Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Final report tanzania ports master plan 1 to 100
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×

Saving this for later?

Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime - even offline.

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

Final report tanzania ports master plan 1 to 100

12,020
views

Published on


0 Comments
2 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
12,020
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
438
Comments
0
Likes
2
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Lake Victoria Mwanza Kigoma Tanga Lake Tanzania Dar es Tanganyika Salaam Lake Nyasa Mtwara Tanzania Ports Master Plan Final ReportTanzania Ports AuthorityFebruary 20099R8821 in association with
  • 2.    George Hintzenweg 85 P.O. Box 8520 Rotterdam 3009 AM The Netherlands +31 (0)10 443 36 66 Telephone Fax info@rotterdam.royalhaskoning.com E-mail www.royalhaskoning.com Internet Arnhem 09122561 CoC Document title Tanzania Ports Master Plan Final ReportDocument short title Status Date February 2009 Project name East Africa Trade and Facilitation Project Project ID No P079734 Port Master Plan Study United Republic of Tanzania Project number 9R8821 Client Tanzania Ports Authority Reference 9R8821/R/903617/Rott
  • 3. EXECUTIVE SUMMARYI – IntroductionThe Tanzania Ports Authority (TPA) assigned Royal Haskoning – in association withArdhi University (formerly known as UCLAS) and Interconsult Ltd. – to prepare a PortMaster Plan covering all coastal and manned Lake ports of Tanzania. Key events duringthe course of the study were as follows:• Contract signature March 3, 2008• Kick-off meeting March 26/28, 2008• Inception report April 25, 2008• Interim Report August 8, 2008• Interim workshop September 19, 2008• TPA workshop October 16-18, 2008• Draft Final Report November 7, 2008• TPA workshop January 9, 2009This Report presents the final conclusions of the study. The following main issues cameto light during the course of the study:• The need to increase the capacity of the existing facilities at Dar es Salaam until new facilities can be built elsewhere.• The location of new facilities for Dar es Salaam overspill traffic once traffic growth can no longer be accommodated within the existing port footprint.• The need for new port facilities at Mtwara to support and stimulate development of the Mtwara Corridor.• The role of the smaller coastal ports in supporting local trade, including new terminals for resource-based exports.• The potential of the Lakes ports as gateways to the rapidly growing transit countries, particularly Uganda and DR Congo.Before going on to consider these issues, the main factors influencing the future patternof port development in Tanzania are briefly discussed.Tanzania Ports Master Plan 9R8821/R/903617/RottFinal Report -i- February 2009
  • 4. II – Perspective on national port developmentNational contextNational transport infrastructureLogistics chains in Tanzania are still very inefficient. Port performance is being severelyimpeded by inability to clear cargo from the ports quickly, and the country’s role as achannel for trade from the land-locked countries1 is impeded by incomplete road and railnetworks, and the poor quality and high cost of land transport. It is essential that overthe next 20 years there is much closer integration of planning across all modes oftransport, as many of the recommendations in this report are conditional on parallelactions being taken in respect of other forms of transport infrastructure.Tanzania has two main railway systems with different gauges, i.e. the Tanzania-ZambiaRailway Authority (TAZARA) with connections to Zambia Railway system, and theTanzania Railway Limited with links to Uganda, DRC Congo, and Kenya. Only limitedareas of the country are rail-connected, and the railway sector has performed badlyduring the last ten years. The infrastructure has deteriorated and services are belowstandard due to the age and obsolescence of the infrastructure and shortage oflocomotives and wagons. Improvements to rail infrastructure and availability of rollingstock (locomotives and wagons) are urgently required.Between 2001 and 2007, TRL’s share of dry cargo imports through Dar es Salaam fellfrom 22% to 3%, whilst TAZARA’s crept up slightly from 2.5% to 4.5%. Rail should bethe predominant mode for cargo movements in excess of 400-600km, so even allowingfor the limited extent of the rail network, there is scope for increasing rail’s share of porttraffic (excluding oil) from around 7.5% today to a target of 30-35% in 10-15 years time.This would lead to a significant reduction in inland transport costs, environmentalimprovements, and more efficient port operations.The national trunk road network is undergoing substantial improvements, but stillincludes large sections which are unpaved. Development of a paved and wellmaintained road network connecting the major ports to the transit countries is critical tothe overall success of the ports master plan.Development corridorsTo ensure balanced regional growth, the Tanzanian Government has charged theNational Development Corporation with exploiting the economic potential of threecorridors running inland from the coast as follows:• Tanga Corridor• Central Corridor• Mtwara CorridorThe Tanga Corridor study has identified several large agricultural and mining projects,but these are less well-defined than in the other two corridor studies. There is a desire toboost manufacturing activity in Tanga and Arusha, and a project – which has been1 Zambia, DR Congo, Malawi, Rwanda, Burundi, Uganda9R8821/R/903617/Rott Tanzania Ports Master PlanFebruary 2009 - ii - Final Report
  • 5. around for many years – to build a new rail link from Tanga to Musoma via Arusha,providing Uganda with a more direct route to the sea than via Dar es Salaam.The principal investment projects in the Central Corridor are in mining and agriculture,supported by large public investments in energy and transport. The additional trafficwhich they generate will go mainly to Dar es Salaam.Work on the Mtwara Corridor is the most advanced, and seems likely to generatesubstantial volumes of port traffic, mainly for Mtwara but also for ports on Lake Nyasa.Economic development zonesEconomic Development Zones (EDZ) provide an important stimulus to trade and attractinward investment. Thirteen locations have been identified for EDZs, with the highestpriority being given to the one in Bagamoyo, followed by Mtwara and Arusha.If the EDZ program were to increase foreign direct investment in manufacturing by 50%,equivalent to US$ 35 to 40 million of additional investment each year, this wouldgenerate approximately 8,000 to10,000 tons per annum of project cargo. The permanentincrease in trade would depend very much on the type of industry attracted to the zone,but experience elsewhere suggests an “order of magnitude” rate of build-up of around2,000 to 5,000 tons per annum in each successive year.Urban developmentMost of Tanzania’s ports are located close to their city centres, where they contribute totraffic congestion and other adverse environmental effects. Difficulties in acquiring landhave led to cramped and inefficient port layouts, and imposed serious constraints onport expansion plans.At the same time, the ports are important sources of local employment, and havespawned a wide range of support activities nearby. It will therefore be difficult and costlyto move them. In order to achieve a proper balance of development, it is important thatport master plans are not viewed in isolation, but are related to much broader nationaland local planning objectives.Environmental considerationsGeneric environmental impacts connected with port development have been identified,and mitigation measures proposed. However these issues can only be properlyaddressed in the detailed planning and design of projects. At this stage no irrevocableenvironmental constraints have been encountered which prevent the recommendedprojects from proceeding to the next stage of investigation.Competitive position of Tanzanian portsAlthough Tanzanian ports face competition from ports as far away as Durban, theSWOT analysis demonstrates their potential to attract additional transit cargoes for thelandlocked countries PROVIDING they are operated more efficiently and developed incloser harmony with hinterland road and rail connections.Tanzania Ports Master Plan 9R8821/R/903617/RottFinal Report - iii - February 2009
  • 6. Vision on port developmentShipping developments.Vessel sizes in global container shipping have grown strongly over the last years. Thelargest vessels sail on East-West routes between the Far East and Europe, while EastAfrica is mostly served by feeders from Middle East ports. It is expected that the presentpattern of shipping corridors will continue during the coming years. However, withincreasing volumes, some direct calls from Asian ports to the North Indian Oceanincluding Tanzania may be introduced. Therefore, the expected maximum vessel sizefor these routes is assessed by us at 5,000 TEU.Port management modelsAt present TPA ports function as a mix between a public service port and landlord port.Most terminals are operated by TPA (service port) and some terminals are operated byprivate parties (e.g. TICTS). Investments in port infrastructure by private parties arehowever very low. Under the Port Act of 2004, Tanzania Ports Authority was formed asa landlord port authority, implying that port operations are handed over to privateterminal operators.In order to further establish this shift, TPA should speedily step back in its role ofsupervising authority and encourage private participation in port development andterminal operations through Public-Private Partnerships (PPP).Physically, terminals should have dedicated facilities and each be fenced and have itsown access gates. All security is to be in place under ISPS regulations, under theresponsibility of the private operator. Ownership of equipment and facilities andemployment of operational staff for terminals are to be transferred from TPA to privateterminal operators under the concession agreement. Such a shift may be undertaken inthe confidence that market forces of free competition and – last but not least – return oninvestments will drive efficiency improvements and cargo growth in the port.TPA is therefore strongly encouraged to further focus on this shift to increase efficiency,attract private capital and gain market share. The first step would be to give all newlydeveloped terminals (such as berth 13/14 in Dar es Salaam) in concession to privateoperators. The next step could be to segregate operations in the existing port areas andgive terminal operation concessions to one or more private entities.Port developmentDar es Salaam port is by far the largest port in Tanzania, serving all major economiccentres in the country as well as the transit countries. All major existing infrastructurecorridors in Tanzania lead to Dar es Salaam, and it is the only place where both railwaysystems (TAZARA and TRL) join. The port has shown a strong growth over the pastyears, especially in the container sector. This has lead to congestion in the port and asearch for additional land area in or near the port.In a city which is growing strongly and where road capacity is inadequate to cope withthe growing number of vehicles, port development, urban development and transportplans must be closely inter-linked.9R8821/R/903617/Rott Tanzania Ports Master PlanFebruary 2009 - iv - Final Report
  • 7. Land availability for the Tanzanian city ports is limited. Development of a green-field portat a limited distance of the existing ports (but well outside the urban area) would allowunrestricted port development, while connections to existing economic and physicalinfrastructure can easily be made. A green-field port can be started as a modern portfacility to match latest developments in shipping and logistics, without having theheritage of outdated infrastructure, equipment and organization.Port logisticsA port is a node in supply chains, including physical flows (shipping, land transport,(temporary) storage), value added operations (logistics, production) and processes(custom clearance, inspections, payments). TPA is to facilitate the supply chain andimprove the competitiveness of Tanzanian ports by continually improving the quality ofport services on strategic, tactical land operational levels.ICDsAn Inland Container Depot is generally defined as a common user facility offeringservices for handling and temporary storage of containers carried under customscontrol. ICDs are often located in the interiors (well outside the port towns) of the countryand well away from the servicing ports.The present ICDs inside and near Dar es Salaam are used as temporary storage ofcontainers, and basically function as a remote terminal stack. Although necessary giventhe limited space availability in the DSM sea port terminals (TICTS and TPA), theadditional handling and transport between the sea terminal and the ICDs add to the totalcosts of the logistics chain without adding value. With sufficient terminal area availableat the sea port, the ICDs in Dar es Salaam would no longer be required for the presentpurpose.The future network of ICDs will develop further away from the sea port on majortransport axes near the major consumption and production areas. Transit countries mayhave a dedicated ICD either near the border in Tanzania or in the transit country itself.ICDs will develop near EDZs and on major transport corridors, such as near Isaka,Mbeya and Kigoma.Plan periodWhile the master plan gives guidance and direction on the long term development,investment planning must be done on the basis of a five year updated forecast to ensurethat development of port capacity is demand driven. These five year forecasts must befrequently updated by TPA to ensure that sufficient capacity is available ahead ofdemand, without creating over-capacity.Tanzania Ports Master Plan 9R8821/R/903617/RottFinal Report -v- February 2009
  • 8. Traffic forecastsThe Tanzanian ports system comprises:• One large international port, Dar es Salaam, with a throughput of 7.1 million tons in 2007• Two medium sized coastal ports, Tanga and Mtwara, with throughputs of 445,000 and 90,000 tons respectively in 2007• A tail of smaller coastal ports with current throughputs of less than 50,000 tons per annum: Pangani, Kilindoni (Mafia), Kilwa Masoko and Kilwa Kivinje, Rushungi, Lindi and Mikindoni• Lake Victoria ports: Mwanza North and South, Bukoba, Kemondo Bay, Nansio and Musoma, plus 17 smaller unmanned ports• Lake Tanganyika ports: Kigoma and Kasanga, plus 19 smaller unmanned ports• Lake Nyasa ports: Itungi, Manda, Liuli and Mbamba Bay, plus 9 smaller unmanned portsThe quality and level of detail of the statistics for the smaller coastal ports and all of theLakes ports is poor, and there is a significant amount of informal trade which has madeit difficult to identify the potential demand for new port facilities.In addition, transit country trade through the Great Lakes ports is only just beginning totake off, and has almost certainly been held down by the poor quality of existing portinfrastructure, a shortage of modern, commercial shipping services, and the poor qualityof road and rail connections from the ports. Much of the existing cargo is still carried onpassenger ferries. Port Liquid Dry Break Container Total ,000 TEU bulk bulk bulk Dar es Salaam 2,189 1,161 515 3,259 7,124 334 Tanga 97 56 194 98 445 10 Mtwara 6 - 63 21 90 5 Lake Victoria 481 Lake Tanganyika Not available 108 Lake Nyasa 182007 cargo volumes (,000 tons)9R8821/R/903617/Rott Tanzania Ports Master PlanFebruary 2009 - vi - Final Report
  • 9. In addition, some of the ports handle large numbers of passengers: Dar es Salaamhandled 732,000 passengers in 2007, whilst passenger traffic through the Lakes portswas as follows: Lake ‘000 passengers 2005-6 Lake Victoria Mwanza 206 Nansio 189 Bukoba 87 Kemondo Bay 9 Lake Tanganyika Kigoma 16 Lake Nyasa Itungi 7 Mbamba Bay 1Since the beginning of the decade peace and macro-economic stability throughout mostof the region has resulted in high traffic growth rates. Between 2001 and 2007 theaverage growth rate for the coastal ports was 9.2% per annum. Container traffic hasbeen growing even faster, at around 13.5% per annum, and there has also been stronggrowth in dry bulk cargoes such as wheat, fertilizers and cement. Liquid bulk traffic(mainly oil) has been growing at an average rate of 5.4% per annum, but break-bulktraffic has been static.Transit traffic to the land-locked countries makes up a growing proportion of Dar esSalaam’s traffic. Since 2001 it has increased from 10% to 41% of liquid bulks, and from25% to 39% of containers. Dry bulk and break bulk flows to/from the transit countrieshave remained fairly small, and fluctuate from year to year.The traffic forecasts assume a continuation of past GDP growth rates of 6 to 8% perannum in Tanzania and neighbouring countries. Although the short-term forecasts to2013 will be affected by the global recession, its impact is likely to be smaller and slowerthan in developed countries. There is a good chance of a speedy recovery, making thetiming of port development the main issue rather than its form.The traffic forecasts have been based on trend analysis, interviews with leadingbusiness organizations, and studies of individual issues such as:• Macro-economic growth and the restructuring of the economy• Agriculture, forestry and fisheries resources• Energy policy• Mining projects• Economic development zones• Corridor development plans• Road and rail infrastructure• Transit traffic, including competition from ports in other countries.Low and high forecasts have been made for individual ports, reflecting the envelopewithin which cargo handling is expected to develop. It is emphasized that futureinvestment planning is to be based on annually updated five-year forecasts, with anappropriate level of substantiation and stakeholder commitment.The forecasts are summarized for each individual port separately.Tanzania Ports Master Plan 9R8821/R/903617/RottFinal Report - vii - February 2009
  • 10. III – Dar es SalaamHigh and low cargo forecasts have been used to demonstrate the high level ofuncertainty associated with future traffic volumes, particularly after 2018. 2007 2013 2018 2023 2028 High forecast Liquid Bulk 2,189 3,724 4,820 6,099 7,652 Dry Bulk 1,161 2,449 3,693 4,779 6,056 Break Bulk 515 655 934 1,317 1,842 Total excl. containers (‘000 tons) 3,865 6,828 9,447 12,195 15,550 Containers (‘000 TEU) 334 775 1,554 2,728 4,719 Vehicles (000 units) 41 81 143 230 370 Ferry Passengers (000 ) 732 981 1,253 1,599 2,040 Cruise Passengers (‘000) - 3 18 28 50 Low forecast Liquid Bulk 2,189 2,824 3,251 3,790 4,260 Dry Bulk 1,161 2,020 2,624 3,245 3,726 Break Bulk 515 424 551 741 992 Total excl. containers (‘000 tons) 3,865 5,268 6,426 7,776 8,978 Containers (‘000 TEU) 334 649 1,074 1,637 2,486 Vehicles (000 units) 41 69 106 155 228 Ferry Passengers (000) 732 849 961 1,087 1,230 Cruise Passengers (‘000) - 1 8 12 23Dar es Salaam cargo forecasts (,000 tons)The existing footprint of Dar es Salaam port – including the planned development ofberths 13-14 – is estimated to have the following capacity. Commodity Capacity Liquid bulk 10 million tons per annum Dry bulk 6.1 million tons per annum Break bulk 4.0 million tons per annum Containers 1.2 million TEU per annum Vehicles 120,000 units per annumCapacity of Dar es Salaam Port’s Existing Footprint(including berths 13-14 and the new SPM)To reach this capacity, significant improvements must be made with regard tooperational efficiency, traffic flows in the port and dwell time reduction. Also changes arerequired to port infrastructure and layout, as discussed below.9R8821/R/903617/Rott Tanzania Ports Master PlanFebruary 2009 - viii - Final Report
