Keywords

Introduction

On 11 December 2019, the European Commission presented the Green Deal [1], intending to provide an initial roadmap of the necessary key policies and measures. The Communication highlights tackling climate and environment-related challenges as ‘this generation’s challenge’. Achieving zero net greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 2050 is arguably the most central, ambitious and challenging goal set out by the Green Deal in Europe. The latest intermediary target for 2030 is set to at least 55% GHG emission reduction [2].

In accordance, the development of European green ports & multimodal hubs of the future to 2050 is not only linked to infrastructure but also to smarter approaches, more efficient, effective, innovative technical solutions, sustainable management of goods and freight flows and seamless integration of the port community and inland multimodal terminals & hubs, balancing environmental effects and economic requirements. Every year, 108 trillion tonne-kilometres are transported worldwide, of which the majority is borne by sea (70%), 18% is handled by rail, 9% is carried by road, 2% is shipped on inland waterways and about 0.25% is transported by air [3]. In 2020, road transport accounted for 75.3% of the total inland freight transport and its share has been consistently rising over the last decade. In 2020, more than 10.3 million workers were employed in the freight industry (including warehousing and supporting transport activities), which accounted for 5.3% of the overall EU-27 labour force [4]. Freight transport and logistics are vital to the EU’s Single Market and for Europe’s prosperity. This industry is an important facilitator in the so-called ‘four freedoms’ of the EU: it allows the mobility of commodities, resources and people because it links economic players to each other. Additionally, well-performing and dynamic freight and logistics sectors improve overall productivity and competitiveness through job growth, economies of scale and by generating remarkable economic and social added value [5]. The latest available figures reveal that about EUR 599 billion, or around 5% of the EU’s Gross Domestic Product, has been created by the transport and logistics industry, with over EUR 931 billion spent by private household on transport-related goods (13% of total consumption), and more than 1.15 million companies active in transportation and logistics [6]. Even more so, the high quality of Europe’s freight and logistics sector is internationally recognised. Indeed, the annual World Bank International Logistics Performance Index ranks no less than 13 European economies in the top 20 global leaders in logistics [7]. Global freight traffic is anticipated to triple for inland modes in the next 30 years [8]. In addition, in the EU, surface freight traffic is expected to rise by 53% by 2050 [9]. In spite of these projections, the growth of the sector is not without complications. The biggest concern is how economic gains from increased demand can be sustained when considering adverse externalities and possible rebound effects.

Transport modes still adhere to silo mentality, despite ports setting moderate goals on transport modal split. Other major challenges include saturated infrastructure, carbon emission goals and energy constraints [10]. Laudable initiatives on alternative energy in ports, remain far too often in a demonstration phase, and do not succeed in spreading the innovation all over the sector. Despite the fact that the ports of Rotterdam, Antwerp and Hamburg claim to be frontrunners in this field, their interaction with ‘smaller’ ports not belonging to the absolute top, is still below expectations. Smaller ports are in urgent need of a concrete Roadmap to sustainability that has ready-to-use cases, in order not to miss that boat. However, this firm step towards sustainability is not possible without a concrete transition to increased automation, digitalisation, standardisation, interoperability of processes, technologies and equipment. By fundamentally altering the use of alternative energy, the organisation and management of ports, inland multimodal hubs and terminals and the related freight transport, digitalisation will propel ports & inland multimodal hubs towards a more sustainable, efficient and performant sector. Digitalisation & increased automation have the potential to reduce administrative burdens, lower operational barriers and so improve efficiency, productivity, interoperability of processes and competitiveness [11] in the multimodal freight transport nodes.

The PLOTO project follows the vision of Horizon Europe framework programme from 2021 to 2027, which aims at ‘a sustainable, fair and prosperous future for people and planet’ and reserves 35% of the budgetary target to tackle climate change in order to contribute towards Europe becoming a climate-resilient society by 2050 [12]. It targets Inland WaterWays (IWWs), focusing on their resilience and the development of tools to model, assess, forecast and mitigate the impact of natural hazards on port operability. Along the way, it aims to address multi-hazard risk understanding, smart prevention and preparedness, as well as faster, adapted and efficient response proposing a new integrated system to support operational and strategic adaptation and mitigation measures. It achieves its stated goals by better absorbing and efficiently recovering from Climate Change impacts, including extreme events, thus increasing the resilience of IWWs.

PLOTO Development Methodology

PLOTO is a pure technological project, but it is driven by the actual needs of the end users, mainly IWW operators, including inland ports, authorities and shipping companies. The pilot activities scheduled within the project lifetime have as the ultimate goal the achievement of a minimum technology readiness level of TRL7 concerning the technology components and the overall system developed in its context. This is even more strengthened through the adoption of an agile development that aims to provide the first prototypes early in the project. PLOTO will pursue to adopt a start-up mentality, targeting to get right the following tasks:

  1. 1.

