Denmark successfully introduces RUC for heavy trucks, Netherlands will be next

To little fanfare, on the 1st of January it was mandatory for trucks operating on national highways and some municipal roads, in Denmark, with a gross maximum weight of 12 tonnes and above, to pay a road user charge (called a truck toll in the EU) based on distance.

The main website for the charge is here.

It applies to all trucks, whether registered in Denmark or not, and by applying to all national highways and some municipal roads, it means around 10,900km of road is subject to the charge.

Denmark heavy truck RUC road network until 2028

However, this is only the first stage in a programme to introduce RUC to all vehicles over 3.5 tonnes, on all public roads in Denmark. 

The stages are as follows:

• 1 January 2025: Trucks with GVW of 12 tonnes and above travelling on all national highways and some municipal roads.
• 1 January 2027: All trucks (GVW of 3.5 tonnes and above) travelling on all national highways and some municipal roads.
• 1 January 2027: All trucks (GVW of 3.5 tonnes and above) on ALL public roads (around 75,000km).

The system parallels withdrawal of Denmark from the Eurovignette programme, which charges trucks on a day, week, month or annual basis to operate in specific countries (now just Sweden, the Netherlands and Luxembourg).  Of course the Eurovignette only applies to trucks 12 tonnes and above. The charge will be new to vehicles below that.

Rate structure

There are three weight categories for 12 tonne and above:

• 12-18 tonnes
• 18-32 tonnes
• 32-44 tonnes

Fees vary by CO2 emission class, with surcharges for operating in low emission zones. This is primarily a charge based on changing behaviour for environmental purposes, and is less about infrastructure costs.  

Four of the five CO2 emission classes have charges that vary by registered maximum allowable weight of the truck combination. The zero emission class has the same charge regardless of size - being DKK0.13 per kilometre (US$0.018 per km). This is indicative of how much importance is being given to encouraging zero emission trucks.

The highest fee is for trucks over 32 tonnes at the highest emissions category, at DKK1.1 per kilometre US$0.16 per km). 

How is distance measured and reported, and how is it paid?

Denmark has been technology neutral and has enabled an open market in EETS service providers for its system. Three companies to date are registered to offer RUC collection services:

• BroBizz (a subsidiary of Sund & Bælt Holding A/S, the Danish SOE responsible for setting up the entire system)
• Telepass (a long standing Italian EETS provider) and
• ØresundPAY (the service provider for the toll crossing to Sweden)

All three provide their own GNSS enabled OBUs (on board units) to be installed either professionally or by the vehicle owner, in their vehicles.  One provider includes the ability to use an app to measure and report distance.  The market is open, there could be more providers (and likely will be) in the years ahead.

Occasional users can buy a "toll ticket" which is literally a permit to travel a set distance within Denmark on specific roads, and is designed for trucks making rare trips into the country.  Toll tickets are only available digitally.

The system is enforced with a network of Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) cameras fixed by the roadside, and also a fleet of enforcement vans which check whether the number plate of a truck is registered either with a service provider or a toll ticket has been paid for it.

Non payment is subject to a fine of DKK4500 (US$634).

What's significant about Denmark?

Besides being another country in Europe with heavy vehicle RUC, Denmark is showing how a RUC system can be introduced entirely serviced through an open market of service providers, with a technology-neutral approach. GNSS OBUs, OEM telematics or mobile phone apps might all be used. Denmark is also introducing heavy RUC on all roads, which is rare in Europe. Only Switzerland and Iceland have RUC systems that apply to distance travelled on all roads (although the Belgian heavy RUC system does measure distance on all roads, it applies a zero tariff to many of them).

The only significant negative news is that some truck operators believe that some operators have been incorrectly fined.

What about light vehicles?

Denmark has already been running a light vehicle road pricing trial based on distance. time and location.  It was focused not just on pricing EVs, but on managing congestion.  Two concepts are being tested - distance-based pricing and time-based (time being the duration of time driving). Both with location and time-of-day elements to it. 2,200 participants in the pilot.

It started in July 2023 and ends in July 2025. So there will be considerable interest in the outcomes of that trial. It will be evaluated subsequently and the results will no doubt inform policy discussions on road user charging in Denmark. It will be helpful that the heavy vehicle system is operational and will have been proven to work effectively. 

Who's next? 