  • 11. Liquid bulks Construction of a new single point mooring (SPM), which will handle the majority of black and white oil products as well as crude oil.This SPM is being designed to handle ships of up to 150,000dwt, and is already at thedetailed design stage. Although it will not do away with the need for a small jetty forspecialist oil products such as LPG, and other liquid bulks such as vegetable oil andmolasses – such a jetty is desirable anyway for emergency back-up purposes – it willsubstantially reduce traffic at the Kurasini Oil Jetty (KOJ).Dry bulks Creation of a specialist dry bulks terminal at berths 5-7 Expansion of grain silo to allow handling of larger vesselsMajor bulk cargoes should no longer be bagged on the quay, but transferred to bulkstorage directly. If required, bagging can take place at the bulk storage facility,independently from the vessel operation.The plan envisages all grains being transported to the existing silo, which would be usedprimarily for intermediate storage to increase the unloading capacity of the quay.Traders would be required to remove the grain as quickly as practical. In order to handlea full shipload, the storage capacity of the existing grain silo should be expanded from30,000 tons to 60,000 tons. Further expansion will be required if the silo is to be used forlong-term storage of grain, an additional demand which could occur if silo operationswere privatized.Dangote cement imports should be transported from berth 7 by conveyor belt to therecently leased packaging area at the back of the port. The conveyor should have anelevation of at least 6m to allow trucks and small equipment to pass underneath.Fertilizers should be stored in a bulk warehouse / Shed 7, from where the product canbe bagged and loaded onto trucks or rail wagons.Other dry bulks can be handled on either of berth 5, 6 or 7 and stored in one of thesheds, depending on allocation and availability.Containers Construction of container berths 13-14 upstream of the Kurasini Oil Jetty (KOJ) Relocation of the KOJ jetty for safety and operational efficiency Development of a large scale ICD outside Dar es SalaamIn view of high traffic growth rates, congestion at the TICTS terminal, the limited amountof storage space available for containers elsewhere in the port, and the inefficiency ofusing ICDs, two additional container berths (berths 13-14) are required as soon aspossible.Tanzania Ports Master Plan 9R8821/R/903617/RottFinal Report - ix - February 2009
  • 12. Berths 13-14 provide the only possibility to create additional container terminal capacityon the short and medium term. This additional capacity is required in 2013 to handleforecasted volumes until new terminals can be developed elsewhere (refer Section IV).Delayed development of berths 13-14 could result in congestion, loss of market share ofTanzanian ports and impeded economic development.Once berths 13-14 are operational (2013) TPA should discontinue container operationson berths 1-7 to allow for the growth of other commodities.Nautical access to berths 13-14 will be impeded by KOJ. Navigational safety must beimproved to limit the risk of collision. Also a safety zone must be created with a 260mradius from the KOJ, within which no cargo handling or shipping activity is allowed. Thefollowing options for improving navigational safety have been considered:• Widening the approach channel to berths 13-14, so that container ships can manoeuvre at a safe distance from the moored tankers, and moving the quay line for berths 13-14 outwards so that it lines up with the KOJ rather than berths 5-11.• Shortening the KOJ trestle so that the jetty head is in line with the TICTS and B13-14 terminal. Construction can start after the new SPM is operational.• Relocating the oil jetty to the Kigamboni site of the creek, physically separating all liquid bulk activities from the container operationsThe last option – relocating the oil jetty to the opposite site of the creek – is preferredbecause of the navigational safety, operational safety, optimal use of container terminalarea, and minimal disruption of operations during construction.The need for additional off-dock ICDs to support the container terminals(s) will dependon the ability and willingness of shippers to reduce container dwell times. The situationshould be closely monitored.There is a proposal to construct a large new large ICD for transit traffic at Kisarawe25 km west of the port, where TRL and TAZARA are about 7 km apart. Containerswould be shuttled between the port and ICD by rail only, using a private rail operator.Development costs would be high (US$ 30-40 million) because the area is hilly andsignificant road improvements are required, and the costs would have to be recoveredover a relatively short period (6-8 years) until new container terminal capacity can bedeveloped in the port(s). A site with lower investment costs would be preferable.Break bulks• Deepening of berths 1-4In the short term much of the space at Berths 1-4 will be needed for container stacking,but more space will become available for general cargo storage as new facilities aredeveloped for containers and dry bulks.The design depth of berth 1-4 should be increased to 12 m –CD. This will require a newquay wall to be built in front of the existing gravity structure.9R8821/R/903617/Rott Tanzania Ports Master PlanFebruary 2009 -x- Final Report
  • 13. Ro-Ro / vehicles• Construction of a new 260m quay in line with the Lighter Quay• Reclamation of the area behind it to provide additional storage space.• Construction of a two multi-storey car parksRo-Ro vessels and specialist vehicle carriers would use the new break-bulk quaybetween berth 1 and the Lighter Quay, with berths 1-4 in reserve.A multi-storey car park for 5,000 vehicles is already planned adjacent to the Malindimarshalling yard, but a second multi-storey car park of comparable size will be requiredto accommodate the forecast growth in demand until a new vehicle terminal can beopened.The feasibility of developing parking areas outside the port – Inland Car Depots muchlike the principle of Inland Container Depots – should be investigated. Inland car depotscould reduce the requirements for multi-storey car parks inside the port.In the longer term car terminals can be built at another location, most probablyBagamoyo.Logistics area• Development of the Kurasini warehouse area for port logistics and distributionThere is potential to develop the Kurasini warehouse area on the other side of BandariStreet to the port for logistics and distribution activities. This land should be transferredto TPA for port-related activities at the earliest opportunity, as it provides a rare chanceto over-come existing space constraints in the port, and would open up new options forimproving port layout and traffic circulation.Passengers• Redevelopment of the waterfront adjacent to the city centreThe waterfront development for passengers, tourists and commercial activities will belocated near the city centre. The development area must lie outside the navigationchannel to the cargo port, and passenger terminals should be located outside of themain port area to avoid security issues.The lighter wharf will remain in use for dhows, coasters and service vessels.Tanzania Ports Master Plan 9R8821/R/903617/RottFinal Report - xi - February 2009
  • 14. Ship repairs• Acquisition of new floating dock• Relocation of related workshopsA floating dock is the preferred solution for ship repairs. The dock and the relatedworkshops can best be placed on the outer edge of berth 13/14, where sufficient spaceis available and noise and light nuisance is minimized. Alternatively the dock could beplaced in Mtwara.Channel dredging• Deepening of the port access channel from -10.5m to -12.0m CDDeepening of the channel would reduce the number of ships having to wait for the tide,and associated demurrage costs. Deepening to -12.0m CD would allow an estimated85% of all ships in 2028 to enter at all states of the tide, allowing 1.0 m for under-keelclearance.Further deepening to -13.0m CD was considered, along with widening and straighteningof the channel to allow two way operation and longer ships. However, high costs andconstraints on longer-term development at Dar es Salaam suggest that relocating thelarger vessels to new port facilities outside of Dar es Salaam would be a more cost-effective alternative.Traffic circulation• Improvement of traffic circulation• Development of parking areas outside the portA traffic circulation plan has been prepared based on dedicated in and out gates foreach of the four terminals (break bulk, dry bulk, TICTS and berths 13-14) and a one-wayroad system.Dedicated parking areas for trucks should be provided near each port entrance, andtrucks should only be allowed to enter the port once all documents are in order and thecargo is ready for collection/delivery. Improvements in signing are needed, and a trafficmanagement unit should be created in the Port Manager’s office to enforce theregulations and remove obstructions.9R8821/R/903617/Rott Tanzania Ports Master PlanFebruary 2009 - xii - Final Report
  • 15. Proposed traffic circulation patternBetter management of the rail-port interface is required, together with the purchase ofadditional rolling stock and cargo handling equipment, and relocation of rail tracks to theback of the port.Summary of development plan of Dar es Salaam existing footprintThe master plan for development of the existing footprint is shown below. Offshore SPM Crude, oil products Liquid bulk jetty Waterfront Passengers, cruise, ferries Floating dock Berths 5-7 Berths 8-11 (TICTS) Berth 13/14 Dry bulk Containers Containers -4 s1 k Lighter wharf r th u l Be ak B Dhows, coasters e Roro Br Kurasini logistics Value added logistics Light manufacturing Car parkTanzania Ports Master Plan 9R8821/R/903617/RottFinal Report - xiii - February 2009
  • 16. Recommended actions are summarized below: Key Actions for Short Medium Long Remarks Dar es Salaam 2009-11 2012-18 2019-28 Liquid bulk • Construction of a new single  At detailed design stage point mooring (SPM) Dry bulk • Creation of a specialist dry  Cement, grain, fertilizer and other dry bulks terminal at berths 5-7 bulks. No bagging on the quay. • Expansion of grain silo  Allowing for larger vessel sizes Containers • Development of  Only location for short term development berths 13-14 of container handling capacity, needs to be fast-tracked • Relocation of KOJ  Preferred relocation to Kigamboni side • Develop a large ICD near  In Kisarawe or other location. In use until DSM 2018. Break bulk • Deepening of berths 1-4  Deepening to -12m CD Vehicles • New Ro-Ro quay  Creating a dedicated Ro-Ro / vehicle • Reclamation Kurasini creek  terminal st • 1 multi-storey car park  In progress, capacity 5,000 cars nd • 2 multi-storey car park  Determine feasibility of Inland Car Depots as alternative solution Logistics • Development of Kurasini  Land to be transferred to TPA, gradual warehouse area development for port related logistics and light industries. Passengers • Redevelopment of  Avoid negative impact on shipping and waterfront commercial port operations Ship repairs • Acquisition of floating dock  • Redevelopment of  workshops Channel dredging • Deepen channel to 12 m –  Reduce tidal restrictions and waiting times CD for container vessels and tankers Traffic circulation • Traffic circulation plan  Traffic plan to include enforcement • Parking areas outside  port area9R8821/R/903617/Rott Tanzania Ports Master PlanFebruary 2009 - xiv - Final Report
  • 17. IV – Development plan – Port expansionThe short-term plan for Dar es Salaam (existing footprint) provides sufficient capacity tohandle the expected traffic up to 2016 in the high forecast case, and 2020 in the lowforecast case. After that, a completely new area will have to be opened up for portdevelopment.After examining the whole of the Tanzanian coastline for potential sites, three wereidentified as the most suitable locations for handling Dar es Salaam overspill traffic:• Kigamboni (on the other side of the creek to the existing port)• Bagamoyo• Mwambani Bay (near Tanga)Consideration was also given to a site at Manza, near the Kenyan border, proposed asthe site for a new port to handle Mombasa as well as Dar es Salaam overspill traffic.However poor land transport infrastructure, high development costs and the politicalchallenges of jointly developing a port which would serve the Kenyan as well as theTanzanian market made this significantly less attractive than the above alternatives.Development scenariosFour port development scenarios were defined based on different combinations of thethree most suitable port sites, as shown in the table below. It was assumed that the newport(s) would handle the Dar es Salaam overspill traffic as well as North Tanzania’straffic. Development scenarios were therefore based on the combined traffic forecasts ofDar es Salaam and Tanga. Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Tanga Mwambani Mwambani Mwambani DSM Bagamoyo Bagamoyo Kigamboni Dar es Salaam – Existing footprint (incl. berth 13-14)Economic analyses and comparison of non-monetary aspects show that Scenario 4(Bagamoyo and Mwambani) is the preferred development alternative. This is explainedfurther below.Distribution scenarios for the merged Dar es Salaam and Tanga traffic forecasts for thefour scenarios are as follows:Tanzania Ports Master Plan 9R8821/R/903617/RottFinal Report - xv - February 2009
  • 18. High forecast 2013 2018 2023 2028 2013 2018 2023 2028 Scenario 1 : Development at Kigamboni and Mwambani Bay Kigamboni Mwambani Bay Dry bulks(000 tons) - - - - - 2,366 2,942 3,026 Break bulk (000 tons) - - - - - 359 426 516 Containers (000 TEU) - 394 1,566 3,520 - 122 211 361 Vehicles (000 units) - 23 110 250 - - - - Scenario 2 : Development at Bagamoyo only Tanga Bagamoyo (lighterage, coasters, dhows) Dry bulks(000 tons) - - 919 2,196 552 626 702 786 Break bulk (000 tons) - - - - 63 98 120 145 Containers (000 TEU) - 506 1,768 3,870 10 10 10 10 Vehicles (000 units) - 23 110 250 - - - - Scenario 3 : Development at Mwambani Bay only Mwambani Bay - 2,366 2,942 3,026 - 359 426 516 - 516 1,778 3,880 - 23 110 250 Scenario 4 : Development at Bagamoyo and Mwambani Bay Bagamoyo Mwambani Bay Dry bulks(000 tons) - - - - - 2,366 2,942 3,026 Break bulk (000 tons) - - - - - 359 426 516 Containers (000 TEU) - 394 1,566 3,520 - 122 211 361 Vehicles (000 units) - 23 110 250 - - - -Traffic at the new ports (,000 tons) – High forecastThe low forecast for the preferred scenario 4 is shown in the table below. Low forecast 2013 2018 2023 2028 2013 2018 2023 2028 Scenario 4 : Development at Bagamoyo and Mwambani Bay Bagamoyo Mwambani Bay Dry bulks(000 tons) - - - - - 667 1,004 763 Break bulk (000 tons) - - - - - 221 227 241 Containers (000 TEU) - - 453 1,302 - 82 126 191 Vehicles (000 units) - - 35 108 - - - -Traffic at the new ports (,000 tons) – Low forecast (Scenario 4)In practice the traffic mix is likely to be more varied than shown in the table – not leastbecause of the unknown effects of EDZ development at Bagamoyo and Mwambani Bay.However the total tonnages in the high forecast give a reasonable indication of themaximum scale and speed of development required for port planning purposes, whilstthe tonnages in the low forecast have been used to test the financial robustness of thealternative scenarios.9R8821/R/903617/Rott Tanzania Ports Master PlanFebruary 2009 - xvi - Final Report
  • 19. Layouts and capital cost estimates were developed for each scenario. In the highforecast the difference in capital costs between the most and least expensive schemes,phased over 15 years, is just over US$ 150m.Cost estimatesFor the preferred scheme (Scenario 4) capital expenditure from 2013-28 is aboutUS$ 845m in the high forecast, and US$ 445m in the low forecast. This includessuperstructure and equipment, which could be privately funded, and road and railaccess which would be funded by public entities other than TPA. High forecasts 2013-18 2018-23 2023-28 Total Scenario 1 Kigamboni 90 190 375 655 Mwambani Bay 110 25 30 165 Total 200 215 405 820 Scenario 2 Bagamoyo 200 210 365 775 Scenario 3 Mwambani Bay 150 200 345 695 Scenario 4 Bagamoyo 170 190 320 680 Mwambani Bay 110 25 30 165 Total 280 215 350 845 Low forecasts Scenario 4 Bagamoyo 100 95 135 330 Mwambani Bay 90 5 20 115 Total 190 100 155 445Capital cost estimates (rounded, US$ m)Operating and inland transport costsEstimates were made of differences in operating costs between the four scenarios, butthese turned out to be relatively small, of the order of US$ 7-8m per annum by 2028,with Scenario 3 the least expensive and Scenario 4 the most expensive. Differences inoperating costs were caused primarily by differences in maintenance costs (includingmaintenance dredging) and the need to duplicate certain facilities at each separate portsite.The main cost difference between the four scenarios was in inland transport costs.These were modelled on the basis of the following:• Origin-destination pattern of the cargo (21 regions in Tanzania plus six transit countries)• Assumed modal split, with an increase in rail’s market share once its current problems have been resolved• Distance-based cost formulae for road and rail transport costs for different types of cargo. These were derived from a mixture of Tanzanian and international data, andTanzania Ports Master Plan 9R8821/R/903617/RottFinal Report - xvii - February 2009
  • 20. allowed for a reduction in unit costs for rail resulting from economies of scale and general efficiency improvements.Discounted cash flowDiscounted cash flow analysis of the capital, operating and land transport costsassociated with the four alternative scenarios showed Scenario 4 (Bagamoyo /Mwambani Bay) to be the lowest cost option in all of the situations tested.Although the cost differences between Scenario 4 (Bagamoyo/Mwambani) and the nextmost expensive Scenario 1 (Kigamboni/Mwambani) are large in absolute terms, they arerelatively small in terms of the total costs considered. On the other hand the costadvantage of Scenario 4 over Scenario 3 (Mwambani Bay only) is overwhelmingbecause of the Mwambani Bay’s peripheral location in relation to national and transitcountry markets. Evaluation period to 2028 Evaluation period to 2038 NVP @ 5% NPV@10% NVP @ 5% NPV@10% High forecast Scenario 1 +1.2% +1.0% +1.4% +1.2% Scenario 2 +3.1% +2.9% +3.2% +3.1% Scenario 3 +8.5% +7.7% +10.7% +9.6% Scenario 4 - - - - Low forecast Scenario 1 +0.8% +0.5% +1.2% +0.9% Scenario 2 +2.9% +2.6% +3.2% +2.9% Scenario 3 +12.6% +11.9% +10.7% +10.7% Scenario 4 - - - -Increase in total discounted costs (compared with Scenario 4)Other considerationsOther (non monetary) economic considerations were taken into account to select thepreferred development option, including:• Security of supply• Level of commercial risk• Increased competition• Longer-term potential for port development• Contribution to regional development• Stimulus to Economic Development Zones• Impact on urban planning• Traffic congestion relief.Some of these criteria favoured different port locations, but on balance they reinforcedthe view that Scenario 4 – large scale development of container and vehicle facilities atBagamoyo, combined with smaller scale dry bulk and multi-purpose terminals atMwambani Bay – offers the best way forward.9R8821/R/903617/Rott Tanzania Ports Master PlanFebruary 2009 - xviii - Final Report
  • 21. Preferred ScenarioThe economic analysis and the analysis of other considerations both confirm Scenario 4(Bagamoyo / Mwambani) as the preferred layout. The conceptual layouts for thisscenario at Bagamoyo and Mwambani are shown below: Land N Very shallow areas Shallow water (<14m) Deep water (> 14m) Access Channel & turning circle(s) Channel Container terminal area Vehicle/RoRo terminal Vehicles 2018 2023 2028 0 1 km ContainersLayout Scenario 4 – Bagamoyo (high forecast)Tanzania Ports Master Plan 9R8821/R/903617/RottFinal Report - xix - February 2009
