it is absolutely necessary.
The other interesting part they are looking at now, and this is not finalized, is they could be conceptual corridors within the fact that they may not be most specific. They may say from -- -- core X to capital Y is a corridor.
They may not say whether it is a highway or rail, but they say it is a key corridor for freight movement for us from this worked -- port to this capital. And leave it at that, not defining a mode.
This would focus on the high-volume, critical and key areas.
Then you have a comprehensive network they are proposing. This is a bottom-up approach and allows the member states and countries, to put together a network that includes their individuals, regional interests. And they would define this.
Again it would be multimodal.
Everything that each member state would submit would be part of the comprehensive network.
Up in the head again, what happened to the map are -- ?
Okay, so on the right side of this, you get a feel for the red network that would be the idea of what would be part of a core network for Germany.
This was really interesting from a future freight planning process possibly in the United States, is looking at a core network for a freight system in the United States.
One of the things I probably should have said in the beginning was we found the timing of this freight scan to be very important from our own national freight planning standpoint.
This is a great opportunity for us to look at the freight planning they were doing and the European Union, in light of the fact there is a lot of interest in DC and headquarters
and with Congress at looking at more comprehensive freight planning.
The planning of this was really interesting. That was the planning process. Ernie do want to add some things [ laughter ]
Some of the things is that you -- in the United States we have 50, but they have 27 . They have a more complicated process, given some of the history and divisions they have had across the EU in the past.
I think that is reflected in one of the transitions we saw in the planning assessed. They are currently moving from a cost analysis as one of the core features of their planning process to a multi-criteria process.
That is going to do for all the various constituent that they need to include in their planning process, and all the variables and determinants that are beyond just the cost of the project and what they might deter.
. Policy integration and societal goals and their attempt to make this a single market is broader than just return on investment that they will get. Another neat thing we saw was the European investment Bank.
They call themselves a policy bank area I thought that was pretty neat. I took it to mean that their capital activity is purposeful and is designed for EU policy and that is impacted by these infrastructures.
They are not only looking for a return on investment, the return on their policy.
It was also interesting to learn that the European investment Bank has developed their own analytical staff to ensure that they provide accurate traffic, income and growth that will support their position.
If they -- they have to replenish that fund. That was very interesting from a planning perspective.
Renée, Eric ?
The other thing that we discovered in regard to sustainability, and we will tell you that as much as we visited all the countries in the they explained to us how it was important to be an economic player
and they wanted to be a part of the union to move goods throughout the EU. But every single one of them have come out and said, we are absolutely very sensitive and very cognizant of climate change and sustainability.
-- In sustainability it they honestly believe that global warming and climate change is very real and something has to be done about it.
They are using transportation as a driver to actually direct -- address some of the issues of sustainability.
Here are some of the examples of how they are actually driving this discussion. What we learned in Germany is they are tolling there interstates. If you look at the engine tabs, -- cabs, those that loot the most have a higher toll to pay.
If you are responsible and have a cleaner truck, there is a less tolling burden on you to use the system.
In Rotterdam, which is a large and expensive court -- expansive port, they are still expanding. The new expansions they have, and the new terminals they are setting up, have contracts with new tenants. 65% of the goods coming in
and out of that port have to go out in a mode that is non-truck. That is staggering expoint -- !
It does work when you have the rail system that they have in Rotterdam. They have a very comprehensive shipping that court -- network. It is a challenge, but it is not something that is out of reach for them.
They are trying to use transportation as a driver that can work better in their environment.
Some of the misalignment we noticed, as much as they were pushing everything from freight to the rail system, the rail system is still priority passenger. If there is a freight train and a passenger train is coming down the track,
a freight train has to pull over on the side to a loud the passenger train to move through. I mentioned about the white versus the dirty boat also.
You can also look at issues of the toll collecting Germany and the toll us for the heavy trucks only. So they are using transportation as a vehicle. There is a little bit more work, but we have to applaud them for the effort
and guts it takes to put some of these things into action.
This slide should actually be called funding and implementation. From a funding standpoint, you will see in the dark red, most of the funding for their freight corridors and projects, still comes from the member states.