The Netherlands will have a heavy vehicle RUC system from July 2026, it will also replace the Eurovignette as well as part of the motor vehicle tax for such vehicles ( a fee chargeable every three months similar to registration).  It will be for all trucks 3.5 tonnes and above and only on major highways and some major local roads. 

The Dutch system will require OBUs to measure and report distance, and will use DSRC as the enforcement technology (communicating with roadside and mobile enforcement units to check if vehicles have operating OBUs). 

A consortium called "Triangle" led by Via Verde of Portugal (including Ascendi and Yunex) has been contracted to introduce the system, supplying OBUs and the remainder of the system, although it will be open to competing service providers.  Via Verde will be the "base" supplier of account management services to those not using EETS providers

Vitronic has been separately contracted to provide the enforcement infrastructure (roadside and mobile).  The core back office system is being owned and operated by RDW (the Netherlands Vehicle Authority, which is responsible for the RUC system).

Netherlands to introduce road pricing for light vehicles from 2030

Those who have been following the road pricing scene for around twenty years may have memories of the Netherlands attempting to introduce road pricing (as in full network, all vehicles, distance/location/time of day based road user charging) several times in the past.

So the most recent news that the new coalition government in the Netherlands has decided to advance road pricing may give some a sense of déjà vu. However, I am a bit more optimistic.

Five previous attempts at road pricing for light vehicles

Three times in the 1990s there were congestion pricing proposals based on either city cordons or corridor based pricing, all of which failed due to political opposition. However, in 2001 and then again in 2005 there were attempts to introduce nationwide road pricing schemes called Kilometerheffing and Anders Betalen voor Mobiliteit.

Kilometerheffing (Kilometre charge) was announced in 2001 as a proposal to introduce distance-based RUC at a flat rate initially, from 2004, transitioning all vehicles onto the system in 2006 (to replace registration fees and sales taxes). It was to be built to be capable of allowing location and time of day based pricing in due course to help relieve congestion. There was widespread opposition, in part due to the forecast €6 billion implementation cost (as it was to require On Board Units to be installed in all vehicles). The proposal was abandoned by the new coalition government following the 2002 election.

Anders Betalen voor Mobilitei (pay differently for mobility) was announced in 2006 with legislation to follow in 2009 for implementation in 2018, also distance based varying by time of day and location. A key condition was that it would be implemented when operating costs would be no greater than 5% of gross revenues. However, the 2010 election saw a new government cancel the proposal, due to concerns over its scale, costs and difficulties in persuading motorists of the merits.

In short, the Dutch appetite for believing politicians that road pricing is about improving mobility is low. There is some sign of progress though.

RUC for trucks coming in 2024

In 2018 the Netherlands decided to introduce RUC for heavy goods vehicles. This is unsurprising since it is surrounded by countries with such systems (Germany since 2005 and Belgium since 2012). It will apply to all trucks 3.5 tonnes and above, on all motorways, highways and major roads (and local roads that may see traffic diversion). It would not apply to the handful of toll roads in the country. It Is now planned that the Netherlands will have heavy vehicle RUC from 2024, although legislation to enable it has not been passed yet. Rates will vary by weight/size and emissions rating. It is intended to replace the Eurovignette for the Netherlands and reduce vehicle registration fees (and apply to foreign as well as domestic vehicles). Revenues will be placed in a hypothecated fund for transport.

So that is a start, and puts it on a par with its neighbours, and also helps to set up some of the infrastructure that could support RUC for light vehicles, even though it is not on all roads (which is common to all such European schemes, except Switzerland and Iceland).

Light RUC from 2030 announced

The new coalition Government is to introduce RUC for light vehicles by 2030.  The political parties in the coalition had different views on the topic.  The liberal/centre right VVD, centrist liberal D66, centre right CDA and the conservative CU coalition.  The VVD and CDA only wanted it to apply to electric vehicles, but D66 and the CU want it to apply to all light vehicles, including light commercial vehicles, so that is what is going to happen.

It was originally only to apply to electric vehicles, but will be phased in for all light vehicles.

What do we know so far?

· It will apply to ALL light vehicles

· It will apply to distance travelled on all roads

· Charge rates will vary by emissions rating, but not location or time of day

· Once introduced, tolls will be abolished on the three existing/planned toll roads

· It will replace sales tax on vehicles and registration fees, not fuel tax

One report indicated that KPMG had estimated the capital cost of introducing RUC for all light vehicles (9.1 million in the Netherlands) is €160 million (which seems plausible, although the technology proposed is not published), with annual operating costs of €350-450 million (which seems ridiculously high, but again the technical proposal is not reported).

