CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Debate!
"P&O willing to consider new ferry routes from Scotland to Scandinavia"
(18 posts)-
Posted 6 years ago #
-
DFDS from Newcastle to Ijmuiden is our closest/only North Sea passenger ferry route.
Nothing to Scandinavia now so if Rosyth could get a route then it could pull in drivers from up to two hours away.
When Newcastle had route to Gothenburg we used it twice. Second time with daughter and tandem.
Was a long trip though - 26 hours with a quick stop in Kristiansand in Norway (booze cruise potential). Ferry operators like Fjordline still do this sort of trip from Hirtshals to Bergen.
The surviving European ferry routes have to pull in passengers from hundreds of miles away to keep the car decks full. Cyclists and foot passengers sadly don't pay enough to run a large, stable ferry. Comfort and amenity make the modern ferry a floating hotel experience ideal for families.
So if P&O do go for it they would need to bring in the crossing with a decent large ferry with a sub 24 hour crossing time and choose ports which would pull in drivers from across Scandinavia and other parts of 'these islands'. That could be Esbjerg as Denmark is central enough maybe with great road / ferry / bridge connections to rest of Scandinavia.
When Norfolk took over the Rosyth - Zeebrugge route the ferry was too slow and too small. DFDS bought Norfolk and shut the passenger route as they wanted to make Newcastle the centre. (Freight ferry still runs.) All about survival and ferries have now to compete with a much larger Edinburgh airport which has many Scandinavian routes. New ferries have to meet environmental standards too.Posted 6 years ago # -
There used to be a passenger ferry Newcastle to Esbjerg - used it when I was an au pair on Fyn a very long time ago...
Posted 6 years ago # -
@unhurt
We had Danish friends in Middelfart - (half way across Fyn from Odense so not a funny name!).
Forgot that there was an Esbjerg route from Newcastle.
The more I think about it the more Esbjerg makes sense. This would allow people from Ireland to access Europe too and Scandinavians could take their mobile homes back the way. Trucks can access Eastern Europe down from Jutland.
Marketed correctly it would be an asset for tourism and trucking.
I looked at Scotsman comments and they are mainly against direct links of course. Seems any business idea emanating with SNP connection is suspect. Much better to drive to Dover etc.
I would counter that with the fact Scotland (however it is governed) can maximise its location to do something that even a staunch Unionist will use. Scandinavia has many challenges but links between these countries still flourish.The 'nae sayers' are obviously trolls. (Not Scandinavian variety)
Posted 6 years ago # -
Seems any business idea emanating with SNP connection is suspect.
Perhaps separatists could be encouraged to row to Scandinavia in their baby boxes?
Posted 6 years ago # -
I can't see how this would be economically viable. Low cost airlines have destroyed the passenger ferry market. The Rosyth freight ferry just about keeps its head above water - but it got pretty close to being pulled a couple of years ago. I can't see there being sufficient lorry-load freight flows between Scotland and Scandinavia to keep such a route going.
Not that I wouldn't want to see this happen - just that I think it highly unlikely to go ahead.
Posted 6 years ago # -
Airlines are quite highly subsidised aren't they? Tax exemptions on fuel for one thing. That might not last forever.
Also, there is a possibility of a future where North Britain isn't in the same trading bloc as South Britain. In that scenario it would make sense to have, and to subsidise if possible, direct sea links for both entities?
Posted 6 years ago # -
We had Danish friends in Middelfart - (half way across Fyn from Odense so not a funny name!).
Etymology is irrelevant, Middelfart is a funny name.
Posted 6 years ago # -
@LaidBack: So if P&O do go for it they would need to bring in the crossing with a decent large ferry with a sub 24 hour crossing time
I believe Brittany Ferries does OK with its 24 hour Portsmouth-Bilbao and Portsmouth-Santander services. They even run a 32 hour "budget" service during the summer. I would agree that a non-stop service would be preferable, though.
