Karttunen formec 2013
0 likes35 views
1) The document summarizes a study that analyzed the cost-efficiency of using an innovative intermodal composite container solution for transporting forest biomass compared to traditional supply chains. 2) Key findings of the study included that the container solution was the most cost-efficient option and allowed 7-19% lower costs than traditional methods. Using railway transportation in addition to trucks was also found to reduce total costs. 3) The simulation results showed that trucks spent most of their time unused in traditional supply chains and that the power plant unloading station was a bottleneck. The container solution improved efficiency in transportation and terminal operations.
Karttunen formec 2013
- 2. Container supply chain for forest biomass Kalle Karttunen, Project Manager M.Sc (Agr. & For.) LUT Savo Sustainable Technologies FORMEC 2013 Techniques for sustainable management 46th International Symposium on Forestry Mechanisation, 30 Sept - 2 Oct 2013, Stralsund Germany
- 3. Content Introduction Intermodal composite container Study scenarios Material and methods Containers Simulation Availability analysis Results Unit cost Time usage Total cost saving potential Conclusion Container or not? Future research
- 4. Introduction - Intermodal composite container Aim of the study was to determine the profitability of an innovative intermodal composite container solution compared to traditional supply chains of forest chips from long-distances Composite Container Logistics 2011 2013 and Container Logistical Innovations, 2013 2014 Karttunen, K., L辰ttil辰, L., Korpinen, O-J. and Ranta, T. Cost-efficiency of intermodal container supply chain for forest chips. Silva Fennica (manuscript). The main idea of composite container was to maximize road transport dimensions and minimize weight of container for intermodal transportation Container is made of plastic channel composite1 material Container is called Supercont速 and it is produced by a Finnish company, Fibrocom 6058 mm 2550 mm 3050 mm (+ 200 mm current dimension) 1 pat pend
- 5. 1. Structural benefits: Light weight of container (1500 kg) -> More payload Temperature isolated -> Non-freezing Composite material -> RFID-free Channel structure, one-shot-moulding -> Durable 2. Supply chain benefits: Suitable for standard equipments -> Flexibility Suitable for truck-train/vessel-truck -> Intermodality Flexibility in roadside chippings -> Easy handling Productivity of unloading -> Fast handling 1 pat pend Introduction - Intermodal composite container
- 6. Introduction - Study scenarios Sub-scenarios Traditional Past dimensions 1.1.1 2.1.1 3.1.1 Current dimensions 1.1.2 2.1.2 3.1.2 a.Sensitivity analyses 1.1.3 2.1.3 3.1.3 b.Sensitivity analyses 3.1.4 Container Past dimensions 1.2.1 2.2.1 3.2.1 Current dimensions 1.2.2 2.2.2 3.2.2 a.Sensitivity analyses 1.2.3 2.2.3 3.2.3 b.Sensitivity analyses 3.2.4 Main scenario Sce. 1 Sce. 2 Sce. 3 Baseline (Sce 1): truck transportation for forest chips (logging residues and small-diameter trees) around the user site for current target demand (540 GWh) the case power plant at central Finland, city of Jyv辰skyl辰 Comparison (Sce 2 and 3): additional target demand of the case power plant (+200 GWh) from long-distances by trucks (Sce 2) and railway (Sce 3). Sce 3: the case satellite railway terminal at Kontiom辰ki Sub-scenarios: Traditional vs. container supply chains Past dimensions (60 t) vs. current dimensions (64 t) Extra scenarios as sensitivity analyses: Several number of trucks and wagons
- 7. Introduction - Study scenarios Main differences between container and traditional supply chain: Trucks Container vs. Solid-frame Unloading: Stationary vs. Back dumping Satellite terminal loading Containers (forklift loader) vs. Loose chips (front loader) Railway transportation Metal containers vs. Composite containers 7
- 8. Traditional = Solid-frame-truckNew innovation = Container truck - Full-trailer solid frame trucks (usage in Finland 89%) -Unloading: Back dumping with a carried chain (usage in Finland 65%) - Metal container trucks (usage in Finland 8%) - Normally unloading method is back dumping, through open doors. -Unloading: Stationary machine in this study - On average 25 t tare weight of truck and trailer (7 axle truck -> 64 t) max. 39 t payload - 127 m3 (137 m3 current increase) frame volume - (8 axle truck -> 68 t) - (9 axle truck -> 76 t) - 20-24 t tare weight of truck, trailer and three containers (7 axle truck -> 64 t) max. 44 t payload -124 m3 (133 m3 current increase) frame volume (three containers) Past: Total weight limit in Finland, 60 t Current (1.10.2013->): 64 76 t & 20 cm height more Material and methods - Containers Payload is dependent not only on the truck weight and dimensions and moisture content of biomass but also road weight limit legislation!