  • 22. Land Shallow water N Channel & turning circle(s) Container terminal area Break bulk Dry bulk Dry bulk Break Bulk Access 2018 Channel 2028 Containers 0 1 kmLayout Scenario 4 – Mwambani (high forecast)Financial AnalysesA preliminary financial evaluation of Scenario 4 showed that the basic infrastructure tobe developed by TPA, and the individual terminals which could be funded by eitherprivate investors or TPA, all generated relatively high rates of return, with the possibleexception of the multi-purpose terminal at Mwambani Bay (7% in the low forecast).A more detailed feasibility study for the development of Bagamoyo is in the process ofbeing commissioned. A similar study is needed for Mwambani Bay, as the trafficforecasts for Tanga have a much higher margin of error because of their dependence onlarge dry bulk projects which may or may not go ahead. The Mwambani Bay feasibilitystudy should also update and evaluate proposals for a new rail link between Arusha andMusoma.Although the construction of a new port at Bagamoyo is unlikely to start before 2013, thedevelopment of a green-field site requires considerable amount of preparatory work.Particular attention should be paid to land acquisition and the agreement of a publiclyacceptable resettlement programme, covering not just residential properties but alsopublic buildings such as schools.9R8821/R/903617/Rott Tanzania Ports Master PlanFebruary 2009 - xx - Final Report
  • 23. V – TangaThe wide spread in the cargo forecasts between the high and the low forecast for Tangais illustrated below: 2013 2018 2023 2028 High forecast Existing cargoes 1,075 1,415 1,770 2,242 New projects 756 1,781 2,311 2,341 Total 1,831 3,196 4,081 4,583 Low forecast Existing cargoes 791 662 1,075 934 New projects 513 515 523 530 Total 1,304 1,177 1,598 1,464Tanga Cargo Forecast (‘000 tons)The high forecast growth of dry bulk cargoes will only materialize if direct vessel calls atalongside berths are possible (i.e. the Mwambani Bay scheme goes ahead). If it doesnot, small scale lighterage operations are likely to continue, although for containers thiswill depend on the availability of geared container ships, which are likely to become lesscommon in future.The main issue is whether any investments are needed to create a temporary increasein capacity until a new port can be built at Mwambani Bay. Tanga port is located nearthe city centre, and does not have enough space for expansion. Port development wouldincrease city traffic, and the noise and dust would have negative environmental impact.Investment in fixed assets such as new quays or storage areas is therefore unlikely tobe desirable, although proposals for investment in mobile assets which can be writtenoff quickly, such as cranes and (possibly) lighters, should be considered on their merits.Even when Mwambani Bay has been completed, some traffic may also continue to behandled at Tanga on coasters and dhows, but only for local markets and the Zanzibar /Pemba trade. Key actions Short Medium Long Remarks Tanga 2009-11 2012-18 2019-28 Maintenance of port  equipment Additional barges and   pontoons Redevelop Tanga port for  Port activities will move to recreational and urban use MwambaniTanzania Ports Master Plan 9R8821/R/903617/RottFinal Report - xxi - February 2009
  • 24. VI – MtwaraThe forecasts for Mtwara have an even larger spread between the high and low figures,largely because of uncertainty about the viability, form and timing of several largeprojects in the Mtwara Corridor. These include compressed natural gas, bio-diesel,woodchips, hardwood timber, cement, urea, coal and iron ore. Some of the projectscould involve substantially larger ships than those using the port at present.The high and low forecasts for Mtwara are shown in the table below. High forecast 2013 2018 2023 2028 Liquid bulks 263 421 619 867 Dry bulks 2,380 4,500 15,050 22,850 Break bulk 139 270 455 682 Containerized 141 229 332 387 Total 2,923 5,420 16,456 24,786 Containers(‘000 TEU) 34 49 68 76 Low forecast 2013 2018 2023 2028 Liquid bulks 11 25 41 61 Dry bulks 130 500 1,500 1,900 Break bulk 81 121 175 228 Containerized 70 114 158 196 Total 292 760 1,874 2,384 Containers (‘000 TEU) 17 24 32 37Mtwara forecasts ‘000 tonsThe Mtwara Corridor project includes the construction of a railway from Mtwara toMbamba Bay. Although intended primarily to facilitate coal exports, this would also allowMtwara to become a natural gateway to Malawi and parts of Zambia. Mtwara has alsobeen selected as the site for an EDZContainer and break bulk operations can continue in the existing port area, where somelimited expansion is possible to provide sufficient capacity. For dry bulk operations anarea away from the existing port must be found with sufficient land close to the mainroad and (future) rail network. Development of CNG exports will require a dedicated jettyjust east of the existing port.Each of the major dry bulk commodities will have its own handling requirements, and thelarger ones may require their own dedicated terminals. Some of the dry bulk facilitiesmay be funded by major shippers, leaving TPA responsible for the basic portinfrastructure, improvements to the existing port, and any common user bulk terminals.The proposed port development of Mtwara port is shown below.9R8821/R/903617/Rott Tanzania Ports Master PlanFebruary 2009 - xxii - Final Report
  • 25. Mtwara Port: - Containers CNG - Break bulk jetty Dry bulk - Liquid bulk importProposed port development MtwaraBecause of uncertainty about the Mtwara Corridor projects, the attraction of gas-relatedindustries, and the speed and type of development envisaged for the EDZ, the mostappropriate layout and development sequence for the port cannot be set out in detail atpresent. It is recommended that TPA and the National Development Corporation (NDC)take the lead in establishing a permanent Working Group for the joint planning ofMtwara port and related economic activities. Key Actions Short Medium Long Remarks Mtwara 2009-11 2012-18 2019-28 Dangote cement terminal  In progress. Private financing. CNG export jetty  Discussions with Artumas in progress. Private financing Woodchips terminal  Discussions in progress. Development on new terminal, private financing Other bulks   Timing linked to individual industrial projects Establish permanent Working  TPA and NDC cooperation Group for joint planning of port and corridor developmentTanzania Ports Master Plan 9R8821/R/903617/RottFinal Report - xxiii - February 2009
  • 26. VII – Small coastal portsPanganiPangani port serves local trade only. No new developments were identified which couldincrease the national strategic importance of the port. To facilitate local trade a basicport facility needs to be developed.Kilindoni (Mafia)No significant trade volumes were identified. However, construction of a jetty is seen asa government obligation to the island’s 45,000 inhabitants to allow passenger traffic,improve working conditions, and facilitate trade.The development of a jetty similar to the existing Tanpesca jetty is recommended, withmooring facilities for two vessels and a draft of 3m -CD. Based on bathymetric surveysa location should be selected that minimizes the length of the jetty. A basic facilityshould be also developed in Kisiju, the landing point on the main land for Mafia dhows,KilwaTwo potential bio-energy projects have been identified in the region, initiated by SEKABand Bioshape. These projects could generate significant export volumes of liquid bulk(bio-ethanol) and (mostly containerized) jatropha nuts. Dedicated facilities need to beconstructed in close coordination with the private developers to handle these exports.The existing jetty at Kilwa Masoko needs to be rehabilitated to handle project cargoassociated with these projects and other small scale exports. No developments arerequired at Kilwa Kivinje.Gypsum exports through Rushungi must be monitored, and if required a basic facilityshould be constructed and the access road improved.LindiLindi port presently serves local trade only. No new developments were identified whichcould increase the national strategic importance of the port. To serve local trade thedredging or modification of the existing pier is required.MikindaniNo potential for Mikindani was identified and it is recommended that the site is notdeveloped.9R8821/R/903617/Rott Tanzania Ports Master PlanFebruary 2009 - xxiv - Final Report
  • 27. Key recommended actions Short Medium Long Remarks Small coastal ports 2009-11 2012-18 2019-28 Pangani Develop basic mooring facility  Local use only Kilindoni Develop jetty short jetty in  Local use. Social obligation to Kilindoni island population. Develop basic mooring facility  Facility to serve Mafia trade with in Kisiju the mainland Kilwa Jatropha nuts  Bioshape, preparations in (containers / dry bulk) progress. Private financing. Bio-ethanol export jetty  SEKAB, preparations in progress. Private financing. Jetty rehabilitation  Linked to projects above, user requirements to be determined Lindi Dredge or modify existing pier  Local use only to allow direct berthing Mikindani No action No development recommendedTanzania Ports Master Plan 9R8821/R/903617/RottFinal Report - xxv - February 2009
  • 28. VII– Lake VictoriaLake Victoria has many public and private ports. Traffic forecasts for the most importantpublic ports are shown below. They assume that container shipping will develop on LakeVictoria within the next 5 years, that there will be substantial improvements to the railservice to Mwanza, and that the public ports will suffer no further loss of market share tothe private ports, some of which are closely linked to shipping services or fish landingactivities. 2013 2018 2023 2028 High forecast (000 tons) Dry cargo Mwanza South 541 833 1,114 1,491 Mwanza North 152 185 225 273 Bukoba 38 46 56 68 Kemondo Bay 32 38 47 57 Nansio 19 23 28 34 Liquid bulks Mwanza South 40 51 65 84 Musoma 20 26 33 42 Total 842 1,202 1,569 2,050 Low forecast (000 tons) Dry cargo Mwanza South 170 228 305 408 Mwanza North 56 52 49 49 Bukoba 25 20 15 10 Kemondo Bay 20 15 10 5 Nansio 20 26 33 42 Liquid bulks Mwanza South 36 42 48 56 Musoma 18 21 24 28 Total 345 403 484 597Lake Victoria Traffic Forecasts for Major TPA Ports (‘000 tons)Mwanza SouthThe existing link span for rail wagon ferries is sufficient and does not require expansion.Rehabilitation of the wooden mooring is required.Container operations are expected to be introduced on Lake Victoria in a coordinatedeffort between private shipping lines and Tanzania, Uganda and Kenya ports. Breakbulk and container operations can best be organized as a multi-purpose terminal, withone berth used for containers and one for break bulk handling. Some additional land forbreak bulk storage and container stacking adjacent to the existing port will be required.Ship building and repair facilities could be further developed on the northern side of theport in combination with the existing floating docks and ship building activities.Although the volumes are small, a liquid bulk jetty could be constructed on the southside of the link span to separate liquid bulk handling from general cargo operations. This9R8821/R/903617/Rott Tanzania Ports Master PlanFebruary 2009 - xxvi - Final Report
  • 29. should be built around 2018, when occupancy of the multipurpose terminal becomeshigher.A development scenario for Mwanza South port is shown below. Mwanza South Port Ship building Floating repair docks General cargo terminal Container terminal Rail link span Liquid bulk jettyPort development scenario Mwanza South portMwanza NorthMwanza North Port is located close to the city centre, and is mostly used for passengervessels and local cargo. Dredging at both berths is urgently required to allow alongsidemooring of the ferries.There are longer-term plans for a new passenger terminal, which could include shops, abar/restaurant and other commercial developments, and a new Ro-Ro berth suitable forlarger vessels. A potential development plan for Mwanza North port is shown below.Tanzania Ports Master Plan 9R8821/R/903617/RottFinal Report - xxvii - February 2009
  • 30. Mwanza North Port Roro Pier Passenger terminal Kamanga ferriesDevelopment of Mwanza North PortBukobaThe port area is completely surrounded by urban development. It is more popular thannearby Kemondo Bay for passengers and local cargo because it is located in the city.However port expansion will require some resettlement of houses and/or a redesign ofthe current port area. A possible layout of the port expansion is shown below. New berth New berths Existing berths Port area Relocated warehousesDevelopment of Bukoba Port9R8821/R/903617/Rott Tanzania Ports Master PlanFebruary 2009 - xxviii - Final Report
  • 31. Kemondo BayKemondo Bay depends largely on the performance of TRL and the Lake ferry wagons.Unfortunately, neither are performing well at present. The wagon ferry will continue tocall Kemondo Bay, but because Bukoba is the preferred port for passengers and localcargo, the development potential for Kemondo port is considered to be low. Significantinvestments are unlikely to be justified.NansioThe existing pier must be modified to allow proper mooring of the vessel and level(dis)embarkation and (un)loading. This would require extension of the pier, dredging orlowering of the existing pier. A floating pontoon could also be considered.MusomaBecause of the good road connection to Mwanza, the potential for port development inMusoma is low. Construction of the Arusha – Musoma railway line would provide anopportunity for further development, but it is not likely that this will happen soon. Key actions Short Medium Long Remarks Lake Victoria 2009-11 2012-18 2019-28 Mwanza South Port Purchase container handling   Development of container equipment shipping could enhance trade Relocate rail yard  Area required for other port development Expansion shipbuilding &  Strategic investment to promote repair facilities lake transport, private financing Develop new oil jetty  Improved safety Mwanza North Port Initiate dredging program  Urgently required Develop new Ro-Ro berth and  Requirements need to be passenger terminal substantiated Bukoba Develop additional quay  Requirements need to be substantiated Kemondo Bay No action Nansio Modify existing berth to allow  level (dis)embarkation and cargo handling Musoma No actionTanzania Ports Master Plan 9R8821/R/903617/RottFinal Report - xxix - February 2009
  • 32. IX – Lake TanganyikaThe Lake Tanganyika ports handle traffic for DR Congo, parts of Zambia, Burundi and(less directly) Rwanda. Because of the recent history of civil disturbances, the traffichas begun to grow again only recently, and its full potential is difficult to estimate. As aresult, the traffic forecasts for Kigoma and Kasanga shown below are indicative. 2013 2018 2023 2028 High forecast (000 tons) Kigoma Local 38 74 104 155 Imports 46 957 1,342 1,883 Exports 134 461 647 907 Total 218 1,492 2,093 2,945 Kasanga Total 40 100 197 305 Low forecast (000 tons) Kigoma Local 24 38 53 68 Imports 30 506 716 1,004 Exports 113 305 422 582 Total 167 849 1,191 1,654 Kasanga Total 27 40 53 76Lake Tanganyika Traffic Forecasts for Major TPA Ports (‘000 tons)KigomaAs in the case of Mwanza, the traffic forecasts for Kigoma assume substantialimprovements to the TRL rail service from Dar es Salaam. The high forecast is veryambitious, and market developments must be closely monitored to ensure the supply ofnew port facilities does not run too far ahead of the growth in demand.In the high forecast berth requirements reach 1,130m in 2028, compared with the 300mavailable now. The best area for expansion is on the North-East side of the port, whereland can be reclaimed along the railway line to create a 700m quay and terminal area.The long-term port development plan is shown below.9R8821/R/903617/Rott Tanzania Ports Master PlanFebruary 2009 - xxx - Final Report
  • 33. 0 500 m Possible future expansion Kigoma port Break Bulk / ContainersDevelopment potential of KigomaKasangaThe forecast for Kasanga indicates a volume of 76,000 tons in 2028, which is conditionalon the improvement of road access. Using mechanized handling this volume can easilybe handled on one berth using one crane. Key actions Short Medium Long Remarks Lake Tanganyika 2009-11 2012-18 2019-28 Kigoma Upgrading of the roads  - Nyankanazi to Kigoma - Mpanda, Uvinza to Kigoma - Tunduma to Sanga & Kasanga Phased development of berths   Demand is uncertain, and terminal area development only when justified by committed cargo. Kasanga Hinterland connection  Under development. Prerequisite for further port development. Develop additional handling  facilitiesTanzania Ports Master Plan 9R8821/R/903617/RottFinal Report - xxxi - February 2009
  • 34. X – Lake NyasaPort development on Lake Nyasa is dependent on the ability of the Mtwara Corridor tocompete with the Nacala Corridor (Mozambique) for Malawi’s foreign trade; the growthof local/regional commerce; and the upgrading of Lakes shipping services which arecurrently operated mainly by Malawi companies.The cargo forecast for the main Lake Nyasa ports is shown below. 2013 2018 2023 2028 High forecast (000 tons) Itungi / Kiwira 144 183 229 292 Mbamba Bay 25 405 680 1,102 Low forecast (000 tons) Itungi / Kiwira 84 110 142 171 Mbamba Bay 15 30 76 136Lake Nyasa Traffic Forecasts for Major TPA Ports(‘000 tons)Itungi / KiwiraA choice between Kiwira and Itungi should be made to focus port development in thispart of the lake. Itungi port is faced with continuous sedimentation problems, which willresult in high maintenance dredging costs. Development at Kiwira is expected to be abetter solution provided that the road connection to the site is improved.The high forecast 292,000 tons in 2028 would require operations to be mechanised,using two mobile cranes shared between two berths (120m in total). Each crane has atypical annual capacity of 220,000 tons.Mbamba BayThe high forecast shows a potential cargo of 1.1 million tons through Mbamba Bay, splitbetween dry bulks and break bulk. Depending on the commodity and the type ofmechanization selected, the capacity of a mechanized dry bulk terminal using one(un)loader would be sufficient to handle the dry bulk traffic. Handling of break bulk wouldrequire two or three berths and mobile cranes, depending on vessel sizes and cranecapacity used. Sufficient area is reported to be available near Mbamba Bay port forthese expansions.Because development at Mbamba Bay is closely linked to the Mtwara Corridor, planningresponsibility should be transferred to the Working Group proposed for Mtwara Port.9R8821/R/903617/Rott Tanzania Ports Master PlanFebruary 2009 - xxxii - Final Report
  • 35. Summary of Projects Outside of Dar es Salaam/Bagamoyo/Mwambani BayThe projects in the smaller coastal ports and manned lake ports are less well developedthan those in Dar es Salaam, Bagamoyo and Mwambani Bay, which makes it difficult toestimate their costs and prioritise their timing. This is something which needs to be donefairly quickly, by:• Setting up a permanent planning organization (the Mtwara Port Working Group) which would coordinate developments at Mtwara and Mbamba Bay with those taking place elsewhere in the Mtwara Corridor.• Commissioning more detailed studies for the two most important projects, namely the expansion/modernization of Mwanza South and Kigoma.• Verifying the accuracy of existing cargo statistics for the Lakes ports and minor coastal ports, and expanding their scope.• Continuing discussions with potential private investors.• Consulting with local communities about some of the smaller or less certain projects (Kilindoni, Mwanza North, Bukoba, Kiwira)All of the projects identified by this study are dependent on continuous improvements tothe road and rail networks. The Ministry of Infrastructure Development has a crucial roleto play in co-ordinating all of the necessary infrastructure investments, and fast-trackingthe projects which are most urgently required.Tanzania Ports Master Plan 9R8821/R/903617/RottFinal Report - xxxiii - February 2009