So what now?

2030 is a long time away, so it is entirely possible this wont proceed as expected, except that it is widely accepted that as the electric vehicle fleet grows, revenue from motor vehicles is in decline. Fuel tax revenue will drop, but this wont directly replace it, although it is hard to see it not doing so, in effect.

Key is that the Netherlands is, this time, not considering road pricing to relieve congestion, but just to replace existing revenue sources.  The UK should heed this, as its previous attempt to introduce road user charging sought to fix congestion, but this simply isn't possible until all vehicles are on the system, and that means equipping all vehicles with technology to measure distance by time and location.

The Netherlands is just introducing a basic distance based system, that will only be defined geographically by the borders.  There is a lot to do, but at least this seems like a policy that, as long as it is clear it is replacing sales tax and registration fees, might just be acceptable enough to be a successful fifth attempt at introducing RUC in the Netherlands for light vehicles.

More here and here (both Dutch)

Paying people not to drive... again

Regular readers will be familiar with my coverage of the Spitscoren and Spitsvrij experiments in the Netherlands, which basically reward regular motorists for avoiding driving in the peaks.  They essentially get paid for regularly NOT driving at peak times.

Transportation Nation reports on an experiment in the US, at Stanford University, called Stanford CAPRI - basically it involves earning credits by using the roads entering the university at off peak times rather than the peaks. A mini version of the Dutch concepts, but already with over 1,800 users. Transportation Nation quotes a number of people who are less flattering of the extension of the idea beyond the Campus, which indicates a lack of awareness of the Dutch concepts.   The system at Stanford was designed by Dr. Balaji Prabhakar, a professor of computer science at Stanford University, so is technically driven, although it has some clear economic impacts.   It now applies to parking and road use at the Campus.   He notes that the best aspect is that only the behaviour of a small number needs to change to create a positive overall impact.

The New York Times reports further on this, with a series of quotes from some advocates of road pricing in New York and elsewhere with some mixed views.  

National Geographic does a wider assessment, noting a similar experiment now in operation in Singapore. Bear in mind Singapore is the grandfather of all congestion pricing systems, being the first city ever to introduce it. Singapore’s trial involves over 17,500 users and ends in July 2012.  It will be particularly interesting to see how Singapore's positive incentives work in with its existing road pricing system which is itself designed to be a deterrent to using the roads that are busiest at specific times.

In conclusion, it is good to see such ideas being tested and considered.  For cities or even businesses where congestion is a chronic problem, then being able to incentivise through credits of some sort the type of behaviour change that would be apparent with congestion pricing, is interesting.  It comes up against critics who say people who don't drive much don't get rewarded for that, but for now it is about innovation.  The key is who pays, and how to make something like this affordable.   In cities which are flush with money, it can be done, but without potentially recycling funds collected from motorists in the first place, it may be challenging for cities in North America and Europe at the moment.

Peak free - or the opposite of congestion charging #2 - Spitsvrij

Last week I wrote about Spitscoren, the trial in the Netherlands that pays motorist to not drive on a highway at peak times.  Effectively a congestion charge in reverse. The key foundation of the project, (which is an integration of telecommunications, tolling related technologies, e-commerce/payment systems and customer management) is to pay selected motorists for not driving in the peak, and the provision of tailored information to motorists through smartphones. An application on the phone gives trip alternative options, there is a service to facilitate carpooling and teleworking is facilitated through  a free flexible remote office that can be used by anyone on the scheme.

Recently launched is a second similar project, called Spitsvrij (Dutch only website). The project lasts till the end of December 2012.  It is in the Utrecht region of the Netherlands, bounded by the A1, A27 and A28.  The intention is to sign up 5,000 motorists (2,000 through their employers) to participate.   This time, network usage is to be monitored by On Board Units (OBUs) on vehicles backed up by Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR).

Spitsvrij area of operation

This time motorists get credit at the start of the month that may range between €30-€120 (US$41.50-US$165.47), which has money deducted from it depending on driving behaviour during that month.  Each trip at peak times in the region may cost between €1.50-€3 (around US$2-$4) off the credit.  The incentive is obvious.  The less you drive the more you keep.   Again the alternatives are to not take a trip, drive off peak, use public transport, motorcycles, cycling or walk or carpool (with someone without the unit).   A maximum of €100 can be available at the end of the month for the participant to use.