- 9. Material and methods - Containers (railway) Intermodal Container Other options = Interchangeable Containers -Same composite containers for truck and train (Fibrocom, Supercont) Fig. VR Transpoint Container wagons (Sg-t) Maximum payload 61 t for wagon Weight limit is not a problem in railway transportation of wood chips. Container frame- volume is a restrictive factor! - Interchangeable concepts, but only for railway -Metal container (Innofreight) in this study
- 10. Material and methods - Containers (unloading) -If containers have no doors, a special unloading system should be used. -Containers can also be unloaded directly from trucks to the stationary system -Heavy forklift or wheel loader is anyway needed in terminal actions (maximum weight capacity for composite container 20 t) -Weighting, moisture sampling and RFID (Radio Frequency Identification) could be included into the operations Stationary unloading system (used in this study):
- 11. 11 Material and methods - Containers (terminal operations) Front wheeled loader or heavy material handling machines for bulky material, forklift loader for containers In Sweden are used Austrian interchangeable container solution (Innofreight), where heavy forklift truck are used for unloading using rotating devise, also tests in Finland Intermodal transportation option with containers could allow combination of truck and railway logistics either on the upstream or downstream part of supply chain Innofreight containers are too wide for Finnish roads (2.9 m) and metal containers are not suitable in winter time (freezing problem)
- 12. Material and methods -Simulation (background) The simulation was conducted with AnyLogic 6 software, which is suitable for discrete-event and process-centric modelling The trucks agents have five distinct states: out of service, waiting, moving, being loaded, and unloaded The aim of the study method: Combine simulation method with forest biomass site- dependent availability analysis 1. Simulation web page to analyse alternative options (older version with past road dimensions): http://personal.lut.fi/users/lauri.lattila/MikkeliUpdated/MikkeliNe tti.html 2. The model runs in the virtual reality for one year and calculates the total costs supply chain for forest chips yearly fixed costs variable costs the production amount of forest chips -> Unit cost (/MWh) 3. Statistics sheet: Time usage of trucks and driving distances etc. 12 Simulation expertise: L辰ttil辰 2012, LUT 1. 2. 3.
- 13. Material and methods -Simulation (input) 13 Productivity of all operations from roadside to powerplant were taken into account (follow-up studies, pre tests, early studies, estimates) Cost structures of all vehicles and machines from roadside to powerplant were analysed with fixed and variable costs Costs of forest operations (logging residues and small-diameter energy wood) were included in supply chain costs (9.3 9.8 /MWh) Several number of trucks (6 18) and wagons (15 or 20) were used in simulation scenarios Parameter Values (red color in this study) Amount of trucks 0N (6 18) Type of trucks Container or traditional Type of rotator Mobile or fixed Compression used Yes or no Satellite terminal Yes or no Amount of wagons 15 or 20 Type of railway containers Composite (41 54 m3) or metal (46-52 m3) Target demand of plant 540 or 740 GWh
- 14. Material and methods -Availability analysis 14 Site-dependent forest biomass resource data was included in the simulation model (additional excel) The source data consisted of municipal estimates of forest fuel availability and land-use data (Korpinen et al. 2012) The datasets were imported to a geographical information system (GIS) environment that was processed by ArcGIS software The points of origin for forest-fuel supply were generated via a 4 4 km grid The competitive demand for forest fuels was taken into account as market share analyses
- 15. Result -Unit cost 15 Past dimension (60 t) Baseline Sce. 1 Sce. 2 Sce. 3 Current dimension (64 t) Baseline Sce. 1 Sce. 2 Sce. 3 First: Traditional supply chain Second: Container supply chain Container supply chains were the most cost-efficient alternatives for both past and current maximum truck dimensions in all scenarios! Traditional supply chains were 7-19 % (past) or 3-11 % (current) more expansive than container supply chains The most cost-efficient way to increase procurement of forest chips was the container truck transportation! Railway transportation was cost-competitive (17.6/MWh) especially for traditional options compared to truck transportation! But the whole costs of intermodal supply chain was still cheaper (17.1/MWh)!