  • 36. 9R8821/R/903617/Rott Tanzania Ports Master PlanFebruary 2009 - xxxiv - Final Report
  • 37. CONTENTS PageEXECUTIVE SUMMARYI INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................................I.1 I.1 GENERAL ...........................................................................................I.1 I.2 OVERVIEW OF TANZANIA PORT SECTOR.....................................I.2 I.3 PROJECT METHODOLOGY ..............................................................I.5 I.4 CONTENTS OF THIS REPORT .........................................................I.7II PERSPECTIVE ON NATIONAL PORT DEVELOPMENT......................................II.1 II.1 NATIONAL TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE................................II.1 II.1.1 Railways .............................................................................................II.2 II.1.1.1 Tanzania Zambia Railway Authority (TAZARA).................................II.2 II.1.1.2 Tanzania Railways Limited (TRL) ......................................................II.4 II.1.1.3 Isaka inland port .................................................................................II.6 II.1.1.4 New rail links ......................................................................................II.6 II.1.2 Roads .................................................................................................II.8 II.1.3 Pipelines...........................................................................................II.10 II.2 TANZANIA DEVELOPMENT CORRIDORS ....................................II.12 II.2.1 Tanga Corridor .................................................................................II.12 II.2.2 Central Corridor................................................................................II.12 II.2.3 Mtwara Corridor................................................................................II.14 II.3 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ZONES............................................II.16 II.4 URBAN DEVELOPMENT ................................................................II.18 II.5 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS.........................................II.19 II.5.1 Introduction on Environmental Assessment.....................................II.19 II.5.2 Potential environmental impacts of port development .....................II.20 II.5.3 Possible mitigation measures ..........................................................II.21 II.6 COMPETITIVE POSITION OF TANZANIAN PORTS......................II.22 II.6.1 Introduction.......................................................................................II.22 II.6.2 Kenya ...............................................................................................II.23 II.6.2.1 Port of Mombasa ..............................................................................II.23 II.6.2.2 Lamu Port.........................................................................................II.29 II.6.3 Mozambique.....................................................................................II.30 II.6.3.1 Port of Nacala...................................................................................II.30 II.6.3.2 Port of Beira, Mozambique...............................................................II.34 II.6.4 South Africa......................................................................................II.38 II.6.4.1 Port of Durban ..................................................................................II.38 II.6.5 Other Potential Competitive Ports....................................................II.41 II.6.5.1 Namibia ............................................................................................II.41 II.6.5.2 Angola ..............................................................................................II.41 II.6.6 Summary ..........................................................................................II.41Tanzania Ports Master Plan 9R8821/R/903617/RottFinal Report - xxxv - February 2009
  • 38. II.6.7 SWOT Analysis DSM versus Regional Competitive Ports.............. II.43 II.6.8 Transhipment Market....................................................................... II.44 II.6.8.1 Port Louis, Mauritius........................................................................ II.44 II.6.8.2 South Africa ..................................................................................... II.44 II.7 BASIS FOR TRAFFIC FORECASTS .............................................. II.44 II.7.1 Overview of past trends................................................................... II.45 II.7.2 Drivers of port traffic growth ............................................................ II.49 II.7.2.1 Tanzania Economic Growth ............................................................ II.50 II.7.2.2 Agriculture, Forests and Fisheries................................................... II.52 II.7.2.3 Energy ............................................................................................. II.52 II.7.2.4 Transit Traffic................................................................................... II.60 II.8 VISION ON PORT DEVELOPMENT............................................... II.67 II.8.1 Shipping developments ................................................................... II.67 II.8.2 Port management models ............................................................... II.68 II.8.3 Port development ............................................................................ II.70 II.8.4 Port logistics .................................................................................... II.72 II.8.5 ICDs................................................................................................. II.73 II.8.6 Plan period ...................................................................................... II.74III DAR ES SALAAM ................................................................................................. III.1 III.1 PORT DESCRIPTION ...................................................................... III.1 III.1.1 General description .......................................................................... III.1 III.1.2 Navigational access.......................................................................... III.2 III.1.2.1 Entrance channel.............................................................................. III.2 III.1.2.2 Tides, wind and waves ..................................................................... III.4 III.1.2.3 Vessel statistics .............................................................................. III.11 III.1.3 Port infrastructure ........................................................................... III.13 III.1.3.1 Berths 1-11 ..................................................................................... III.13 III.1.3.2 Storage areas ................................................................................. III.18 III.1.3.3 Container yards .............................................................................. III.19 III.1.3.4 Grain terminal ................................................................................. III.25 III.1.3.5 Kurasini Oil Jetty (KOJ) .................................................................. III.26 III.1.3.6 SPM ................................................................................................ III.26 III.1.3.7 Dockyards....................................................................................... III.27 III.1.3.8 Lighter wharf ................................................................................... III.28 III.1.4 Terminal operations........................................................................ III.28 III.1.4.1 Berth occupancy............................................................................. III.29 III.1.4.2 Liquid bulk handling........................................................................ III.30 III.1.4.3 Dry bulk handling............................................................................ III.31 III.1.4.4 Break bulk handling ........................................................................ III.32 III.1.4.5 Motor vehicles ................................................................................ III.35 III.1.4.6 Containers ...................................................................................... III.36 III.1.5 Land access and infrastructure ...................................................... III.39 III.1.5.1 Rail.................................................................................................. III.39 III.1.5.2 Road Access .................................................................................. III.41 III.1.6 Ongoing development projects....................................................... III.439R8821/R/903617/Rott Tanzania Ports Master PlanFebruary 2009 - xxxvi - Final Report
  • 39. III.2 FORECASTS ..................................................................................III.46 III.2.1 Liquid Bulks .....................................................................................III.46 III.2.2 Dry Bulks .........................................................................................III.50 III.2.3 Break Bulk Cargo ............................................................................III.53 III.2.4 Motor Vehicle Forecasts .................................................................III.56 III.2.5 Containers .......................................................................................III.57 III.2.6 Passengers .....................................................................................III.66 III.2.7 Fish..................................................................................................III.67 III.2.8 Summary .........................................................................................III.72 III.3 PORT REQUIREMENTS ................................................................III.73 III.3.1 Nautical requirements .....................................................................III.73 III.3.2 Terminal requirements ....................................................................III.74 III.3.2.1 Liquid bulk .......................................................................................III.75 III.3.2.2 Dry bulk ...........................................................................................III.76 III.3.2.3 Break Bulk .......................................................................................III.77 III.3.2.4 Motor vehicles .................................................................................III.78 III.3.2.5 Containers .......................................................................................III.78 III.3.2.6 Passengers .....................................................................................III.80 III.3.2.7 Fish..................................................................................................III.81 III.3.2.8 Summary .........................................................................................III.82 III.4 DAR ES SALAAM – DEVELOPMENT OF EXISTING FOOTPRINT....................................................................................III.83 III.4.1 Liquid bulk .......................................................................................III.84 III.4.2 Dry bulk ...........................................................................................III.88 III.4.3 Break bulk .......................................................................................III.89 III.4.4 Motor vehicles .................................................................................III.89 III.4.5 Containers .......................................................................................III.90 III.4.6 Passengers .....................................................................................III.91 III.4.7 Dhows / lighters...............................................................................III.91 III.4.8 Kurasini logistic area .......................................................................III.91 III.4.9 Traffic circulation .............................................................................III.91 III.4.10 Inland Container Depots .................................................................III.92 III.4.11 Dry docking facilities .......................................................................III.93 III.5 CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................III.95 III.6 RECOMMENDED ACTIONS ..........................................................III.97IV NEW PORT DEVELOPMENT .............................................................................. IV.1 IV.1 EXPANSION POSSIBILITIES.......................................................... IV.1 IV.1.1 Expansion in Dar es Salaam............................................................ IV.1 IV.1.2 Alternative port locations .................................................................. IV.3 IV.1.2.1 Potential port development locations ............................................... IV.3 IV.1.2.2 Manza............................................................................................... IV.6 IV.1.2.3 Mwambani ........................................................................................ IV.8 IV.1.2.4 Bagamoyo ...................................................................................... IV.10 IV.1.2.5 Kilwa Masoko ................................................................................. IV.13 IV.1.2.6 Mtwara............................................................................................ IV.13 IV.1.3 Comparison of potential container port development sites ............ IV.13Tanzania Ports Master Plan 9R8821/R/903617/RottFinal Report - xxxvii - February 2009
  • 40. IV.2 ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT SCENARIO’S............................IV.15 IV.2.1 Scenarios definition ........................................................................IV.15 IV.2.1.1 Scenarios........................................................................................IV.15 IV.2.1.2 Cargo split.......................................................................................IV.17 IV.2.1.3 Layout development .......................................................................IV.19 IV.2.2 Scenario 1 – Kigamboni / Mwambani.............................................IV.20 IV.2.3 Scenario 2 – Bagamoyo .................................................................IV.25 IV.2.4 Scenario 3 – Mwambani .................................................................IV.28 IV.2.5 Scenario 4 – Bagamoyo / Mwambani.............................................IV.31 IV.3 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS .......................................IV.35 IV.3.1 Dar es Salaam ................................................................................IV.35 IV.3.2 Mwambani ......................................................................................IV.38 IV.3.3 Bagamoyo.......................................................................................IV.39 IV.4 ECONOMIC EVALUATION OF PORT DEVELOPMENT SCENARIOS...................................................................................IV.42 IV.4.1 Approach to Evaluation ..................................................................IV.42 IV.4.2 Capital Cost Estimates ...................................................................IV.42 IV.4.3 Operating Cost Estimates...............................................................IV.44 IV.4.4 Land Transport Costs .....................................................................IV.46 IV.4.5 Modal Split of Cargoes ...................................................................IV.48 IV.4.6 Costs of Road and Rail Transport ..................................................IV.51 IV.4.7 Summary of Transport Costs..........................................................IV.54 IV.4.8 Discounted Cost Comparison.........................................................IV.55 IV.5 PREFERRED DEVELOPMENT SCENARIO .................................IV.57 IV.5.1 Other economic considerations ......................................................IV.57 IV.5.2 Evaluation of Scenarios..................................................................IV.61 IV.6 FINANCIAL EVALUATION OF PORT DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS........................................................................................IV.62 IV.6.1 Capital Costs ..................................................................................IV.62 IV.6.2 Operating Costs..............................................................................IV.65 IV.6.3 Revenues........................................................................................IV.68 IV.6.4 Financial Evaluation .......................................................................IV.73 IV.7 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS .................................................IV.79 IV.8 RECOMMENDED ACTIONS..........................................................IV.80V TANGA ...........................................................................................................V.1 V.1 PORT DESCRIPTION .......................................................................V.1 V.1.1 General description ...........................................................................V.1 V.1.2 Nautical accessibility .........................................................................V.3 V.1.3 Port infrastructure ..............................................................................V.6 V.1.4 Terminal Operations ........................................................................V.11 V.1.5 Hinterland access ............................................................................V.13 V.1.6 Planned port improvements.............................................................V.139R8821/R/903617/Rott Tanzania Ports Master PlanFebruary 2009 - xxxviii - Final Report