In additional to supplying the on board unit and e-commerce systems, the Spitsvrij project offers a smartphone travel app (but unlike Spitscoren no actual phone) with a carpooling database (to facilitate people carsharing) and customised alternative travel options.  The project also offers teleconferencing workshops and teleworking kits to support employers that participate, with a loyalty programme for such employers.   The intention is that it be a long term solution to managing congestion within the area, with a major emphasis on supplying intelligent and personalised travel information (including options and traffic conditions) to users through a website, smartphone app and the installed OBU in the car.  Meanwhile, participants (who like the Spitscoren programme are invited on the basis of being identified as regular motorists at peak times) keep track of their credits and are incentivised to not drive.   The minimum usage required to be able to participate is to have been a continuous user of the roads in the area at least 25 times during peak times over a 5 week period.  If a motorist qualifies he or she may join.

It is led by the Province of Utrecht and the Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment.

BNV Mobility formed and leads the operations, development and implementation of this project together with Goudappel Coffeng and Technolution.

Apparently at least 50 employers are now participating, encouraging their own employees to join (and the employers get a financial benefit, although how much that is, is not yet clear).

The peak times are 06:30-09:30 and 15:30-18:30.  A trip of up to 5km can be undertaken without risking a loss of credit, to enable trips to be taken for school runs or to drive to park and ride facilities.

Installation of the GPS based OBU is done professionally and takes one hour.  A key part of the system is that it only measures distance travelled within the "credit area" concerned and during peak times.  It does not operate outside those times and when it detects departure from the "credit area".

An important dimension for the Netherlands is that privacy is secured, with no details onsold, and no records kept beyond what is necessary to credit for lack of use.  In essence, if you have it installed and never drive during the peaks, it wont ever notify the system.

The project was officially launched on 7 October by the State Secretary for Transport, Melanie Schultz van Haegen.

  

Again, another fascinating project that is the opposite of congestion charging.  This time it isn't just one road, but a whole area that is subject to the system.  The other interesting variation is the use of an OBU using GPS to measure and identify when participants drive in the zone, and for how long to determine the extent to which they keep or lose credits.

It is far too early to say what the results are, but if this is as promising as the Spitscoren project, it would appear to provide an excellent example of an alternative approach for cities or regions seeking to manage congestion, in a way that is far more politically palatable than introducing congestion pricing.

The opposite of congestion pricing - and it works (UPDATED)

How would you feel about being paid to NOT drive at peak times on a road that you drive on every day?

It is easy to understand why congestion charging can work. Charging for something that was previously free is likely to cause consumers to think again about whether they want to “consume” the product, and as a result demand will decline. As congestion is a result of demand for roadspace exceeding supply, a reduction in demand can reduce congestion. It isn’t the only solution, or always the right solution, but it has proven itself, through implementation in Singapore, London, Stockholm and elsewhere, to help.

Cities all around the world experience traffic congestion, but implementation of congestion charging remains difficult for many. The politics of doing so are by far the greatest barrier. Motorists so frequently don’t want to pay more, even if it is to mean a faster trip.

Yet what happens if you apply the same principle – in reverse. What about paying people not to drive on congested roads at congested times?

That is exactly what has been getting trialled, with considerable success, in the Netherlands for three years now. No, I am not mistaking it with the various Dutch attempts for national road pricing. It is a project driven by the Port of Rotterdam, City Region of Rotterdam and the Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment. It is called Spitscoren or “profit from the peak”.

Corridors subject to "Spitscoren"

The location is the A15 highway in Rotterdam and parallel routes (as seen on the right).  The A15 corridor consists of the A15 between Vaanplein and Rozenburg center (in both directions), the N492, the N218 (Hartelbrug - crossing N57) and the roads parallel to the A15 from Charlois to the Caland Bridge (Vondelingenweg, Old Maasweg, Botlekweg and Droespolderweg). The above N-roads may be used in the morning eastbound in the evening westbound.

The concept is to pay every motorist that is part of the scheme, €5 every morning peak that the motorist does not use the road, and €1.50 for every evening peak. How does it work? 

Well firstly, you can't just have anyone sign up. Otherwise, I would do so as I never use the road.  So, regular users of the highway were identified, by collecting number plate information to get those vehicles that travelled at peak times regularly. The owners of those vehicles were then approached (by accessing their data through the vehicle registry) and offered to participate in the programme.

