Transport White Paper underlined the need to tackle low levels of interoperability,
the lack of mutual recognition of rolling stock and products, and the weak coordination
of infrastructure and interconnection of IT systems. Exploiting the
potential of rail, therefore, has been a key focus of recent Commission initiatives,
including development of a rail network, giving priority to freight. In the Communication,
‘‘Towards a rail network giving priority to freight’’ (EU 2007b), the
Commission emphasized measures which contribute to creating that strong
European rail network. This is part of the TEN-T. (Priority projects are summarized
later, in Table 9.2.) The goal is that rail has a greater share of freight
transport in Europe.
On maritime transport, the Commission is promoting the creation of a new
‘‘European maritime transport space without barriers’’ (EU 2007c), and a new
strategy for maritime transport policy to 2018 (EU 2009). The challenge is to
proceed in a way compatible to environmental goals. Recent developments at the
IMO (International Maritime Organization) may have important ramifications. The
IMO unanimously adopted amendments to the MARPOL Annex VI regulations,
stipulating serious reductions in SOx emissions. But on the negative side, progress
regarding greenhouse gases has been slow. In the summer of 2011, the IMO
adopted mandatory rules on the so-called Energy Efficiency Index (EEDI). This
applies to new ships, and aims to assess their energy efficiency. However, effective
application of this index will not be felt until several years later. Discussion has
only started on the introduction of Market Based Measures (MBMs) (See Psaraftis
and Kontovas 2010 concerning the balance between environmental and economic
aspects of maritime transport).
The European Commission is following IMO developments very closely, and
has stated quite clearly its intention to act alone if IMO’s procedures take longer
than previously anticipated. The end of 2011 is critical: any delay beyond that date
will certainly trigger the EC’s action. Indeed, the EC will almost certainly proceed
with measures of its own, even though the IMD has adopted EEDI. It is not yet
clears what these measures could be.
Significant as the IMO developments might be, these may have important
impact on other, seemingly unrelated, policy subjects regarding alternative modes
of transport, especially road. Already ECSA (European Community Shipowners’
Association) has voiced concern that the use of fuel with lower sulphur within
designated sulphur emissions control areas (SECAs) may have a reverse impact on
the policy goal to shift cargo from land to sea. Short-sea shipping would become
less favourable than road transport, ultimately leading to more CO2 pollution
overall (Lloyds List 2008). Measures to reduce emissions in ports (such as cold
ironing3
) may, if not implemented properly, increase the cost of moving freight
through ports and again discourage co-modality from land to sea. Given the
Commission’s new port policy (EU 2007d), the question is, How can the