    Identify the needed competences to succeed in its objectives.

  2. 2.

    Form a team that has the ability to perform efficiently and deliver high-quality results.

PLOTO will follow a process by iterating a series of activities, performing preliminary module and system assessments and validation campaigns well before the pilot demonstrations:

  • The proposed approach will be realised in two cycles, allowing new data from the evaluations to be incorporated into the output development process, revising it whenever necessary. The first cycle will close with the successful delivery of the initial integrated PLOTO system. The second cycle will conclude through the final integrated system that will be based on the technical and operational assessments to be carried out in the first round of demonstration activities.

  • PLOTO will adopt a fast-failure approach in terms of getting through the steps in the concept maturing and system evolution process. This will provide a means for rigorous assessment of options and the selection of the most suitable one based on balanced trade-offs that will not hamper the overall project progress. The project team’s peripheral vision will be used in order to keep a live roster of opportunities, threats and challenges in the area of interest, allowing an effective alignment with the current conditions throughout PLOTO’s lifecycle.

  • The approach will allow the PLOTO consortium to respond to external or internal opportunities during the project’s lifetime and will add to the project’s agility to accommodate innovative solutions that will match emerging trends and needs at the actual time of implementation. Thus, the real potential of the final outputs ensures the uptake in the mid-term horizon after the end of the project.

In support of its agile/iterative approach, PLOTO is organised to perform smaller-scale intermediate validations, in which end users will be introduced to the developed and evolved solutions, so as to incorporate their feedback in a timely and resource-efficient manner, aligning their needs with project outcomes to the highest possible extent. This will also be a training opportunity for the end users, so that they can understand PLOTO’s value proposition in improving IWWs’ resilience through the integration of the proposed hazard-awareness solutions. Taking into consideration the high innovation and business potential of PLOTO, the iterative agile development will be executed with discipline, having as a clear aim the constant improvement of the components’ and system’s TRL. TRL7 is considered a critical threshold as a transition from experimental to real-life conditions is performed. From the demonstration, a feasibility study, business planning and economic viability will take place, which in combination with the ongoing developments and the pilot-scale study will produce a near-to-market product. This process will generate a gradually increasing TRL for the whole system and for each component individually.

PLOTO Technological and Scientific Basis

The technological backbone of PLOTO includes climate, atmospheric forcing and multi-hazard modelling, multi-hazard vulnerability modules and assessment toolkit for IWW assets, improved computer vision techniques and machine-learning techniques, remote sensing, including quick assessment damage maps, fore-now/casting weather predictions methods & tools, PLOTO middleware and data fusion, IWW assessment tool and IWW digital twin, enhanced visualisation common operational picture, incident management system and decision support system.

At the core of the PLOTO platform lies the digital twin (Fig. 11.1). A modular design is adopted to connect hazards, exposed assets and interconnected infrastructure networks to form a digital twin of the IWW that interacts with all PLOTO modules to efficiently transfer and process sensor data (Fig. 11.1). It is built upon pre-compiled data on-site hazard and asset exposure. Hazard information covers weather, climate, hydrological and seismic perils, while the exposed assets cover the entire IWW and hinterland infrastructure of each port, comprising both individual assets (piers, cranes, warehouses, etc.) as well as connected networks (power/transportation/etc.), and interconnectivity among said networks (i.e. power network influencing rail transportation).

Fig. 11.1
A schematic diagram of the digital twin formulation that forms the core of PLOTO presents the process starting from the hazard that affects assets which affects the network which further affects interconnected networks.

The proposed digital twin formulation that forms the core of PLOTO

Full size image

Figure 11.2 presents the flow of information within the PLOTO platform modules. It comprises (1) the cloud-based digital twin incorporating all hazard and asset data, fed into (2) the multi-hazard vulnerability assessment tools projecting hazard scenarios to deliver (3) asset response characterisation. The results from individual assets and scenarios are combined within (4) the system risk assessment, ultimately leading to (5) the system impact evaluation. Throughout this process, additional data by hazard, response and impact sensors is incorporated, serving to remove scenarios that are incompatible with current observations and to improve accuracy. All in all, this offers an integrated decision support system tied to incident management under a common operational picture.

Fig. 11.2
A schematic diagram of the flow of formation within the PLOTO platform modules presents a cloud that stores natural hazards historical records, infrastructure asses data, networks, and interconnected networks go through a multi-hazard vulnerability assessment toolkit to the project services.

