I'll come back again (at least) the écoredevance, namely the tax issue so we do not pollute. I know it does not interest you too much, and yet you are concerned, paying the price of what you eat.
As I said a client of mine the other day, écoredevance is for there to be fewer trucks on the roads, and there transferring to other modes transportation, including rail and river transport. The goal is laudable.
But why is it that the share of road transport is increasing, now reaching 86%, leaving the remaining 14% of river transport, air, rail and multimodal? (Another source speaks of 90%.)
Even the air that is not no pollution, just increased its share of the pie.
This is even not a question of cost is largely a matter of feasibility, reliability and speed.
Today customers want to be delivered yesterday. It is a fact that we face daily.
Only trucks arrive - without the speeding elsewhere!
In addition, distance is not necessarily very high. If I look at those that we ourselves do regularly, they range from 2 km (1800 meters to give a more accurate number) for shorter (yes!) To 250 km for the longest, with a multitude of intermediate relations, the average distance, including empty miles to get to the point of loading was 126.5 km for the month of January.
how such transport by rail or barge? In any case, a truck will approach, as are exceptional plants or other loaders and unloaders located along the quay (river or railway).
course, there are road transport, which are on longer distances. Fécamp there is still wood that goes to the Grenoble area, for example. But can we put the goods on the train? It is not safe, because the station does more than just trains *) and should also be the shipper and the recipient are connected to the rail. In addition they should have room to store a large quantity of goods just before departure or after arrival of the train.
Nothing to do with the lean ...
The multi-modal, then? Trucks on trains? Here it is more reliable because the station is not known to arrive on time. On the relationship Fecamp - Grenoble example, a truck load can deliver today and tomorrow. Only the plane is faster to a point to another, but everyone does not have an airfield nearby. Even though the plane does not deliver yesterday, as often want the end customer.
There of course transport that could - and should - be removed from the road. Very long distances, for example, especially if quantities allow.
But I have seen Nordic goods down to France by truck, and when I asked why, they said it was "cheaper".
No, this is not the écoredevance will reduce share of road transport. Niet! My client the other day also takes this view. And he and people like him who choose to do what they can.
To reduce the share of road transport requires that other solutions exist, and meet customer requirements.
***
*) = a comprehensive same charger, same recipient, and a number of cars.
***
I do not pretend to be the cause, but I just (17 / 2) to learn that the implementation of écoredevance was postponed to early 2013, during a roundtable held yesterday morning (16 / 2) by the Senate Finance Committee. But who knows, the comments I made during my participation in the study of this tax may have been recovered to someone who started to think about certain issues (among others related to the impact of Tax on the client) so far ignored! I can only hope, although I doubt it.
0 comments:
Post a Comment