The second example from the study regards the problem with congestion. The
study comes from the Port of Los Angeles and Long Beach in the United States. In
short, this program aims to set up night and Saturday shifts at both ports through a
Traffic Mitigation Fee during peak hours. This incentive is known as the Pier Pass
Program. The incentive works on the basis of getting the truck operator to use so
called off-peak shifts. The extra cost that the port authority will have to incur for the
extra shifts is covered by fees from a congestion pricing model.
43 The abovementioned Pier Pass Program partly refunds the fees in respect of those containers
that leave/arrive at the terminal in the off-peak hours. Under the program, importers
or exporters are charged USD 20 per TEU.
The third case concerns modal shift and the program referred to comes from the
Port of Oakland, United States. This is about introducing a Heavy Weight Corridor
which was implemented in 1993. Under the program, the Chief of Police designates
new roadways and controls, and directs trucks to specific routes in the city without
using residential streets. As an add-on to this, there is a requirement by the Port
Authority for truck drivers to present a special port vehicle permit when entering the
port. Otherwise, drivers are denied access to the port.
44
The examples given here are taken from the report by Gonzalez-Aregall and
Bergqvist which illustrate the possibilities to direct vehicles in a direction to reduce
emissions and traffic congestion. In those examples, the different programs bring
forward an incentive to follow the aspirations of the program, which is cleaner air
and less traffic during an unwanted time of the day. The big question is whether it is
possible to emulate this in a European context. In the appendix to the report, there is
documentation showing different projects that have been identified, but there is no
further elaboration by the authors. Some of these projects have a stronger bearing
towards the outcome of this chapter contribution than perhaps the three discussed
above.
5 The Swedish Perspective
As mentioned above, in the project on incentives and fees to reduce environmental
problems in ports, some suggestions were put forward in some of the five different
work packages. It was clear that the research carried out on vessel operations and
slow steaming only resulted in a recommendation for further research.
45 Important to
43 This fee is called Traffic Mitigation Fee (TMF) and it is required for most cargo movement during
peak hours (Monday through Friday, 3 a.m. to 6 p.m.). According to figures from the Port Authority
of Los Angeles and Long Beach published in 2017, more than an average of 60,000 trucks per week
have been diverted to the off-peak shifts since 2005. See p. 22 of the report.
44 See p. 22 of the report and the information that was acquired from the Port Authority of
Oakland, 2017.
45 The major reason for a recommendation for further research was that the time and money
allocated were not sufficient to take on more than initial studies.
Environmental Challenge in Port Development: The Legal Perspective in. . .
449
study comes from the Port of Los Angeles and Long Beach in the United States. In
short, this program aims to set up night and Saturday shifts at both ports through a
Traffic Mitigation Fee during peak hours. This incentive is known as the Pier Pass
Program. The incentive works on the basis of getting the truck operator to use so
called off-peak shifts. The extra cost that the port authority will have to incur for the
extra shifts is covered by fees from a congestion pricing model.
43 The abovementioned Pier Pass Program partly refunds the fees in respect of those containers
that leave/arrive at the terminal in the off-peak hours. Under the program, importers
or exporters are charged USD 20 per TEU.
The third case concerns modal shift and the program referred to comes from the
Port of Oakland, United States. This is about introducing a Heavy Weight Corridor
which was implemented in 1993. Under the program, the Chief of Police designates
new roadways and controls, and directs trucks to specific routes in the city without
using residential streets. As an add-on to this, there is a requirement by the Port
Authority for truck drivers to present a special port vehicle permit when entering the
port. Otherwise, drivers are denied access to the port.
44
The examples given here are taken from the report by Gonzalez-Aregall and
Bergqvist which illustrate the possibilities to direct vehicles in a direction to reduce
emissions and traffic congestion. In those examples, the different programs bring
forward an incentive to follow the aspirations of the program, which is cleaner air
and less traffic during an unwanted time of the day. The big question is whether it is
possible to emulate this in a European context. In the appendix to the report, there is
documentation showing different projects that have been identified, but there is no
further elaboration by the authors. Some of these projects have a stronger bearing
towards the outcome of this chapter contribution than perhaps the three discussed
above.
5 The Swedish Perspective
As mentioned above, in the project on incentives and fees to reduce environmental
problems in ports, some suggestions were put forward in some of the five different
work packages. It was clear that the research carried out on vessel operations and
slow steaming only resulted in a recommendation for further research.
45 Important to
43 This fee is called Traffic Mitigation Fee (TMF) and it is required for most cargo movement during
peak hours (Monday through Friday, 3 a.m. to 6 p.m.). According to figures from the Port Authority
of Los Angeles and Long Beach published in 2017, more than an average of 60,000 trucks per week
have been diverted to the off-peak shifts since 2005. See p. 22 of the report.
44 See p. 22 of the report and the information that was acquired from the Port Authority of
Oakland, 2017.
45 The major reason for a recommendation for further research was that the time and money
allocated were not sufficient to take on more than initial studies.
Environmental Challenge in Port Development: The Legal Perspective in. . .
449