The flow of information within the PLOTO platform modules, comprising (1) cloud-based data, (2) multi-hazard vulnerability assessment, (3) asset response characterisation, (4) risk assessment and (5) system impact evaluation, all fed by hazard, response and impact sensors, to offer decision support, incident management and a common operational picture

Full size image

Use Cases and Scenarios

PLOTO will perform extensive tests in three different demo sites, Belgium, Hungary and Romania. The demonstration shall prove the suitability of the PLOTO platform for multiple-hazard assessment and optimised operational and strategic decisions for management and maintenance of IWW, considering hazards relevant for other sections of the same corridor, or for other critical parts of IWWs. The demonstration will focus on the following main objectives: (1) to improve multiple-hazard assessment and strategic management for protection of hotspots of the IWW ports and sections, (2) to improve strategic and operational decision-making, (3) to test the various PLOTO outcomes and the overall integrated decision support tool with actuation technologies in real-scale critical parts of the IWW.

Use Case A: Danube Area, Including the Waterways and Inland Ports

The Danube River sector located between Iron Gate II (RKM 863) and Călăraşi (RKM 375) (Fig. 11.3), belongs to the lower basin of the Danube and is characterised by a very dynamic riverbed with large flow rates (between 1600 and 15,000 m3/s). The geography of this sector is diverse. It includes mountains, large plains, sand dunes, forested or marshy wetlands. Similarly, climate and precipitation vary significantly, and they continuously form the basin’s landscapes. The morphological processes in the Lower Danube can be classified as very dynamic. In the upper part of the section (km 863–km 730), the intensity of the erosion and accumulation is less than in the middle (km 730–km 500) or in the lower part of the section (km 500–km 375). Hundreds of kilometres at the left and the right bank of the Danube River are eroded.

Fig. 11.3
A Google Map screenshot presents the route from point R K M 863 near Iron Gates to R K M 375 near Silistra.

Map of the Danube River sector between Iron Gate II (RKM 863) and Călăraşi (RKM375), use case A. (Figure processed from Google maps)

Full size image

Use Case B: Budapest Freeport and Railway Hub

The port is located in the Central region of Hungary, within the boundaries of the capital city Budapest (Fig. 11.4). The port has been established in the first third of the twentieth century, when that area was still considered a suburb. Then, a strong industrialisation and population growth occurred in the 1950s. Consequently, the city surrounded the port; thus, the port’s development possibilities are limited recently, and its approach is difficult. The port is accessible via one railway connection and from two main road directions. Establishment of the M0 motorway (ring road around Budapest) in the 1990s significantly improved the road connection quality, but the traffic must pass through the 21st district of Budapest (called Csepel) causing harmful environmental effects there and congestion reaching the motorway. As the waterway network in Hungary is not very dense, the port serves not only the capital city with approximately 1.7 million inhabitants, but the entire central-Hungarian region with approximately 3.5 million inhabitants.

Fig. 11.4
A Google map screenshot presents the routes of Budapest with the freeport marked above the X X L KERULET.

Location of the Freeport of Budapest

Full size image

Use Case C: Region of Wallonie in Belgium

The area of interest for Use Case C is located in the Walloon region in Belgium downstream of the city of Liège. Here, our focus lies on a section of the river Meuse up to the Belgian-Dutch border and the part of the Albert Canal (Fig. 11.5b), which is more-or-less parallel to the river Meuse as well as the associated floodplain of both, where the relevant assets of Use Case C are located. Over this section (i.e. downstream of Liège), river Meuse itself is not navigable and shipping takes place on the Albert Canal. Just before reaching the Belgian-Dutch border, the Albert canal turns towards the north-west to reach the sea harbour of Antwerp (Fig. 11.5a). Details of the configuration of the IWW stretches in and around Liège are visible in Fig. 11.5c and d. The floodplain and all its assets are especially interesting to analyse in the context of dike breaching scenarios, as such an event would have devastating consequences on infrastructure, buildings and people in the region.

Fig. 11.5
3 maps. A presents the Netherlands in the top right, Germany at the bottom right, France in the bottom left, and Belgium in the top left corner. B presents a route of the Meuse River with flow direction upwards, an Albert canal beside it, and Ourthe river.

Division between river Meuse and the Albert canal in Liège. (a) International Meuse basin covering parts of France, Belgium, Luxembourg, Germany and The Netherlands. (b) Studied Meuse river and Albert Canal stretches. (c) Meuse and Ourthe river stretches upstream of the entrance of the Albert canal. (d) Schematic representation of the division between river Meuse and the Albert canal downstream of Liege, with Monsin weir and hydropower plant. (Adapted from Renardy et al. [13])

Full size image