An example, from 2007, there estimated between 2007 two 2013 -- two 2013 -- to 2013, about $106 million will be provided by the member states for freight corridor projects. The EU union,
will probably only find about eight $8 billion worth of project. So you'll see on the chart that the member states provides a large portion of the funding. You will see the European investment Bank which is very successful
and I will talk about it in a second. I can talk about it now I guess. In 2009 a loan, the -- along -- alone, they had about nine point billion dollars in euros.
It was virtually funded by contributions from the member states, and it appears to be self-sustaining. You can see there are various sources of funding, and I will talk about the cohesion fund and the TEnT funding in a minute
or so the member states into double of the funding. There is about $8 billion available over a six-year period from the EU.
The EU has various funding programs. They have different than the programs for new member states versus more developed for regional and -- member states -- four original member states.
The less developed member states are available for money out of a cohesion fund. This cohesion fund is to help those new member states -- may be a better way to to say it is to reduce the economic
and social disparities between newer countries that joined the EU and the older, more established entries in the EU.
That is pretty much based on GNP of the country.
It can fund up to 85% of the projects. So like Hungary and Poland, they were using a lot of cohesion fund money from the European Union for their freight corridor projects.
Multi-year funding. Many of the countries were very envious of the federal highway program in the United States with its multi-year funding.
They would like to have 5 to 7 year funding programs in the member states. The European Union funding is a multi-year funding, and that is positive. As I mentioned above, other states provide the bulk of the funding,
and most member states have single year appropriations and authorizations.
It makes their long-term planning for projects very difficult. I have argued talked about the European investment Bank -- already talked about the European investment take.
There is a different between the new member and original states. The new member states are trying to bring the standard of their system up to that of the older number states. We are dealing with a lot of Eastern,
European countries that just do not have the interstate am a the rail infrastructure that -- the interstates, or the rail infrastructure. The member rails dates -- states have rail available
and they are trying to do more ITS type things and to fill in bottlenecks.
There is no harmonized tolling policy.
These processes are all over the board. It would not be unusual for a truck to have 4 to 6 different co collection articles in the cab of that truck. Many countries use stickers, like a permit.
Germany has a GPS-based system. One country has a radio-based system. There are also multiple ways of determining what the toll is. Some based on distance, some on a mission, some on all vehicles being taxed.
In Germany they only tax the heavy trucks.
Hungary taxes all vehicles. The only unifying policy that I believe we saw was the EU does have a cap On tolls that the member states can charge, so that it cannot the totally disparate.
The only way a member state can substantiate a higher rate is if they actually based the toll on actual maintenance and operating costs of that specific highway.
Another interesting thing. EU project coordinators. This was a really good fighting from the state -- finding from the stands that -- stands -- stance that projects crossmember state borders.
Maybe between France and Spain for example.
Many of these were assigned project coordinators from the European commission. The goal of these European coordinator's, they were hired by the EU, was to serve as a project facilitator. If any of you have worked on, in the United States,
a cross state project, maybe a bridge or state between -- or highway between two states. There are memorandum of agreement among differences in traffic for for, differences in project development and environmental policies.
There are also differences in permits and a lot of times developing these prostate projects -- cross state projects are complex.
In the EU we have gone to this project coordinator for many of their cross order projects. -- Crossed order -- cross border projects. Many times this person has a lyrical influence. They come from a political arena.
The purpose behind that is they have credibility to meet with heads of state.
So if France and Spain's leadership cannot reach an agreement on a cross border project, this coordinator would step in, they have the ability to call the heads of state in France and Spain and meet with them individually
or jointly to resolve the issues on the project and keep it moving forward.
Their goal is to resolve issues to keep the project moving forward. What we heard from the European union numbers and the member states is they found this to be very successful in keeping their cross border projects moving.
I guess it is up to me to explain how this works in terms of an operation.
We have a planning process, the sustainability, the implementation in terms of how we start getting this to work and what are the findings of the operation.
There are still some gaps. Particularly in the roadway and rail system. When you look at the roadway and you look how complex Germany's system is in terms of tolling their primary road systems, it was only for trucks,
but it does have an impact on cars.
On some of the bordering countries, they told both trucks and cars. -- They toll both trucks and cars.
As you begin to cross borders, you come across difficulties. Not only is a car tolled in Hungary but it is not tolled in Germany. We have the issue of the tolling technology, if I am a trucker
and I am tolled in Hungary but I cross over into Germany, it is a completely different tolling system. I have to have a different pass device so I don't get picked up.