(I used the Portsmouth-Bilbao ferry for one holiday. Fine on the way out but on the way back...my God, that thing felt like it was bouncing around like a ping pong ball in a washing machine! Some damage was incurred down on the car decks.)
Posted 6 years ago # -
IWRATS - taxing aviation fuel is far trickier than you might think. Article 24 of the Chicago Convention (which governs international aviation) requires all contracting states not to charge duty on aviation fuel already on board any aircraft that has arrived in their territory from another contracting state.
The bi-lateral air service agreements between states (and the EU) that regulate aviation include an exemption from national taxes on aviation goods, including fuel, as standard. Any state that removed this exemption could damage its connectivity and would see inbound airliners coming in fully fueled-up from tax-free states, so they don't have to re-fuel at higher cost.
It would take a major shift in international aviation policy to see this happen and would have to be driven by the USA or more likely EU.
Directly subsidising an international ferry service is technically possible, I seem to remember the Scottish Government looked into it for Rosyth-Zeebrugge, but the European Commission warned that it would breach state-aid rules.
None of it impossible - but some pretty high bars to jump.
Posted 6 years ago # -
@Morningsider
In that case the Convention maybe needs to be extended to international shipping?
Now I'm going to have to look at full lifecycle carbon footprint figures for air and sea....
Posted 6 years ago # -
The Dutch manage to tax (unilaterally) their aviation fuel, and I don't see airliners stopping in Belgium to fill up, before hopping over to Schipol.[I think I am wrong on this one. Regardless, there is no real reason aviation fuel can't be taxed - it's just a subsidy "to help the economy" & rich people]Airliners will not come in fully fuelled-up from tax-free states because:
a) They physically won't be able to land (too heavy with fuel)
b) The weight of the additional fuel on take-off will burn even more fuel, negating any, if not all, tax benefits. Bear in mind that a plane can typically carry as much fuel as its own weight and a kg of payload typically burns a kg of fuel. Airlines always try to carry the absolute minimum fuel for this reason
Posted 6 years ago # -
nedd1e_h - this practice already exists to an extent, as aviation fuel prices vary quite a bit between airports, and is known as "tankering". Airlines use pretty sophisticated tools to decide how much fuel to load and where to buy it, as a means of minimising costs.
I agree that planes are unlikely to fly around fully loaded, when this isn't required - but a more sophisticated method to minimise fuel costs would be used and tankering would be a part of this.
Posted 6 years ago # -
Totally love the idea of going to Noroway, to Noroway, to Noroway over the foam.
Posted 6 years ago # -
“
The move increases the number of destinations from Scotland’s busiest airport to 146.
“
“Low cost airlines have destroyed the passenger ferry market. The Rosyth freight ferry just about keeps its head above water - but it got pretty close to being pulled a couple of years ago. I can't see there being sufficient lorry-load freight flows between Scotland and Scandinavia to keep such a route going.”
Clearly it mostly depends on price, and to an extent marketing.
No idea about the potential for freight on any particular route.
Much Ireland-Brexit-Scandinavia potential?
Motorhomes and cyclers presumably too niche to make anything viable.
By contrast (to cheap flights) seems to be a growing market for boat trips - as long as they are called cruises.
Maybe potential for holidays planned around a leisurely (semi) luxury boat trip then some cycling and return from same/different port days/weeks later?
C/should work for some residents on both sides of the North Sea.
Posted 6 years ago # -
Hm. While this may be a good idea, the story sounds a bit too much like kite flying to me. P&O would be willing.....if the Scottish government picks up the tab.
Hypothetical speculation fomented at the behest of a backbench MSP is not the same as an imminent ferry service, or even any government interest in one. Where's the line in the Scottish budget for this?
Transport funding priorities in Scotland are overwhelmingly committed to trunk roads and motor vehicles. The single largest piece of infrastructure investment is the new motorway across the Forth. That's the stark reality just now and while more needs to be done to change priorities we also need to see very clearly where we are currently.
Posted 6 years ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
posts