  • 41. V.2 CARGO FORECASTS .................................................................... V.14 V.2.1 Past Traffic ...................................................................................... V.14 V.2.2 Forecasts for Existing Cargoes ....................................................... V.16 V.2.2.1 Imports ............................................................................................ V.16 V.2.2.2 Exports ............................................................................................ V.17 V.2.3 Forecast for New Cargoes .............................................................. V.19 V.2.4 Summary of Traffic Forecasts ......................................................... V.20 V.3 PORT REQUIREMENTS ................................................................ V.21 V.3.1 Nautical requirements ..................................................................... V.21 V.3.2 Liquid bulk ....................................................................................... V.22 V.3.3 Dry bulk ........................................................................................... V.22 V.3.4 Break bulk ....................................................................................... V.22 V.3.5 Containers ....................................................................................... V.22 V.4 PORT DEVELOPMENT .................................................................. V.23 V.4.1 Expansion possibilities .................................................................... V.23 V.4.2 Capital costs estimates ................................................................... V.23 V.4.3 Recommended development .......................................................... V.24 V.5 RECOMMENDED ACTIONS .......................................................... V.26VI MTWARA .......................................................................................................... VI.1 VI.1 PORT DESCRIPTION...................................................................... VI.1 VI.1.1 General description .......................................................................... VI.1 VI.1.2 Nautical accessibility ........................................................................ VI.2 VI.1.3 Port infrastructure............................................................................. VI.3 VI.1.4 Terminal operations ......................................................................... VI.4 VI.1.5 Hinterland access............................................................................. VI.6 VI.1.6 Ongoing projects .............................................................................. VI.6 VI.2 CARGO FORECASTS ..................................................................... VI.7 VI.2.1 Past Traffic ....................................................................................... VI.7 VI.2.2 Forecasts for Existing Cargoes ........................................................ VI.8 VI.2.3 New Projects .................................................................................. VI.10 VI.2.4 Summary Mtwara forecast ............................................................. VI.16 VI.3 PORT REQUIREMENTS ............................................................... VI.16 VI.3.1 Nautical requirements .................................................................... VI.16 VI.3.2 Liquid bulk ...................................................................................... VI.17 VI.3.3 Dry bulk .......................................................................................... VI.17 VI.3.4 Break bulk ...................................................................................... VI.18 VI.3.5 Containers ...................................................................................... VI.19 VI.3.6 Hinterland connections................................................................... VI.19Tanzania Ports Master Plan 9R8821/R/903617/RottFinal Report - xxxix - February 2009
  • 42. VI.4 PORT DEVELOPMENT .................................................................VI.20 VI.4.1 Navigational access........................................................................VI.20 VI.4.2 Port layout.......................................................................................VI.20 VI.4.2.1 Containers ......................................................................................VI.20 VI.4.2.2 Break bulk.......................................................................................VI.20 VI.4.2.3 Liquid bulk.......................................................................................VI.21 VI.4.2.4 Dry bulk...........................................................................................VI.21 VI.4.2.5 Layout .............................................................................................VI.21 VI.4.2.6 Capital costs estimates...................................................................VI.24 VI.4.3 Environmental considerations ........................................................VI.25 VI.5 RECOMMENDED ACTIONS..........................................................VI.26VII SMALL COASTAL PORTS ..................................................................................VII.1 VII.1 PANGANI.........................................................................................VII.2 VII.2 KILINDONI (MAFIA) ........................................................................VII.5 VII.3 KILWA............................................................................................VII.10 VII.4 LINDI..............................................................................................VII.15 VII.5 MIKINDANI ....................................................................................VII.18 VII.6 TYPICAL DESIGNS ......................................................................VII.20 VII.7 RECOMMENDED ACTIONS.........................................................VII.21VIII LAKE VICTORIA .................................................................................................VIII.1 VIII.1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................VIII.1 VIII.1.1 Lake Victoria Ports .........................................................................VIII.1 VIII.1.2 Shipping services on Lake Victoria ................................................VIII.2 VIII.1.3 Ongoing projects ............................................................................VIII.3 VIII.2 CARGO FORECASTS ...................................................................VIII.4 VIII.2.1 Past traffic.......................................................................................VIII.4 VIII.2.2 Drivers of traffic growth...................................................................VIII.7 VIII.2.3 Cargo Forecasts Lake Victoria .....................................................VIII.11 VIII.3 MWANZA......................................................................................VIII.14 VIII.4 MWANZA SOUTH PORT .............................................................VIII.17 VIII.4.1 Port description.............................................................................VIII.17 VIII.4.1.1 General description ......................................................................VIII.17 VIII.4.1.2 Nautical accessibility ....................................................................VIII.17 VIII.4.1.3 Port infrastructure .........................................................................VIII.18 VIII.4.1.4 Terminal operations......................................................................VIII.21 VIII.4.1.5 Hinterland access .........................................................................VIII.22 VIII.4.1.6 Ongoing projects ..........................................................................VIII.239R8821/R/903617/Rott Tanzania Ports Master PlanFebruary 2009 - xl - Final Report
  • 43. VIII.4.2 Port requirements......................................................................... VIII.23 VIII.4.2.1 Nautical requirements .................................................................. VIII.23 VIII.4.2.2 Liquid bulk .................................................................................... VIII.24 VIII.4.2.3 Wagon ferry.................................................................................. VIII.24 VIII.4.2.4 Break bulk .................................................................................... VIII.25 VIII.4.2.5 Containers .................................................................................... VIII.26 VIII.4.2.6 Ship building and ship repair........................................................ VIII.26 VIII.4.3 Port development ......................................................................... VIII.27 VIII.4.3.1 Layout........................................................................................... VIII.27 VIII.4.3.2 Capital costs................................................................................. VIII.28 VIII.4.3.3 Environmental considerations ...................................................... VIII.29 VIII.5 MWANZA NORTH PORT ............................................................ VIII.31 VIII.5.1 Port description ............................................................................ VIII.31 VIII.5.1.1 General description ...................................................................... VIII.31 VIII.5.1.2 Nautical accessibility .................................................................... VIII.31 VIII.5.1.3 Port Infrastructure......................................................................... VIII.32 VIII.5.1.4 Terminal operations ..................................................................... VIII.33 VIII.5.1.5 Hinterland access......................................................................... VIII.33 VIII.5.1.6 Planned port improvements ......................................................... VIII.34 VIII.5.2 Port development ......................................................................... VIII.34 VIII.6 BUKOBA ...................................................................................... VIII.35 VIII.6.1 Port description ............................................................................ VIII.35 VIII.6.1.1 General description ...................................................................... VIII.35 VIII.6.1.2 Navigation .................................................................................... VIII.35 VIII.6.1.3 Infrastructure ................................................................................ VIII.35 VIII.6.1.4 Terminal operations ..................................................................... VIII.36 VIII.6.1.5 Hinterland access......................................................................... VIII.37 VIII.6.1.6 Cargo handled.............................................................................. VIII.37 VIII.6.1.7 Ongoing development projects .................................................... VIII.38 VIII.6.2 Port development ......................................................................... VIII.38 VIII.7 KEMONDO BAY........................................................................... VIII.39 VIII.7.1 Port description ............................................................................ VIII.39 VIII.7.1.1 General description ...................................................................... VIII.39 VIII.7.1.2 Navigation .................................................................................... VIII.39 VIII.7.1.3 Infrastructure ................................................................................ VIII.40 VIII.7.1.4 Operations.................................................................................... VIII.40 VIII.7.1.5 Hinterland access......................................................................... VIII.41 VIII.7.1.6 Cargo handled.............................................................................. VIII.41 VIII.7.2 Port Development......................................................................... VIII.41 VIII.8 NANSIO........................................................................................ VIII.42 VIII.8.1 Port description ............................................................................ VIII.42 VIII.8.1.1 General description ...................................................................... VIII.42 VIII.8.1.2 Nautical accessibility .................................................................... VIII.42 VIII.8.1.3 Hinterland connections................................................................. VIII.42 VIII.8.1.4 Infrastructure ................................................................................ VIII.42 VIII.8.1.5 Operations.................................................................................... VIII.43 VIII.8.2 Port development ......................................................................... VIII.43Tanzania Ports Master Plan 9R8821/R/903617/RottFinal Report - xli - February 2009
  • 44. VIII.9 MUSOMA......................................................................................VIII.44 VIII.9.1 Port description.............................................................................VIII.44 VIII.9.1.1 General description ......................................................................VIII.44 VIII.9.1.2 Nautical accessibility ....................................................................VIII.44 VIII.9.1.3 Infrastructure ................................................................................VIII.44 VIII.9.1.4 Operations ....................................................................................VIII.45 VIII.9.1.5 Ongoing development projects.....................................................VIII.45 VIII.9.1.6 Hinterland access .........................................................................VIII.45 VIII.9.2 Port development .........................................................................VIII.45 VIII.10 RECOMMENDED ACTIONS........................................................VIII.46IX LAKE TANGANYIKA.............................................................................................IX.1 IX.1 INTRODUCTION ..............................................................................IX.1 IX.2 CARGO FORECASTS .....................................................................IX.2 IX.2.1 Past Traffic........................................................................................IX.2 IX.2.2 Lake Tanganyika cargo forecast ......................................................IX.5 IX.2.2.1 Kigoma..............................................................................................IX.5 IX.2.2.2 Kasanga..........................................................................................IX.10 IX.2.2.3 Summary ........................................................................................IX.11 IX.3 KIGOMA .........................................................................................IX.12 IX.3.1 Port description...............................................................................IX.12 IX.3.1.1 General description ........................................................................IX.12 IX.3.1.2 Nautical accessibility ......................................................................IX.12 IX.3.1.3 Port infrastructure ...........................................................................IX.13 IX.3.1.4 Terminal operations........................................................................IX.14 IX.3.1.5 Hinterland access ...........................................................................IX.15 IX.3.1.6 Planned port improvements............................................................IX.16 IX.3.2 Port requirements ...........................................................................IX.16 IX.3.2.1 Nautical requirements.....................................................................IX.16 IX.3.2.2 Liquid bulk.......................................................................................IX.17 IX.3.2.3 Break bulk.......................................................................................IX.17 IX.3.2.4 Containers ......................................................................................IX.18 IX.3.3 Port development ...........................................................................IX.18 IX.3.4 Environmental considerations ........................................................IX.19 IX.3.4.1 Potential impacts ............................................................................IX.19 IX.3.4.2 Mitigation measures .......................................................................IX.21 IX.4 KASANGA ......................................................................................IX.22 IX.4.1 Port description...............................................................................IX.22 IX.4.1.1 General description ........................................................................IX.22 IX.4.1.2 Navigation.......................................................................................IX.23 IX.4.1.3 Infrastructure ..................................................................................IX.23 IX.4.1.4 Operations ......................................................................................IX.23 IX.4.1.5 Hinterland access ...........................................................................IX.24 IX.4.1.6 Ongoing development plans...........................................................IX.25 IX.4.2 Port development ...........................................................................IX.25 IX.5 RECOMMENDED ACTIONS..........................................................IX.259R8821/R/903617/Rott Tanzania Ports Master PlanFebruary 2009 - xlii - Final Report
  • 45. X LAKE NYASA ........................................................................................................ X.1 X.1 INTRODUCTION............................................................................... X.1 X.2 CARGO FORECASTS ...................................................................... X.2 X.2.1 Past Traffic ........................................................................................ X.2 X.2.2 Lake Nyasa traffic forecast................................................................ X.3 X.3 ITUNGI .............................................................................................. X.6 X.3.1 Port description ................................................................................. X.6 X.3.1.1 General description ........................................................................... X.6 X.3.1.2 Navigation ......................................................................................... X.6 X.3.1.3 Infrastructure ..................................................................................... X.6 X.3.1.4 Operations......................................................................................... X.8 X.3.1.5 Hinterland access.............................................................................. X.8 X.3.2 Port development .............................................................................. X.8 X.4 MBAMBA BAY................................................................................... X.9 X.4.1 Port description ................................................................................. X.9 X.4.2 Port development .............................................................................. X.9 X.5 RECOMMENDED ACTIONS ............................................................ X.9Tanzania Ports Master Plan 9R8821/R/903617/RottFinal Report - xliii - February 2009
  • 46. 9R8821/R/903617/Rott Tanzania Ports Master PlanFebruary 2009 - xliv - Final Report
  • 47. I INTRODUCTIONI.1 GeneralThe Tanzania Ports Authority (TPA) assigned Royal Haskoning – in association withArdhi University (formerly known as UCLAS) and Interconsult Ltd. – to prepare a PortsMaster Plan (PMP) covering all Coastal and Lake Ports of Tanzania. The projectorganisation is shown in Figure I.1. Client TPA Lead consultant Royal Haskoning Sub Consultant Sub Consultant Ardhi Interconsult UniversityFigure I.1 – Project organisationThe contract for this project was signed on March 3rd, 2008. On March 26th and 28th2008 a kick off meeting was held in Dar es Salaam, marking the official start of theproject.The Inception Report was submitted on 25th April 2008 and approved on 13th June 2008.The Interim Report was submitted on 8th August 2008 and approved on 3rd October2008 following the workshop discussing this report with stakeholders on 19th September2008. Thereafter, a workshop was held with TPA staff on 16th to 18th October 2008 todiscuss and fine-tune the requirements for the PMP project. The Draft Final Report hasbeen submitted to TPA on 7th November 2008 and was approved mid January 2009following a workshop with TPA staff on 9th January 2009.This Final Report addresses all the comments received on the draft final report andmarks the completion of the Ports Master Plan study.The information included in this PMP report is based on a concise review of documentsand on interviews with TPA staff and numerous stakeholders. A list of referencesconsulted for this project is included in Appendix I.1A. Appendix I.1B includes adatabase prepared during this project comprising key characteristics of all available TPAreports. Appendix I.1C comprises a list of interviews held during this study.Tanzania Ports Master Plan 9R8821/R/903617/RottFinal Report - I.1 - February 2009