It is interesting, we had one of the vehicles -- we noticed in the -- of the truck, it was carrying international truck and it had four or five different transponders in the window of the --. -- -- Board --
As much as we are trying to do the interoperability here, like on I-95 on the East Coast, much of that needs to be taken for complete harmonization in the EU for the tolling technology.
We are absolutely very fortunate in the states to have a rail system -- Burlington Northern, union specific, it and our Canadian partners. Their standard is the same border to border. From Long Beach all the way to New York or New Jersey,
the standardization of rail is developed the same. The gauges the same, it is very easy. They just have to change the engine sometimes.
That is not the case when you go to the EU. There are certain types of cage that stop at the border and you have to change everything, locomotives and the cars. So there is much to do in regard to that.
There is one stop shopping for freight movement, like we have oversize for our weight, and truckers have to stop -- they don't have a permit to go state to state to state because of weight limits.
The same thing happens on the freight rail system in the EU. Just to have a one stop shop where someone can go to the EU and try to go from one place to the next, what is the one type of locomotives
or car that I need that will allow me to transfer all the way through ? What permits do I need to get all the way through ?
Some of the things we saw on the ground were also very interesting. One of the neater things that interested the express rail, they use PTC. When we were in Berlin we visited a traffic adage but area for the rail system.
They are using intercity express trains, commuter rail trains, and slower trains that are all operated through this with room. They increase passenger trait -- train speeds,
and their traditional approaches something we should take a look at. They have developed these systems and are working through those problems and hazards.
We also learned that about 85% or more of their rail system is electrified. That is great for their decarbonization, but it limits the stack containers and some of the heavier freight movement.
We also saw some pub arches -- self-propelled barges. There was a small car in the back, coal, sand, and it is a dominant type of arch -- Arjun -- barge.
The tolling process in Germany is worth noting. Only trucks over 12 tons are tolled. It is rare for anyone to avoid a toll.
They use satellite technology as well as vehicles to regulate compliance. They have compliance of 99% with their toll system. Unlike in the US, we did not see very many as 250 pickups, or suburbans running around.
Their fuel process requires a little bit more analysis in how they are going to make the system integrate and what does secondary benefit, as well as to track every move they make.
I will wrap it up here and we will hope to have a good question and answer session.
What we had discovered his we are absolutely envious of the way that the EU has a unifying vision. It is a sickly making ratification a part of the economy and is bought into by all the member states. The EU is taking this
and treated it as gospel and moving it forward. It is great to have that unifying vision.
Going from a myopic view to a multijurisdictional, international, regional view of how things actually are critical.
They all realize they cannot do it alone. To be competitive you have to join versus. The alignment of the policy, all deployed in the same direction is great. The international interest was critical,
because you get to combine financial resources.
You may not be the recipient of all the dollars at a certain point in time, that essentially they will come back around. There are challenges with harmonization of the transportation system, particularly across borders.
There is a fact he -- that taste -- fact based analysis. When you have a true market driven approach in terms of what is a true court system, it helps deliver a system that people can buy into.
It can also bring a level of common sense when you're trying to deliver something to the public. It is important to have the fact and figures behind it to deliver the message.
If anything, this is home for us as we are going to the piecemeal of a reauthorization. Having the value of a multi-year, cable funding is -- stable funding is absolutely critical.
Long-term vision is nothing if you do not have the dollars through multiple years to help get their -- there.
We do this every time we go way on vacation, you always come back and appreciate home.
We cannot undervalue what we have here in this country. I have used the example before, the DU has the overall vision -- the EU has the overall vision but they don't have the pieces in place to get there.
We are the opposite. We have all the pieces in place, we have one heck of an interstate system and the national Highway system and rail system, primarily through the efforts of the private industry.
We have a very good port system, we are a little shy in see shipping -- sea shipping. We have all the pieces there almost that we don't all -- always have people running in the same direction. But we have all the pieces,
but we don't necessarily have the vision. Hopefully that will change as we go through the next reauthorization and we began to knock down the barriers between the truckers versus rail versus water.
We need to realize this is about our economic competitiveness with China, India and the rest of the world. This concludes what we have to say, but we would like to hear what others have to say.