- 16. Results -Unit cost The fixed and variable costs from roadside to powerplant: The biggest costs of the transportation chain were the fixed costs of the trucks, which varied between 2.1 and 4.7 /MWh depending on the scenario The second biggest part was the fixed costs of chipping, which varied between 1.8 and 3.5 /MWh 16
- 17. Result -Time usage Simulated time usage of the truck logistics showed that the trucks stayed unused (Trucks at base) most (62 66 %) of their annual time It is notable that the traditional trucks spend 14.8 % of their time waiting to be emptied Large number of trucks are in unloading station of power plant at the same time, which is clearly a bottleneck in traditional operations. 17
- 18. Result - Total cost Target demand (Sce. 1: 540 GWh. Sce 2 and 3: 740 GWh): Truck driving kilometres can be decreased with satellite terminal and railway supply chain Simulated supply deliveries (482-857 GWh): The total costs can be reduced with intermodal container supply chain 18 Kilometre distance, km Sce. 1 Sce. 2 Sce. 3 Logging residues 61 (92) 69 (103) 59 (88) Small-diameter energy wood 81 (121) 96 (144) 71 (106) Average 71 (107) 83 (124) 65 (98)
- 19. Result - Total cost saving potential As an example, if deliveries of forest chips is doubled from 500 GWh to 1000 GWh: Traditional supply chain: 15.9 /MWh -> 20.5 /MWh (increase: 4.6 /MWh, 29%) Container supply chain: 15.6 /MWh -> 18.1 /MWh (increase: 2.5 /MWh, 16%) Container cost saving potential: 0.4 /MWh to 2.4 /MWh -> annual cost saving potential from 0.4 to 3.1 million euros! 19
- 20. Conclusion - Container or not? Intermodal composite container supply chains were lower costs than traditional options in all scenarios Traditional systems were 7 19 % more expensive than the intermodal container scenarios for past maximum road vehicle dimensions Current dimension regulations decrease the total costs of forest chips in 0.4 1.9 /MWh (on average 6 %) Traditional options were still 3 11 % more expensive for current road vehicle dimensions than container supply chain How to expand the procurement area for forest chips? Start using intermodal container trucks Start using satellite terminals and train transportation with interchangeable or intermodal containers instead of truck logistics from long-distances Intermodal composite container logistics and railway transportation could be developed as an attractive option for a large-scale supply chain for forest chips 20
- 21. Conclusion - Future research Study method: Simulation study combined with geographical site-dependent information will lead to results of greater relevance to practical decision making when considering the use of innovations The study method leads to cost evaluations very close to the actual prices of forest chips (average price for forest chips 2008-2011: 17.4 /MWh) The simulation model can be used elsewhere if site-dependent availability studies can be included Supply chain: Intermodal containers for biomass transportation and terminal operations Usability of heavy volume traditional trucks with more axles and more frame-volume Composite material can be used for the wall of traditional trucks Usability of intermodal and removable containers for forest roads This study presented the costs of traditional or container supply chain but combined methods might achieve optimal solutions for the large-scale supply chain of forest biomass in practice 21
- 22. Thank you for your attention ! Further information: kalle.karttunen@lut.fi (project manager) or tapio.ranta@lut.fi (prof.) http://www.lut.fi/lut-savo-sustainable-technologies http://www.fibrocom.com/