The ranked list in the previous chapter of risk reducing measures with the highest cost-benefit ratio is a starting point for the recommendations to increase the naviga- tional safety in Øresund.
However, as stated earlier, there may be different reasons for not immediately im- plementing the most efficient measures, e.g.
• Not all elements related to the implementation is quantifiable (imposed traf- fic delays etc.).
• Political opinions differ from the cost-benefit ranking.
• Some measures are subjected to considerations concerning the acceptance criterion that is not comparable to the cost benefit criteria.
• The sensitivity analysis results show that some measures are not robust to changes in model parameters.
Hence, it is considered that some measures may be implemented very easily without imposing disturbances to the traffic, whereas implementation of other measures may lead to various degrees of traffic disturbance or have other effects to be taken into account before deciding whether or not to implement the risk reducing measure. Bearing this in mind, the list of recommendations is given in Table 13-1 below and they are marked on a map of Øresund in Figure 13-1. Further development of the details in these risk reducing measures should be carried out, and the estimated costs confirmed.
No. Description of recommendation Comments
35 Move buoy W4 at Helsingør-
Helsingborg further north to give the north- and southbound traffic more time to manoeuvre before meeting the east/west bound traffic.
This gives a large reduction in collision frequencies. It is how- ever noted that no collisions are actually registered at this loca- tion
7 Mark additional lanes in Drogden out- side the existing Drogden channel to be used for smaller ships with draughts less than 5 m.
This will give more space to the large ships in Drogden and will lead to a reduction in collision frequencies
43 Improvement of the marking at the north western area of Väster Flacket
A number of groundings have been registered at this location, and a better marking will lead to improved navigational condi- tions
Figure 13-1 Marking of recommended risk reducing measures.
It should be noted that detailed design of possible risk reducing measures should result in an updating of the cost estimate and thus the cost benefit of a given meas- ure.
Besides the measures above, a number of measures may be recommendable de- pending on additional clarification before implementation. These recommendations are listed in Table 13-2 below.
7
43
35
No. Description of recommendation Comments
4 Convoy sailing in Drogden The convoy sailing in Drogden will lead to a large reduction in collision frequen- cies. However, this will lead to delays in passing Drogden and furthermore, no considerations to the additional risk of having line-up areas etc. is considered. 17 Overtaking forbidden in Drogden This will lead to a reduction in collision
frequencies, but will give delays for the fast moving ships. Furthermore, the ad- ditinal risk for front-back collisions from ships with different speeds are not taken into account.
1 Traffic Separation Scheme in Drog- den/Flintrännan
The traffic separation in Drog-
den/Flintrännan such that north bound ships shall use Flintrännan and south bound ships shall use Drogden will sig- nificantly reduce collision frequencies in Drogden and Flintrännan. However, the imposed additional transverse traffic from and to the ports of Malmö and Co- penhagen have not been taken into ac- count. Furthermore, calculations on cost from longer distances for ships in transit and ship calling at Copenhagen and Malmö have not been included in the analyses.
32 Traffic Separation Scheme at Ven The traffic separation at Ven such that north bound ships shall go East of Ven and south bound ships shall go West of Ven will significantly reduce collision frequencies at Ven. However, in order to go to the port of Malmö, ships with large draughts must use a deep water route east of Ven. Grounding and collision sce- narios for this route is not taken into account.
Table 13-2 List of possible recommendations – depending on clarifications. Furthermore, two risk reducing measures were not robust to changes in model pa- rameters. VTS navigational assistance service and removal of Drogden lighthouse (excluding installation of a new lighthouse) were found to be cost beneficial in the base case cost benefit analysis, but in the sensitivity analysis of the benefit these measures were not found to be efficient. Thus, the present analysis does not give a clear recommendation of these measures. However, further analysis of both cost and
It should be noted that in the analysis the risk reducing measures have been ana- lysed one at a time, thus interaction between two or more measures have not been taken into account, e.g. the implementation of 7 in Table 13-1 will possibly influence the recommendations 4, 17 and 1 in Table 13-2 since they address the risk in the same area.
Furthermore, in the analysis the principle of each measure has been evaluated, the specific details of each measure (e.g. exact location of a buoy) have not been estab- lished at this point.