Eric, we should mention that a final report on our scan will be published later this year. We are also putting on an executive summary of our scan result and we have developed an implementation plan for many of the things we learned.
These are things we want to continue here in the United States. I will put my plug-in for the partnership meeting in the beginning of August. One of the things we are doing is bringing over to representatives from Europe.
We are bringing Helmet who is one of the implementors from the EU and another is on Jerry and by the name of Scholz -- by the name of Scholz.
Both of these individuals will be coming to the meeting in the first week of August, which are naked and provide details on -- Ernie can provide details on.
They have mentioned the foreign comprehensive network and their policy should be formalized by July. We hope to hear an update on their reaction to their corridor planning policy in August.
That is also part of our implementation plan. Are there any questions ?
I want to mention two everybody that I will bring up the slide with the website information. We will share the executive summary through the freight planning list serve. The slide will have the address for you.
It is also the way that information is distributed about upcoming freight seminars.
So let's stop -- start at the top.
To Europeans have a regional approach for each corridor ?
Are all countries concerned by a court or working together ? -- Concerned by a corridor working together ?
They do now. That is part of the reason why they have had much discussion in terms of identifying the core and comprehensive network.
Many of the quarters that are primary -- many of the corridors that have crossed borders immediately become a regional transportation issue. I will toss it over to others who have comments. I can probably say, this was a regional
and international concept of planning that was not necessarily in place several years ago. Now through the EU and this network they are thinking much broader.
We saw several examples of projects that one member country thought was critical and even told they are part of what they thought was a critical, regional freight infrastructure.
And it ended at the national boundary because the country it went into did not place the same amount of priority on it. So this idea of comprehension that they are entering into, their goal is to eliminate that
and have a more unified approach.
Thank you. We have two related questions. How do the prices of moving freight compared to the freight rates in the United States ? What is the EU price of diesel for trucks and barges versus the US prices ?
I didn't look at the price of diesel. When you are over there, you have so many options in terms of movement doing trains, planes and many other options versus vehicles. So you start -- stop looking at gas presses,
which is a very pleasant experience given today's environment. I will tell you that trucks don't carry the bulk of the freight.
Trucks here carried 78% of the goods, and that figure Oakley will not change much. It there is a lot of the freight, if it is not carried on our -- barge, is carried on trucks. Fuel is more expensive there than in the United States.
Moving things on rail -- we applaud their efforts to move as much as they can to the rail. It is just not true we there yet because they do have the harmonization and gauge differences. So for just-in-time delivery,
you cannot do it by rail there.
Someone had commented that they believed tracking in the EU was regular -- fairly cheap.
There is no competition -- or much a petition -- competition.
How is waterway, see shipping taxed -- or sea shipping taxed or subsidized ?
They do have a Marco Polo program to try to move some of the freight onto the sea shipping programs. That does have some sub -- subsidies, but I don't remember what they are. You do have some taxes especially in the inter waterway systems.
They do want to look at the finances that can take care of the locks and dams.
There is correlation problems across these countries as well.
To EU truckers generally overnight at home or in motels. If not are there specialized facilities for idling ?
I don't know if I can answer that question. I guess all that depends on the industry itself. From what we see here in the United States, we see that there are actual people to get into the cabs to do long calls. -- Halls -- hauls.
I don't know exactly what the trends are in the trucking industry in the EU in terms of are they having difficulty in getting drivers.
Also, did you see what sort of harder should exist to an environmental and transportation industries to work on carbon reduction goals ?
I will tell you, much has gone into developing the comprehensive core network. Those are exercises that have not been done in a vacuum. It is a very different approach there. It is interesting,
in that as we visited with all the countries, and we sat down with the Ministry of transport officials in various forms, they didn't need anybody from the environmental community to tell them,
this is what we want to do in terms of reducing the carbon footprint. When I said before, this is something they truly believe, they truly believe this. They do not need any any -- anybody environmentally to tell them.
Let's go back to the port at Rotterdam. They were concerned about the environmental impact. That's modal shift was a litigation structure.
They are they had said -- there they had set their overall goals at the EU double as well as the individual country level for reducing their carbon foot it.