  • 48. Further, the major and minor ports were visited to collect information, gainunderstanding of local conditions and have discussions with local TPA staff and otherstakeholders. TPA staff accompanied the Consultants on these visits. An overview ofthese port visits is included in Appendix I.1D. Finally, a copy of the Terms of Referencefor this project is included in Appendix I.1E.I.2 Overview of Tanzania port sectorTanzania, officially known as the United Republic of Tanzania, is located on the EastCoast of Africa bordered by Kenya and Uganda to the north, Rwanda, Burundi and theDemocratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) to the west, and Zambia, Malawi andMozambique to the south (refer Figure I.2). The country serves as a gateway tolandlocked countries of Malawi, Zambia, Democratic Republic of Congo, Burundi,Rwanda and UgandaDar es Salaam is the country’s largest city and is the commercial centre. About 80% ofthe population of 40 million people lives in rural areas. Uganda Kenya Lake Victoria Rwanda Mwanza Burundi Kigoma Tanga DR Congo Tanzania Lake Dar es Tanganyika Salaam Zambia Lake Mtwara Nyasa Malawi Mozambique MozambiqueFigure I.2 – Tanzania + neighbouring countries Figure I.3 – Major ports and lakes of TanzaniaAlong the coastline there are three major ports (Tanga, Dar es Salaam, and Mtwara)and several minor ports.The lakes along the Northern and Western borders of Tanzania are important for transittrade, local trade and passenger traffic. Mwanza is the major port on Lake Victoria,whilst Kigoma is the major port on Lake Tanganyika. On Lake Nyasa only Itungi port hasquay facilities.The major ports and lakes are shown in Figure I.39R8821/R/903617/Rott Tanzania Ports Master PlanFebruary 2009 - I.2 - Final Report
  • 49. The Coastal Ports and Inland Ports along the major lakes owned by TPA are listed inTable I.1. Coastal Ports Inland Ports Lake Victoria Lake Tanganyika Lake Nyasa Major ports Major ports Major ports Major ports • Dar es Salaam • Mwanza • Kigoma • Itungi • Tanga • Mtwara Minor ports Minor ports Minor ports Minor ports • Pangani • Nansio • Kasanga • Manda • Mafia • Musoma • Liuli • Kilwa Kivinje • Bukoba • Mbamba Bay • Kilwa Masoko • Kemondo Bay • Lindi • Mikindana Unmanned ports Unmanned ports Unmanned ports Unmanned ports • Kisiju • Kinesi • Kirando (Tongwe) • Matema • Bagamoyo • Shirati (Sota) • Sigunda • Lundu • Songo Songo • Nyamirembe • Hrembe • Lumbili • Nyamisatu • Chato • Kaperaresenga • Itungu • Buchezi • Logosa • Lupingu • Bukondo • Kibweza • Njambe • Nungwe Bay • Kalya • Nkili • Kahunda • Likola • Ndumbe • Maisome • Karema • Makonde • Kome Ntama • Kabwe • Kome Mchangani • Kirando (Rukwa) • Lushamba • Kipili • Irigamba • Ninde • Luhama • Msamba • Maharamba • Wampembe • Itabagumba • Kala • Kagunga • Mwamgongo • MtangaTable I.1 – Coastal and Inland Ports owned by TPATanzania Ports Master Plan 9R8821/R/903617/RottFinal Report - I.3 - February 2009
  • 50. I.3 Project MethodologyThis report provides a master plan for port development in Tanzania, addressingdevelopment for each port. The Consultants have applied the following basicmethodology to determine the master plans.Port requirements are determined using a methodology as illustrated in Figure I.4. Cargo Quay & Area Forecast Productivity Design considerations Port Requirements Port DevelopmentFigure I.4 – Methodology to determine port requirementsCargo forecastsCargo forecasts have been made for the individual ports for each commodity. The cargoforecasts per commodity for the 20 year master plan period (2008-2028) have beentaken as a basis to determine future port requirements. The high scenario has beenused for these analyses because it is the most demanding for port facilities.Quay & area productivityThe present situation in the ports has been mapped based on site visits, interviews andreview of documents. This resulted in an overview of available infrastructure and portequipment. Key productivity indicators were then determined for all commodities.Most important factors are the following:• Quay crane productivity• Terminal productivity• Dwell timePossibilities for improvement of productivity were identified and assumptions for futureproductivity were made.9R8821/R/903617/Rott Tanzania Ports Master PlanFebruary 2009 - I.4 - Final Report
  • 51. Design considerationsDesign considerations included analyses of the fleet mix, allowable berth occupancy andmarket developments. Present fleet mix and parcel sizes were determined based onhistoric data. Assumptions on the development of vessel and parcel sizes were made onbasis of developments in trade (local and global) and shipping trends.Port requirementsCargo forecasts, productivity projections, vessel sizes and berth occupancy werecombined to determine port requirements. For each commodity requirements weredetermined for:• Number and length of berths• Storage area (open and covered)• Cargo handling equipmentPort developmentThe port requirements have been translated into a physical development plan for theports taking into account available port facilities and expansion possibilities within thesettings of the ports. The development plan includes a layout and an investment plan,resulting in recommended actions for TPA.I.4 Contents of this reportThis final report includes the following sections:Section II provides an overview of basic elements that are important for portdevelopment. The section includes the following elements:• National transport infrastructure• Development corridors• Economic development zones• Urban development• Environmental assessment• Competitive position• Basis for traffic forecasts• Vision on port developmentSections III to IX discuss developments in the ports as follows:• Section III – Dar es Salaam• Section IV – New port development• Section V – Tanga• Section VI – Mtwara• Section VII – Small coastal ports• Section VIII – Lake Victoria ports• Section IX – Lake Tanganyika ports• Section X – Lake Nyasa ports.Tanzania Ports Master Plan 9R8821/R/903617/RottFinal Report - I.5 - February 2009
  • 52. Each port section contains a description of the existing port, cargo forecasts, analyses offuture port requirements and port development considerations. Each section is closedwith a list of key recommended actions. However, section IV (New port development)contains an extensive economic evaluation comparing different port expansionscenarios including Bagamoyo and Mwambani.The structure of the Ports Master Plan report is illustrated in Figure I.5. I Introduction Appendices II National Appendices port development III Dar es Appendices Salaam IV New port Appendices development Executive Summary V Tanga Appendices VI Mtwara Appendices VII Small Appendices coastal ports VIII Lake Victoria Appendices IX Lake Appendices Tanganyika X Lake Nyasa AppendicesFigure I.5 – Structure of PMP report9R8821/R/903617/Rott Tanzania Ports Master PlanFebruary 2009 - I.6 - Final Report
  • 53. II PERSPECTIVE ON NATIONAL PORT DEVELOPMENTThe Tanzanian Ports Master Plan has been prepared by giving due account to a numberof global, regional, national and local development aspects. This is necessary to ensurethat Tanzanian ports will adequately and timely meet the demands and requirements forefficient and prosperous operations.The following aspects have been addressed in this section:• National transport infrastructure• Tanzania development corridors• Economic development zones• Urban development• Environmental considerations• Competitive position of Tanzanian ports• Basis for traffic forecasts• Vision on port developmentII.1 National transport infrastructureTraffic to and from the Tanzanian ports is conveyed by rail, road or pipeline for both bulkand unitary cargo. The condition of this infrastructure and their efficiency in operationhas a strong impact on the overall performance of the ports and immediately affectstheir development potential. Therefore, these modes of transports have been addressedbelow.Tanzania has two main railway systems which include the Tanzania-Zambia RailwayAuthority (TAZARA) with connections to Zambia Railway system, and the TanzaniaRailway Limited with links to Uganda, DRC Congo, and Kenya. The country main portsare also connected to the trunk roads network which links them to the landlockedcountries of Malawi, Zambia, DRC, Ruanda, Burundi and Uganda. The only existing oilpipeline (TAZAMA) ferries crude oil to Zambia.Rail and road infrastructure are still under-developed and Tanzania and transport costsare high by international standards, which inhibits trade. This section looks at the scopefor reform and reconstruction of the railway network and the impact of the current roadinvestment programme – which will considerably expand the paved road network.Tanzania Ports Master Plan 9R8821/R/903617/RottFinal Report - II.1 - February 2009
  • 54. II.1.1 RailwaysTanzania has two national rail networks operating on different gauges, i.e. • Tanzania Zambia Railways (TAZARA) • Tanzania Railways Corporation (TRC1)Only limited areas of the country are rail-connected, and the railway sub-sector hasperformed badly during the last ten years. The infrastructure has deteriorated andservices are below standard due to the age and obsolescence of the infrastructure andshortage of locomotives and wagons. Further, there is a history of land slides and wash-outs of sections of rail track by floods.II.1.1.1 Tanzania Zambia Railway Authority (TAZARA)The 1.067 m gauge single track rail link between Tanzania and Zambia is operated byTAZARA and is shown in Figure II.1. It crosses the border at Tunduma (980km from Dares Salaam), and is connected to the Zambian Railway system at Kapiri Mposhi some1,850km from Dar es Salaam. It is connected to the TRC network by a transhipmentfacility at Kidatu.Figure II.1 – TAZARA Network1 In this report reference is made to TRL, whilst past references, i.e. before 2007 should beread as being TRC.9R8821/R/903617/Rott Tanzania Ports Master PlanFebruary 2009 - II.2 - Final Report
  • 55. The TAZARA network was built more recently than that of TRC in 1970 to 1975, and asa result the infrastructure is in better condition, although bridges and tunnels are under-maintained and the signalling system is outdated.The maximum speed limit on TAZARA is 70 kph, and the maximum axle load 25 tons.The trains are significantly larger than those on the TRC network, carrying up to 1,800tons.Because of steep gradients in the central section of the line and the limited availability of3,000 HP locomotives, TAZARA is seeking to reduce train weights to around 1,100 tons,equivalent to 23 wagons for metal exports and 25 wagons for other cargoes. UnlikeTRL, which is restricted to a maximum of 40 TEU per train, TAZARA trains should beable to carry up to 100 TEU.In 2007 TAZARA had 14 mainline and 6 shunting locomotives, and 1,500 wagons ofwhich 1,200 were available for commercial use. Wagon reliability was low because oflack of maintenance.Traffic has fallen from 1.1 million tons in 1992 – 1993 to just over 600,000 tons in 2005 –2006 (including local traffic). Most of the fall occurred during the 1990s, and was due tocompetition from road transport and the increase in trade routed via South Africa. Since2000 traffic has been fairly static, as the shortage of locomotives has preventedTAZARA from exploiting the growth in Zambian trade through Dar es Salaam.Although only 250 of its wagons are flat-beds suitable for carrying containers (2 TEU perwagon) these have so far been sufficient, as the large container flows that wereexpected when the flatbed wagons were purchased have never materialised. This isbecause much of the cargo moves in break-bulk form with stuffing and stripping in Dares Salaam to avoid high container demurrage charges. To overcome shipping lineresistance to letting containers travel far inland, TAZARA is considering buying its owncontainers. This would improve security and allow it to handle customers who do notgenerate full wagonload traffic.Investment in TAZARA over the next five years is estimated by the Transport SectorInvestment Plan (TSIP) to be around US$ 40m per annum. Expenditure will be mainlyon new rolling stock for minerals and containers, plus some track rehabilitation in themore mountainous sections which are prone to landslides.There are also plans for management reform, including the outsourcing of managementto a Chinese contractor, but these still require the approval of the two shareholdergovernments.Tanzania Ports Master Plan 9R8821/R/903617/RottFinal Report - II.3 - February 2009
  • 56. II.1.1.2 Tanzania Railways Limited (TRL)The main national railway network (refer Figure II.2) was formerly operated by TanzaniaRailways Corporation (TRC) and has now been split between RAHCO (infrastructure)and TRL (services). The 1.000m gauge single track network has a total length of2,700km, with connections to the rail networks of neighbouring countries at Taveta(Kenyan border), Mwanza (rail ferry service across Lake Victoria to Uganda) andKigoma (ferry services to DR Congo and Burundi).In September 2007 operating and maintenance rights were concessioned for 25 years toa 51:49 JV between RITES of India and the Government of Tanzania (TRL). Ownershipof the permanent way remains with the Government entity RAHCO.The former TRC infrastructure, now the responsibility of RAHCO, is old and of poorquality. Around half of its network is restricted to a maximum speed of 56 kph, and theother half to 30 kph. The maximum axle loading is only 18 to 20 tons, whilst there arefurther weight restrictions at some of the bridges. As a result, the normal train length isonly 20 wagons carrying 40 tons per wagon, or 800 tons per train which is low byinternational standards.The long term strategy is to change the gauge from 1.000m to 1.435m, and to increasethe weight of the rails in order to allow heavier trains and higher operating speeds.There will also be some reductions in curves and gradients.Figure II.2 – TRL NetworkThe rolling stock in 2007 included 115 diesel locomotives, of which 86 were consideredto form the working fleet. 103 of the locomotives were more than 20 years old. The fleetfurther included 1,847 wagons, of which 1,514 were over 20 years old. Only 188 ofthese wagons were suitable for carrying containers.9R8821/R/903617/Rott Tanzania Ports Master PlanFebruary 2009 - II.4 - Final Report
  • 57. In recent years operations have been seriously affected by deterioration of the trackresulting in weight and speed limits, theft and vandalism of signalling andcommunications equipment; and lack of maintenance of the rolling stock. This has led inturn to reductions in service frequency and a reputation for unreliability. Some keyperformance indicators for TRC are given in Table II.1.Freight traffic, including local cargoes, peaked at 1.44 million tons in 2002 but haddeclined to less than 600,000 tons by 2007. This compares with the network’s designcapacity of around 5.0 million tons per annum. Indicator unit 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Availability of main line [#] 62 60 59 55 48 39 locomotives Reliability of main line [km/failure] 6,359 5,400 4,107 2,720 2,379 1,985 locomotives Freight 1,351 1,446 1,443 1,333 1,128 775 [‘000 tons] of which transit 524 457 445 475 463 241 Average freight speed [Kph] 15.6 16.1 15.9 13.5 12.8 10.4 Wagon turn-round [days] 11.9 12.2 13.5 13.9 14.9 20.5Table II.1 – Key Performance Indicators for TRC[Source: Ministry of Infrastructure Development – JISR Rail Sub-Sector Review 2007]After start of the concession in 2007, TRL has cut back some services in an attempt torestore profitability, and has also begun to invest – more slowly than was hoped for – inrolling stock rehabilitation, the acquisition of new rolling stock, and the replacement of648km of track with heavier-duty rails. The strategy is to focus resources on the longer-distance routes where rail can compete most effectively with road transport, and achievefinancially viable traffic volumes of around 2 million tons per annum (mtpa), much ofwhich up to 30 – 40% could be transit traffic.The first priority for RAHCO is to enhance the load carrying capacity of the trains byupgrading critical sections of the track including the 22km Makutupora – Sarandasection between Tabora and Dodoma which is the main capacity restriction point.Capacity will also be enhanced – and service standards improved – by enlarging thepassing loops at some stations to take 30-wagons trains, and by introducing ofCentralized Traffic Control between Morogoro and Dodoma. It is also proposed toincrease rail’s share of container traffic by establishing new Inland Container Depots atMwanza, Kigoma, Tabora and Morogoro, to be followed later by a second wave of ICDsat Tanga, Shinyanga, Arusha, Dodoma and Mpanda.A Railway Master Plan study is to be prepared during Phase 1 of the TSIP to determinethe optimum extent of network expansion and modernization, and identify priorities. Atpresent, planned investment in the TRL network over the next five years (including theRAHCO component) averages just under US$ 150 million per annum, a substantialincrease on past levels.Tanzania Ports Master Plan 9R8821/R/903617/RottFinal Report - II.5 - February 2009
  • 58. II.1.1.3 Isaka inland portThe Isaka inland port located 130km from Tabora along the Tabora – Mwanza linehandles container traffic from the port of Dar es Salaam destined for Rwanda, NorthernBurundi and Goma on the eastern side of DRC where it is offloaded from wagons andloaded on trucks for final destination. An impression of the dry port is shown in FigureII.3. The yard at the Port is capable to handle 500 containers or 20,000 tonnes with astorage capacity of 1,620 tons of general cargo. The yard has planned future capacity ofhandling up to 1,000 containers and storage capacity for 46,000 tonnes of generalcargo. A bulk oil facility constructed and operated by a private firm has a capacity of2,100 tonnes of white oils, diesel and fuel oils.Figure II.3 – Isaka Inland Port with Cargo on Wagons, Offloaded and on TrucksII.1.1.4 New rail linksAlthough the two railway networks have been performing badly, there is a view that newlinks may still be needed to open up mineral deposits and improve links to the transitcountries (refer also Figure II.4).Feasibility studies are to be carried out for new lines between:• Isaka – Kigali via Rusoma. This is already the subject of an MOU between the Governments of Tanzania and Rwanda, and seems likely to go ahead. A feasibility study by Deutsche Bahn is nearing completion. The line will probably be European gauge (1.435m) with a rail weight of 125lb/yard and a design speed of 120kph. In the longer term, realignment of the existing route from Isaka to Dar es Salaam will be required if this speed is to be achieved throughout the whole route. There is also a proposal to eventually convert the existing track to 1.335m gauge. A 300km branch line from the Isaka – Kigali line to the nickel mines at Musongati in Burundi has also been proposed. This is a long-term project, but could be an important traffic generator for the port of Dar es Salaam, as a mine output of 5 million tons per annum of ore would produce around 1.0 million tons per annum of concentrates.9R8821/R/903617/Rott Tanzania Ports Master PlanFebruary 2009 - II.6 - Final Report