In exchange for participating, the motorist receives the loan of a  GPS enabled smartphone. Its primary purpose was to provide information on travel alternatives, and to enable the motorist to keep track of their trips (and credits for not travelling).   The phone should be on during trips, as it is part of the system to ensure that people are or are not travelling at peak times on the specified corridors.

In essence, if a registered motorist did not travel at the peaks on the road, the motorist would receive a credit. If the motorist did travel, then automatic number plate cameras would identify the vehicle, and the presence of the smartphone.  The credit would appear on a web and phone accessible account.  The alternatives on this route are to drive at different times, use other modes (including motorcycles or motor scooters), or not travel at all.

The key reward is based on a monthly balance, the amount of which depends on frequency of use.  The credit becomes accessible after a month up to a maximum of 100 euros able to be withdrawn.

Part of the reward system is to get up to a 10 euro credit every month towards keeping the phone. After a year this credit provides a discount to buying the phone. 

Peak periods are defined at 0600-0900 and 1500-1800.

The goal of the system was to reduce traffic levels by 5% in each direction, the result has been an 8% reduction.  On average it has removed 750 vehicles from the road every peak period.

The companies involved are BNV Mobility – a subsidiary of Portuguese toll road operator Brisa (which formed the SpitsScoren associations and leads the operations, development and implementation of this project), together with ABN AMRO, Goudappel Coffeng and Technolution.

The motivation behind the project has been from the Port of Rotterdam, keen to reduce congestion that has hindered its competitiveness with other ports.  It has been willing to pay to reduce congestion to improve business.  It shouldn't be too difficult to envisage how such a concept might be extended to similar facilities, such as other ports, airports, or for special events.  For example, could the London Olympics find such a scheme to be advantageous?   Could this provide an alternative in certain cases where the costs of congestion are high, and the politics against charging are also high? 

The project is due to end in June 2012, but I expect it may well be extended given its significant success. It has been such a success that it has encouraged another project to follow it called Spitsvrij – which I will write about later this week.

It has a website, (all in Dutch). 

I intend to gather more information about this project and write more about it.  If you have any questions you would like answered, leave them in the comments below.

UPDATE:  If you like Spitscoren, you'll love Spitsvrij.  In other words, another similar scheme has been launched in the Netherlands, this time covering an area rather than one corridor.  It is described here.

News briefs from the Netherlands, New Zealand and Indiana

Netherlands

Dutch News reports that the Dutch transport Minister has announced that the A15 motorway is to be extended from Bemmel to the A12 at a cost of €1bn, of which 242.5 million will be funded from tolls, the rest from central and local government contributions. As much as the Netherlands has tried and failed to introduce comprehensive road pricing, it is good to see that tolling isn’t dead in the Netherlands.

New Zealand

NZ$0.5 million (US$) in unpaid fines have been accumulated since New Zealand’s first electronic free flow toll road was opened north of Auckland in January 2009. TVNZ reports that the New Zealand Transport Agency, the crown entity responsible for operating the tolling system and the road, will finally be calling in the debt collectors “Debt collectors will be visiting toll evaders with high levels of outstanding debt. If the debts remain outstanding, the next step for the NZTA will be going to the courts to get a summary judgement which will give the NZTA additional legal powers to recover debt.” It has taken long enough.

Indiana

NWI (North West Indiana) Times claim there is a real risk that the private owner of the Indiana toll road may default on its debts. The state itself faces no risk, as it was fully paid for the lease at a price of US$3.8 billion, but apparently ITR Concession Co is delving deep into a reserve account to cover its debt servicing costs.

The report notes: “Tolls for cars driving the length of the road are now $8.80 as compared to $4.65 when the lease was signed. Tolls for large semitrailer trucks are now $35.20, as compared to $18 when the lease was signed”. No doubt the owners are trying to make the road pay. Since then, the tolls for vehicle not paying by tag and beacon based account have increased to US$9 for cars using the entire road. However, part owners Macquarie Atlas Roads say no default is expected, and other owner Cintra said:

“The reserve account was initially created exactly for the intended financial gaps that occur over long time periods of operations. That is expected during economic cycles. Naturally it's going to be accessed and utilized on occasion, which is a continued sign of fulfilling its intended use”. Naturally their shareholders will hope that this report is more fear than fair.