-- Footprint. All industries were acting together to reduce their carbon footprint. In case of Germany, where tolls are based on the mission level of the trucks. -- The mission -- the commission -- emission level of the truck.
Within five years, the majority of truck fleets have changed over to the -- the cleaner engines. So I think it was a case of the transportation agencies reaching out to meet their country or EU set else for reducing the carbon footprint.
Can anyone elaborate on the Rotterdam terminal leases of 35% truck I'm a 45% charge at -- barge and 20% rail ?
It was definitely as a result of the Port of Rotterdam wanting to be accepted of the larger oceangoing vessels. So they were filling in the day -- day -- bay. One thing they experience is,
remember a large part of the freight movement is by truck in Europe, so they are doing a lot of interesting things at the Port of Rotterdam.
For example, they right now have a pilot project going on where they pay people if they do not travel on the main highway in and out of the Port of Rotterdam during the peak periods. So if you volunteer to be in the program,
you give them your license plate number and if your license plate is not autographed on the main highway during the peak periods of travel, at the end of the month you are mailed a check.
I don't remember the amount, but it was like a dollar a day. So you could make money by not traveling on the main interstate in and out of that port. It was a pilot project with a report to follow.
That is how concerned they are with the image and levels -- emission levels being reported by the trucks.
On the terminal leases, they are required to put more of their freight once it is off loaded from the large oceangoing vessels, more onto rail than what currently happens.
About 50% of the freight that comes off the large vessels were actually be moved out by truck. So these new terminals have to commit to more going I barge. -- By barge.
I think it even had to do with their new contracts and they have to adopt that as well.
Do you know how the private sector has reacted to reducing the carbon foot rent -- footprint ?
I don't believe we had much of an opportunity to speak with the shippers and carriers. We had a conversation with the Association that -- the people who oversaw had representation at the EU.
Population is supportive of the overall concept, and there are many partners in helping develop what is defined as a core and comprehensive network. There are many cooks in the kitchen and they fight over the ingredients,
but to come up with the same -- dish.
This is not brought up in any of the conversations as one of their obstacles.
I don't see any questions typed in, but we have plenty of time, so please ask any questions.
If the operator could give it -- instructions to ask questions over the phone.
Please press star and the number one on your telephone keypad.
And again, if you would like to ask a question please press star and the number one on your telephone keypad.
And there are no questions at this time.
Okay, what I'm going to do, it looks like we have a few people typing in some questions. We may have some audio cutting in and out. I will look into what might be causing that. In the meantime,
we'll give people a few more minute to ask questions.
There is a comment that I can read. Many shippers that our partners in EPA transfer partnerships site pressure from the EU government as one of the reasons why they are participating.
Coming from the standpoint of -- they had a much more accepting philosophy or culture toward accepting some of these changes. When asked about accepting tolls or emissions, the response was, it is our obligation
and responsibility to do this. It wasn't one of, well it is being forced on us. It was definitely much more acceptance of that versus what we see here in the. This is my second scan to Europe,
and I have to admit on the first scan it was very similar. When asked about congestion pricing in London, when asked about some of the forces -- if you buy a car in Denmark you pay three times the amount of the car in taxes .
So if you pay $10,000 for a car, you're going to pay another $20,000 in taxes.
They were much more accepting of doing this.
If you think of more questions, please feel free to type them in. I'm going to go ahead and read some of the closing information.
I do want to thank all three of our presenters and thank you for attending today. As I mentioned at the beginning, webinar was recorded and the PowerPoint presentation and transcript will be posted online within the next two weeks.
I will send out an e-mail once it is available. As a reminder, if you are in AICP number and you would like to receive 1.5 credits for today, please make sure you're signed in with your first and last name
or if you are attending with a group of people, make sure your name is typed into the chat box. I encourage everyone who attended today to download the evaluation form that is in the file share ox
and the bottom right screen -- box in the bottom right screen. We are planning for the July through December some in ours of this year, so if you have any topic ideas we would entertain those.
The next seminar will be held on May 18 and will be about clean port. It is currently available for reservations. You can go to the third to the bottom link and register for that to webinar.
There is more description on that webinar as to what will be covered.
The information about talking freights is in a listserv. It does not appear we have any other questions, so we will end a little bit early today.
Thank you for all -- to all the presenters. Thank you everybody and enjoy the rest of your day.