  • 59. Total project costs (including the Musongati branch line but excluding upgrading of the Isaka – Dar es Salaam line) are currently estimated at US$ 6 billion. In spite of its high cost, an Expression of Interest in developing the project has been received from a large North American railway• Arusha – Musoma. This has been under discussion now for many years, but has been given renewed impetus by the recent political disturbances in Kenya, which have increased Ugandan interest in establishing an alternative corridor to the coast at Tanga.• Mchuchuma – Mtwara. This line would be closely linked to the development of the Mchuchuma coal field (and possibly the Liganga iron ore deposits) and would probably be privately funded although open to other types of traffic on a common user basis. It could eventually be extended to join the TAZARA line at Makambako, providing an alternative exit route for the coal via Dar es Salaam.Longer-term proposals have also been put forward for a north-south branch line runningfrom the TAZARA line at Tunduma (close to the Zambian border) to Kigoma viaSumbawanga, with a spur from Sumbawanga to Kasanga.Figure II.4 – Existing and Proposed Rail Links[Source: Ministry for Infrastructure Development Transport Sector Investment Plan 2007/8-2016/7]Tanzania Ports Master Plan 9R8821/R/903617/RottFinal Report - II.7 - February 2009
  • 60. II.1.2 RoadsThe national trunk road network is undergoing substantial improvements, but stillincludes large sections which are unpaved. Road density is low, and there are stillseveral “missing links” whose completion in the medium and long term future wouldsignificantly reduce distances from Dar es Salaam. Road maintenance has improvedsignificantly in recent years with 80% of main roads now being classified as good or faircondition, compared with only 50% at the start of the decade. The main road network isshown in Figure II.5.TANROADS sets the weight restrictions for different truck configurations, usually basedon a maximum axle loading of 8 tons. In practice the maximum permitted gross weight is29 tons per truck, including the tare weight of the vehicle. This means that all 20ftcontainers weighing more than 14 tons must be carried individually.Truck overloading is a major problem in Tanzania, and has resulted in the installation ofmany weighbridges along the main routes. These are a significant source of delay tolong-distance traffic movements in Tanzania.Figure II.5 – Tanzania Trunk Road Network[Source: MOID – Transport Sector Investment Plan 2007/08 – 2016/17]9R8821/R/903617/Rott Tanzania Ports Master PlanFebruary 2009 - II.8 - Final Report
  • 61. A World Bank study entitled “Africa Infrastructure Country Diagnostic: Transport: Roads,Railways, Ports, Airports, Urban Transport” estimates that Tanzania needs to investaround US$ 13 billion on transport to meet the accessibility standards appropriate formiddle income country with a per capita income of US$ 1,500 (compared with US$ 300today), the objective set out in the Government’s 2025 Vision. Of this around 70% wouldbe capital expenditure on roads.The Transport Sector Investment Plan (TSIP) 2007/08 to 2016/17 envisages around45% of this total being spent over the next five years, with capital expenditure on theupgrading of trunk and regional roads averaging US$ 588 million per annum, comparedwith a planned expenditure on roads for the previous five years of US$ 153 million perannum (not achieved). Around 40% of the road investments in the TSIP have alreadybeen committed; the others are largely dependent on securing additional donor funding.The TSIP increases planned maintenance expenditure on the trunk and regional roadnetwork from US$ 102 million per annum for the last five years (of which US$ 57 millionper annum was actually spent) to US$ 126 million per annum for the next five years. Italso assigns US$ 86 million per annum to the improvement and maintenance of localroads in support of local government expenditures.The TSIP’s main strategic goals in respect of roads are:• All trunk roads are to be paved by 2018• All Regional centres are to be linked with paved roads, and all district headquarters are to be linked with all weather roads of at least gravel standard by 2018.The major changes to the network included in the TSIP are shown in Figure II.5.The projects which are most likely to have a direct impact on the ports sector inTanzania include:• Paving of the Dar es Salaam to Mtwara road between Matanda and Lindi (now almost completed). This will help to overcome the perceived remoteness of SE Tanzania as a manufacturing area, but also make it easier to supply with imports from Dar es Salaam.• Paving of Mtwara Corridor road between Masasi and Mbamba Bay. Linked to an improved Lakes ferry service, this will open up a new trade route to/from Malawi.• Paving of the road between Tabora and Kigoma, and subsequent construction of a new road between Tabora and Manyoni which will shorten the distance from Kigoma to Dar es Salaam by approximately 200km• Paving of the road between Kigoma (Lake Tanganyika) and Muleba (Lake Victoria). This will open up Kigoma and Kagera regions for agricultural and mineral development, and improve Rwanda’s accessibility to both lakes.• Paving of the road around the southern half of Lake Victoria from Nyamashere to Mwanza and Nuanguge to Musoma. This will reduce dependence on Lakes transport for local passenger and cargo movements.Tanzania Ports Master Plan 9R8821/R/903617/RottFinal Report - II.9 - February 2009
  • 62. • Paving of the road between Tunduma and Sumbawanga, which will improve access to Kasanga port on Lake Tanganyika, particularly once the road between Iringa and Mbeya is also paved.Not all of these projects will go ahead immediately, as there is a shortfall of funds andconstraints on implementation capacity. However, they do provide a strategic vision ofthe long-term transport network within which the Ports Master Plan has to beimplemented.II.1.3 PipelinesTAZAMA PipelineThe TAZAMA Pipeline Limited is jointly owned by the Government of Zambia (66.7%)and the United Republic of Tanzania (33.3%). The pipeline is 1,710km in length fromDar es Salaam (Tanzania) to the Indeni Refinery in Ndola (Zambia) with a mixeddiameter of 8 inches (200mm) and 12 inches (300mm). The pipeline was commissionedin 1968 and was originally designed for a throughput of 1.1 million tonnes per year.Currently it is capable of handling approximately 600,000 metric tonnes per annum.The pipeline is supported by equipment and infrastructure owned by the Tanzania PortsAuthority (TPA) comprising of:• 36 inch diameter sub-sea and on land pipeline to the TAZAMA tank farm• A single point mooring buoy (SPM)• Kurasini oil jetty for offloading tankers of capacity up to 45,000 DWT through an 18inch diameter pipelineTAZAMA owns a tank farm with six onshore tanks at Dar es Salaam comprising of three36,000m3 capacity tanks and three 41,000m3 capacity tanks. There are seven pumpstations between Dar es Salaam and Ndola; five stations are located in Tanzania andtwo in Zambia.The two Governments had initially agreed in principle to concession the pipeline in April2002. The format of the concession and distribution of assets is still not established yet.Dar es Salaam – Mwanza PipelineA Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) has been signed between the Government ofTanzania through the Ministry of Planning and Economic Empowerment and Noor Oil ofQatar for the construction of a 1,200km oil pipeline from the Port of Dar es Salaam tothe City of Mwanza. Noor Oil is expected to invest US$2billion in the project that willinclude an oil refinery at Mwanza. The project ownership structure is still being workedout. This project has been on the drawing board for quite some time and it is unlikelythat it will be realised.9R8821/R/903617/Rott Tanzania Ports Master PlanFebruary 2009 - II.10 - Final Report
  • 63. Songo Songo Gas pipelineIn October 1995, Ocelot Tanzania Inc. and TransCanada Pipeline Limited (TCPLTanzania Inc.), in partnership with the Government of Tanzania (GoT), Tanzania ElectricSupply Company Limited (TANESCO) and Tanzania Petroleum DevelopmentCorporation (TPDC), created a company called Songas to implement the Songo SongoGas to Electricity Project. However TransCanada in 2000 sold its 49% interest in theproject to AES Sirocco who has acquired an overall project management role.The project consisted of refurbishment and operation of five natural gas wells in SongoSongo, the construction and operation of a 65mmscf/day gas processing plant andrelated facilities and the construction of a 230km marine and land pipeline from the gasplant to Ubungo in Dar es Salaam.After processing, to remove water and other hydrocarbon condensates, the gas istransported through a 25km 12-inch pipeline from Songo Songo to Somanga Funga,and from Somanga Funga through a 207km 16-inch pipeline to Ubungo Dar es Salaamwhere it drives six turbines that generate 190 megawatts (MW) of electricity for thenational grid. A 16km 8-in pipe line has been extended northwards to provide naturalgas to the Wazo Hill cement plant where gas has replaced fuel oil as feedstock in themanufacture of cement.Construction of the pipeline commenced in the year 2003 and was completed in May2004. The first gas reached Dar es Salaam in July 2004. The project attainedcommercial operations date in July 2004.Tanzania Ports Master Plan 9R8821/R/903617/RottFinal Report - II.11 - February 2009
  • 64. II.2 Tanzania Development CorridorsTo ensure balanced regional growth, the Tanzanian Government has charged theNational Development Corporation with exploiting the economic potential of threecorridors running inland from the coast as follows:• Tanga Corridor.• Mtwara Corridor,• Central CorridorWork is most advanced – and opportunities most promising – in the case of the MtwaraCorridor. This paragraph is a summary of the development corridors, the completereview can be found in Appendix II.2II.2.1 Tanga CorridorThe Tanga Corridor study also highlights the importance of agricultural and miningdevelopments, but these are at a smaller scale and less well-defined than in the othertwo corridor studies. There is also more emphasis on manufacturing, which reflects thehistoric role of Tanga and Arusha as industrial centres.The agricultural plan focuses mainly on increasing the output of existing crops – coffee,sisal, wheat, sugar, maize, barley, beans, vegetables, flowers and fruit – and oninvestment in local processing plants.Mining projects are dominated in volume terms by the Lake Natron soda ash project withprospects also for copper (Pare mountains), gold (Mara), phosphates (Minjingu),tanzanite (Arusha), and other gemstones.Investments in manufacturing are likely to be linked to the local resource base: agro-processing, sisal products, furniture, detergents, glass and ceramics, phosphatefertilizers, leather and jewellery.There have been repeated calls for the upgrading of the Tanga – Arusha railway line(services currently suspended due to lack of cargo) and its extension to Musoma (for alakes service connection to Uganda). None of these proposals seem likely to go aheadin the foreseeable future as has been described above.II.2.2 Central CorridorThe principal investment projects along the central corridor are in mining and agriculture,supported by large public investments in energy and transport.Mining to date has been mainly for gold, diamonds and nickel, but exploration iscontinuing for platinum, tin-tungsten, columbite-tantalite and gemstones as well as lowervalue industrial minerals such as kaolin, graphite and phosphates.9R8821/R/903617/Rott Tanzania Ports Master PlanFebruary 2009 - II.12 - Final Report
  • 65. Agricultural developments include:• Sugar cane: re-investment since privatisation is significantly increasing output at the country’s three main sugar estates (Kilombero, Mtibwa and Kagera) and technical support for contract growers has increased smallholder production. Output is expected to increase from around 300,000 tons per annum at the beginning of the decade to 570,000 tons per annum by 2010, converting a national deficit of around 100, 000 to 150,000 tons per annum into a surplus of 40,000 tons per annum. New estates are also planned at Ruipa and Ifakara with a projected capacity of 224,000 tons per annum and more estates are under discussion in Coast, Kagera and Kigoma regions linked to the manufacture of ethanol• Bio-fuels: the palm oil area is likely to increase around Kigoma, where 50,000ha has been allocated to Malaysian palm oil producers. Elsewhere plants such as jathropa can be grown extensively in poor semi-arid areas.• Cereals : expansion of maize production in Morogoro, Kigoma and Kagera regions, rice production in swampy marshlands in Shinyanga, Tabora, Mwanza, Kigoma, Coast and Morogoro, and wheat production in Kagera and Kigoma regions.• Coffee and tea: expanding growing areas, higher quality, more local processing, speciality products, and market diversification, including local tea auctions.• Cotton: increased output in new and existing areas, with modern ginning, spinning and weaving factories and related activities such as dyeing and garment manufacturing.• Tobacco: new farms in Singida, Shinyanga and Tabora regions (large estates and smallholders), more competitive marketing, and local processing factories.• Fruit and vegetable production for domestic and export markets, processing (juice and citrus powder), packaging/canning.• Cashew nuts: expansion of production in Coast region.• Other crops: paprika, spices, sisal, sesame, millet/sorghum, and legumes (for human and animal food) have all been identified as having potential for further growthPlans for transforming agriculture rely on attracting investors with links to agro-processing or overseas markets, with the outsourcing of production to small scalefarmers or “out growers”.Tanzania Ports Master Plan 9R8821/R/903617/RottFinal Report - II.13 - February 2009
  • 66. The Central Corridor already has an established backbone of transport infrastructure,which means that new areas can be opened up with relatively small investments. Inaddition, the Tanzanian Government is committed to the construction of the Isaka –Kigali railway, and the development of proper dry port facilities at Isaka ICD. The formerwill open up nickel deposits in the Ngara district bordering Rwanda, whilst the latter willfacilitate the transportation of agricultural products, and cold chain operations for frozenand chilled horticultural products.II.2.3 Mtwara CorridorA large amount of documentation has been produced in respect of the Mtwara Corridor,and there is a high level of investor interest in several of the projects. Table II.2 sets outthe current status of the Tanzanian projects, which seem most likely to generatesubstantial volumes of port traffic, mainly for Mtwara but also for ports on Lake Nyasa.There are three main opportunities for increased traffic from/to Malawi:• Exploitation of the Viphya pine plantation in Northern Malawi (100,000ha of which 53,000ha was planted in the 1950s). If developed by a private company, this could produce up to 350,000 tons per annum for export via Mtwara.• Diversion of exports from Dwanga Sugar Plantation (50,000 tons per annum) from Nacala to Mtwara following the establishment of a new Lakes ferry service, with some further increase following the stimulus this would give to sugar growing in central Malawi.• Coal imports of 30, 000 to 50,000 tons per annum from Tanzania using lake transport, from the Kiwira mine initially or the Mchuchuma mine in the longer term.The Mtwara Corridor Study also covers the traffic potential of the Northern, Eastern andLuapula Provinces in Zambia. These are largely agricultural areas, and the mainopportunities identified are broadly similar to those in Malawi: sugar / ethanol productionon a new sugar estate at Luena (30,000 tons per annum, oil palm and jatropha in theMpika – Chinsali area and the Luapula valley for bio-fuel production, and variousforestry projects with an output of around 100,000 tons per annum from indigenousforests and up to 600,000 tons per annum from newly planted areas.Zambian exports, however, are likely to move via Nacala and Dar es Salaam or toregional markets in DR Congo, Burundi and Rwanda via Mpulungu (Lake Tanganyika),rather than via Mtwara, particularly if two new rail projects in Zambia go ahead (Chipata-Mchinji and Nseluke-Mpulungu).9R8821/R/903617/Rott Tanzania Ports Master PlanFebruary 2009 - II.14 - Final Report
  • 67. Project Developer Status CAPEX Completion Port traffic a (US$m) (000 tons)30MW gas fired power plant Artumas/IPP Very probable 80 2009-10 None300MW gas fired power plant Possible. Represents a low value use of 300 2180-25 None gas, and may not be cost competitive with hydroCompressed natural gas Artumas Quite possible. Buyers identified, but 200-300 2012 250 Tanzanian Governm ent perm ision still requiredW oodchips plantation OJI Paper/Marubeni Probable. Pilot areas planted, and 150 2015-20 600 research underway to locate 50,000ha of suitable land. EIA in progress, and Japanese Governm ent support for infrastructure funding sought.Charcoal production OJI Paper/Marubeni Feasibility study for supplying European 760 Long term 500 steel industry still requiredBiodiesel (Jatropha) AgroFuels Africa Concept 36 2015 b 10 Green Fuels Tanzania LtdHardwood processing Not yet active. Local resources exist, 10-30 2012-5 60-250 but road infrastructure improvements requiredFurniture manufacture Depends on EPZ incentives and local 18 2012-15 31 timber sippliesCashew nut processing Local investors Very probable. Based on rehabilitation 2 2010 16 of existing factoriesSesame seed production Japanese investors Possible. Two pilot projects started, but 150 80 full project requires 100,000ha of landTuna processing Unknown. No investor identified, but 16 2015 24 could be responsive to EDZ incentives. EDZ location closer to DSM would be preferableFishing projects (various) Several small projects for octopus, 15 2012 15 shark, shimp, crab and acquaculuture. One or more m ay go aheadMchuchum a Coal Phase 3 Requires construction of new railway 98 Long term 8-15,000 (US$1.3bn)Ngaka Coal Pacific Corp MOU for further project evaluation work 6 2012-5 c 75Kiwira Coal Mine Expansion of the coal m ine is going 390 2012 c 50 ahead, but with the majority of its output dedicated to power productionLiganga sponge iron project Local investors EOIs recently requested 80 2012 50 cLiganga vanadium /titanium mine No recent activity reported 940 Long term 260Mkuju River Uranium Mine Mantra Resources Ltd Three year drilling project just begun 180 2018 2Gysum mining TPCC Ltd Already being trialled using barge 5 2010 d 30 transport from LindiSmall cement plant Makonde Developments/ Probable. Strong investor interest in 15-20 2010-12 e 0-100 Tanga Cement Ltd expanding local marketLarge cement plant Dangote Industries Ltd Unlikely in the short term because of 420 2012 1,000 dependence on low gas pricesUrea fertilizer plant International investors Several expressions of interest 1500 2015 800-1500 received, and feasibility study about to be commissioned, with outcome dependent on gas priceShip breaking & steel industry May not be approved for environmental 22 2012-15 200 reasonsTitanium pgm ent plant Requires development of mineral 145 Long term 70 deposits in SW Tanzania or MalawiGlass manufacturing Requires opening up of transport links 35 Long term 10 to MalawiNotes: (a) Mtwara unless stated otherwise (b) based on 30,000 ha growing area. If successful, output could subsequently expand by a factor of 10 © exported to Malawi via Lake Nyasa (d) could use smaller alternative port (e) depends on whether the plant uses local lim estone or im ported clinke. May also import some gypsumTable II.2 – Mtwara Corridor Projects[Source: National Development Corporation + Consultants’ interviews]Tanzania Ports Master Plan 9R8821/R/903617/RottFinal Report - II.15 - February 2009
  • 68. II.3 Economic Development ZonesEconomic Development Zones (EDZ) have a direct relation to and impact on the tradeand traffic flows via Tanzanian ports and therefore EDZs have been addressed in thissection.Tanzania’s manufacturing sector accounts for only 8% of GDP, but has been growing at8% per annum. Production is concentrated in Dar es Salaam, and focused on threesectors:• Natural resources: agro-processing, food and beverages (fish processing, beer, spirits, and cigarettes)• Textiles and other light consumer goods such as furniture• Heavy industry: metals (aluminium and iron sheets), cement, paints, and plastics.Given the poor state of Tanzania’s infrastructure and the need to boost foreign directinvestment (FDI), the government has decided to target infrastructure provision oneconomic development zones near the main industrial areas to maximize agglomerationeconomies and reduce the cost of private infrastructure provision.Until recently Tanzania had two parallel systems of industrial incentives:• Export Processing Zones, established in 2002 and controlled by the Ministry of Industry and Marketing (now part of the Ministry of Industry and Trade)• Special Economic Zones, established in 2006 and controlled by the Ministry of Planning and Economic Empowerment (now absorbed into the Ministry of Finance)A Directive from the Government in April 2008 ordered SEZs to be transferred to theEPZ Authority. Both types of zone will now be known as Economic Development Zones.The investment incentive scheme is still under development, but is likely to containseparate incentives for companies producing for the domestic and export markets.Thirteen locations have been identified for EDZs, with the highest priority being given tothe one in Bagamoyo, followed by Mtwara and Arusha (refer Figure II.6).9R8821/R/903617/Rott Tanzania Ports Master PlanFebruary 2009 - II.16 - Final Report
  • 69. Figure II.6 – Economic Development Zones in TanzaniaThe President has been active in encouraging Chinese and Middle East participation inthe Bagamoyo EDZ, which is sufficiently close to Dar es Salaam to support thedecentralisation of domestic industry from the congested urban area, as well as theattraction of export oriented activities. A 10,000ha site to the south of Bagamoyo hasbeen identified as suitable for development, and the EPZA has signed an MOU with theRas Al Kaimah Investment Authority (RAKIA) for a joint venture to develop a port andEDZ of between 500ha and 1,000ha. The details of this project are still to be developed.At Mtwara the 2,623ha site identified for use as an EDZ is owned by TPA, and itsdevelopment is likely to be dominated by energy intensive activities and agro-processingindustries based on natural resources found within the Mtwara Corridor. .The Tanga EDZ is not yet very active, although a 2,000ha site for it been identified atNeema, near the new port site. Two companies involved in oil marketing and coffee /fruit processing responded to a recent request for expressions of interest.The amount and type of new industry which might be attracted to EDZs can beassessed by looking at the Foreign Direct Investment recorded each year by theTanzania Investment Centre (TIC), and the industrial sectors for which TIC is receivingproposals. Between 2002 and 2005 Tanzania received an average of US$ 370 millionper annum in FDI, equivalent to 4.5% of GDP. Almost 45% went into the mining sector,and only 20% into manufacturing. Because of this, around 40% was directed towardsthe Lakes region (Mwanza and Shinyanga) and a further 40 to 45% to Dar es Salaam,where many international companies have their headquarters.Tanzania Ports Master Plan 9R8821/R/903617/RottFinal Report - II.17 - February 2009
  • 70. If the EDZ programme were able to increase FDI in manufacturing by 50%, this wouldlead to an additional US$ 35 to 40 million of investment each year, generatingapproximately 8,000 to10,000 tons of project cargo2. The volume of on-going trade willdepend very much on the type of industry attracted to the zone, and on the balancebetween companies serving the domestic and export markets. Experience in Mauritiussuggests that an additional investment of US$ 35 to 40 million in manufacturing eachyear could increase international trade by around 2,000 to 5,000 tons per annum, witharound two thirds of this being imports and one third exports. A high proportion of EDZtrade – and imports of project cargo – is likely to be containerised.A detailed overview of EDZ developments in Tanzania is included in Appendix II.3.II.4 Urban developmentPorts are generally located inside or near town and cities and in developing ports masterplans due attention is required for urban developments to ensure both developments arewell balanced and are of mutual benefit to each other.Tanzania has experienced continued, steady population growth over the past threedecades. According to the data from National Population and Housing Census, whichhas been conducted four times by the National Bureau of Statistic (URT 2003), thepopulation of Tanzania mainland has increased nearly triple since 1967; the populationextended from 11.9 million persons in 1967 to 17.0 million persons in 1978, 22.4 millionpersons in 1988 and to 33.4 million persons in 2002. The average annual populationgrowth rate was 3.3% between 1967 and 1978, 2.8% between 1978 and 1988 and 2.9%between 1988 and 2002.Tanzania represents one of the larger African countries on a population basis. Accordingto the World Bank population index of year 2004, Tanzania had fifth largest populationsize following Nigeria, Egypt, Ethiopia and South Africa. Population size is roughly thesame as Sudan and Kenya. Population density is relatively modest at approximately 43persons/km2 of land area. The share of urban populations was 36.4% in Tanzania,which was lower than South Africa (57.4%), Kenya (40.5%) and Sudan (39.9%) andmuch higher than Ethiopia (15.9%) and Uganda (12.3%).The urban developments in Tanzania’s major port cities are described in Appendix II.4.2 Assumes 60% of capital expenditure is imports, with an average value of US$ 2,500 per ton9R8821/R/903617/Rott Tanzania Ports Master PlanFebruary 2009 - II.18 - Final Report
  • 71. II.5 Environmental considerationsEnvironmental considerations related to port developments in Tanzania as included inthis PMP project are described below and comprise the following general issues: • Introduction on environmental assessment • Potential impacts of port development on the environment • Possible mitigation measuresII.5.1 Introduction on Environmental AssessmentGeneric environmental impacts and mitigation measures connected with portdevelopment should be considered as potential impacts but are depending on the kindof development of the specific port and the receiving environment (natural and social).These impacts and the associated required mitigation measures serve as a basis for theenvironmental assessment in the PMP framework as well as for further EnvironmentalManagement by either the Contractor for the construction works or TPA for the portoperations.Based on interviews held by the Consultants with different stakeholders (Port Masters,environmentalists, engineers, public, etc), visits to the port area and surroundings,document research and interviews with the technical advisors for this project, specificpotential impacts has been assessed and potential mitigation measures has beendrafted for this PMP project.When the port developments are in the detailed design phase (i.e. a stage beyond thePMP phase), a proper Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), compulsory byTanzanian law, should bring about the description of all the potential environmental andsocial impacts and the development of appropriate mitigation measures. The genericimpacts and mitigation measures described below may well serve as a basis for theseEIAs.The (potential) impacts are often considered for the construction activities as well as foroperational activities separately due to the fact that they significantly differ (magnitude,duration, etc) over these phases of development and the responsibilities vary with themitigation measures to take.Construction refers to construction activities at sea and on land, like dredging anddisposal of dredge spoil, construction of quays, transport activities, use of borrowmaterials, etc. These activities are mostly performed by a contractor.Operations and maintenance includes among others: maintenance dredging, cargohandling and storage and traffic (sea and land). As a result of these activities there willbe inevitably spills and leakages, discharges and emissions from the port and relatedwaterfront industry. For the sake of simplicity these activities are considered to bemanaged by TPA (often delegated to tenants, contractors, etc.).Tanzania Ports Master Plan 9R8821/R/903617/RottFinal Report - II.19 - February 2009
  • 72. Further, a Preliminary Emergency Plan related to oil and / or chemical spills has beendrafted and included in Appendix II.5A presenting a framework for the furtherdevelopment of detailed emergency response procedures, which have to be elaboratedcomprehensively with the national authorities at a later stage.It has been noted that the TPA organisation is not yet structured for implementation ofsuch plans. For an adequate response organisation often a management structure isadapted which includes a Health, Safety, Environment and Social aspects (HSES) Unit.This Unit is a ‘’service provider’’ and supports operational departments within TPA andwould be responsible for the formulation of the various environmental managementplans (Emergency Plan, Resettlement Plan, etc). Such a HSES Unit will take on theresponsibility for implementing the various environmental management plans andrelated monitoring. Direct responsibility for managing significant environmental aspectslies with the operational and support departments (line).II.5.2 Potential environmental impacts of port developmentThe following environmental aspects related to port development have been consideredin the PMP project: 1. Hydrodynamics and sedimentation, 2. Water and sediment quality, 3. Soil and groundwater, 4. Aquatic and coastal ecology, 5. Terrestrial ecology, 6. Noise and vibration, 7. Air quality, 8. Light, 9. Movement, 10. Local community, 11. Recreation, 12. Landscape, 13. Cultural heritage, 14. Raw material and energy use.Detailed descriptions for each of these aspects are included in Appendix II.5B.9R8821/R/903617/Rott Tanzania Ports Master PlanFebruary 2009 - II.20 - Final Report
  • 73. II.5.3 Possible mitigation measuresGenerally, mitigation measures should be applied in the planning and design of projectsthrough a hierarchy as outlined below. Mitigation hierarchy for planned port development Avoid at Source; Reduce at Source Avoiding or reducing at source is essentially ‘designing’ the project such that a feature causing an impact is designed out (e.g. pipeline re-route) or altered (e.g. reduced working width). This is often called minimisation. Abate on Site This involves adding something to the basic design to abate the impact – pollution controls fall within this category. This is often called ‘end-of-pipe. Abate at ReceptorIf an impact cannot be abated on-site then measures can be implemented off-site – an example of this would be to install double-glazed windows to minimise noise impact at a nearby residence. Repair or Remedy Some impacts involve unavoidable damage to a resource, e.g. agricultural/natural land during port construction. Repair essentially involves restoration and reinstatement type measures. Compensate in Kind Where other mitigation approaches are not possible or fully effective, then compensation, in somemeasure, for loss, damage and general intrusion might be appropriate. This could be ‘in kind’, such as planting new woodland elsewhere to replace what has been lost.Further, it is noted that most aspects, such as air and noise pollution, solid wastegeneration, occupational health and safety risks may occur from specific types of projectactivities (e.g. quay construction and dredging) where others, such as water pollutionand soil erosion may occur only in certain cases.Generic mitigation measures are described in Appendix II.5B, whilst relevant mitigationmeasures for each port have been addressed in the specific port sections.Tanzania Ports Master Plan 9R8821/R/903617/RottFinal Report - II.21 - February 2009
  • 74. II.6 Competitive position of Tanzanian PortsII.6.1 IntroductionThere are a number of Land Locked Countries (LLCs) in East Africa depending on thecountries bordering the Indian Ocean for their supplies. These countries are ranked aslow-income countries by the World Bank, and depend heavily on external financialsupport for the development and maintenance of their transport infrastructure. Thissupport saw a sharp decline in the 1990s, which affected the ability of the LLCs toundertake major construction and maintenance work of transport infrastructure projects.The result is limited system of hinterland connections with poor performance.The competition to serve these landlocked countries however, is fierce. Main portscompeting for this transit cargo with the port of Dar es Salaam are the following (referFigure II.7):• Mombasa, Kenya• Nacala, Mozambique• Beira, Mozambique• Durban, South AfricaFigure II.7 – Position of DSM port (red) in region and its competitive ports (blue)9R8821/R/903617/Rott Tanzania Ports Master PlanFebruary 2009 - II.22 - Final Report
  • 75. The market for pure transhipment is rather small on the whole cargo volume. Thefollowing ports are the main competitors to Dar es Salam, Tanzania:• Durban, South Africa• Port Louis, Mauritius• Djibouti, EthiopiaBelow, a description is provided of ports in the competitive East African region and theirfacilities and services offered such as:• Port Facilities and Layout• Port Operation• Cargo Commodities and Volumes• Hinterland Connections (pipe line, railway, and road)• Market served per port• Development PlansII.6.2 KenyaII.6.2.1 Port of MombasaPort Facilities and LayoutMombasa is a deep-water port with 21 berths in total; 3 dedicated container terminals(10m depth), 2 bulk oil jetties (10 to 13 m depth), dry bulk wharves, and several generalcargo berths. The port offers many specialized facilities, including cold storage,warehousing, and a specialised container terminal. It serves most global shipping lines.Currently there is not a free trade zone at Mombasa port. Though one has been plannedfor several years, and the idea still seems to be alive.Access to the port of Mombasa is through a 14m deep channel, with a width of less then300 m. All quays are on the northern side of the bay as indicated in the layout below(refer Figure II.8).Tanzania Ports Master Plan 9R8821/R/903617/RottFinal Report - II.23 - February 2009
  • 76. 3Figure II.8 – Layout of Mombasa PortPort OperationsThe port operations are managed by Kenya Ports Authority (KPA), a government body,though discussions on privatisation have revived recently, with Maersk as a potentialconcession holder.Cargo Commodities and VolumesIn terms of throughput, Mombasa is twice the size of Dar es Salaam. The Port ofMombasa is a sheltered natural harbour, with a throughput of 14 million tons in 2006 (ofwhich 82 % are imports), and a claimed4 capacity of 22 million tons. Kenyas mainseaport, is also the largest on the East African Coast, and handles the bulk of Kenya’sforeign trade, and part of foreign trade of transit countries like Uganda, Rwanda, DRCongo and Southern Sudan. Over the last years the share of transit cargo hasincreased from 20% to approximately 27%5.3 Source: www.kpa.co.ke4 http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/facility/mombassa.htm5 UNCTAD –study - http://www.unctad.org/en/docs/ldc20072_en.pdf9R8821/R/903617/Rott Tanzania Ports Master PlanFebruary 2009 - II.24 - Final Report
  • 77. Table II.3 shows a summary of the cargo throughput of Mombasa, whilst Table II.4presents the distribution of the transit and transhipment cargo. Imports 2006 % Exports Containerized Cargo 2,970 Containerized Cargo 1,625 General Cargo 1,129 General Cargo 185 Dry Bulk 2,344 Dry Bulk 313 Bulk Liquids 5,403 Bulk Liquids 132 Total 11,846 Total 2,255 of which transit 3,583 30% of which transit out 355 16% Total Import & Export 14,101 Container Traffic 479,355 TEU Transhipment 318 2% Vessel Calls 1,857 Total 14,419Table II.3 – Cargo handled at Mombasa port in 2006, and % of transit and transhipment (in ‘000tons) Transit Country 2006 % Uganda 2822 72% Tanzania 270 7% Burundi 67 2% Rwanda 253 6% Sudan 137 3% DR Congo 226 6% Somalia 139 4% Others 0,7 0% Total 3915 100%Table II.4 – Transit cargo through Mombasa and its distribution (in ‘000 tons)Hinterland Connections Port of MombasaThe port of Mombasa is linked to the hinterland by pipelines, rail, and road.Pipe LinesMost of the regions petroleum imports are pumped by pipeline from Mombasa toEldoret, from where it is trucked to the respective countries (see Figure II.9). Ugandarelies on the Kenya Pipeline Companys Kisumu – Busia depot (at the Kenyan –Ugandan border) to transport 60% of all petroleum supplies, while the Eldoret depotaccounts for the rest.Kenya and Uganda intend to construct a 354 km pipeline extension to the currentsystem to supply petroleum products to serve Uganda, Rwanda, Burundi, Eastern DRCongo and South Sudan (refer Figure II.9). The initial extension is from Eldoret (Kenya)to Kampala (Uganda), and then maybe on to Kigali (Rwanda) or Bujumbura (Burundi).Construction is set to kick-off in November 2008, and will last approximately 18 months.The project will be fully funded (US$ 73 million) by the Libyan government and TAMOIL,the mother company of TAMOIL East Africa Ltd6. Upon completion, this pipeline will benamed, East African Pipeline Company, and will offer considerable lower transport costsfor oil products.6 http://www.bdafrica.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=8433&Itemid=5810Tanzania Ports Master Plan 9R8821/R/903617/RottFinal Report - II.25 - February 2009
  • 78. Figure II.9 – Port of Mombasa and the pipe line to Eldoret and future extension to Uganda,Rwanda and BurundiOn the other hand, there are also initial plans to build a new oil refinery in Uganda,which would make Uganda self sufficient. It would also mean that by then Mombasa,Uganda and DSM would all three be competing for the oil product markets of Rwanda,Burundi and DRC.RailThe Port of Mombasa is connected to its hinterland through the network of the RiftValley Railways (RVR). There is a main line from Mombasa to Malaba (Ugandan border)extending into Uganda to Kampala (refer Figure II.10). This 1,300-km rail line howeveris, not in very good shape.There is also a branch of this line from Nakuru – Kisumu to Lake Victoria, connectingalso to Uganda through lake ferry services. This line was damaged following the recentpolitical instability, but was re-opened in October 2008. However, a fuel levy of 1.2percent on the freight tariff is levied currently, making it less attractive to local business7.7 http://www.kam.co.ke/?itemId=17&newsId=1299R8821/R/903617/Rott Tanzania Ports Master PlanFebruary 2009 - II.26 - Final Report
  • 79. Figure II.10 – Port of Mombasa and the railways that connect to Kampala (pink) and Kisumu(orange)RoadAs a result of the poor condition of the rail roads, the share of road transport – despiteits moderate to bad condition – is increasing, and by 2003 it had risen to 74% (referFigure II.11). Trade in the sub-region can be characterized by low-value, high-bulk exportcommodities, which would be ideal for rail transport. The roads in Rwanda and Ugandaare in good to fair condition, but substantial funds are required in the DR Congo for therehabilitation of its road network.Figure II.11 – Port of Mombasa and roads to Uganda, Rwanda, Burundi, and Northern DRC.Tanzania Ports Master Plan 9R8821/R/903617/RottFinal Report - II.27 - February 2009
  • 80. Markets served by KenyaIn Mombasa roughly 75 per cent of the dry cargo throughput is destined for Kenya, andonly 25% is transit traffic (compared to 40% transit in Tanzania). Kenya is not in directcompetition for Tanzania’s home market, and rather focuses on expanding cargoes to /from transit countries. According to World Bank Studies, a quarter of the GDP ofUganda, Rwanda, and a third of Burundis pass through KenyaKPA has an active approach towards capturing the market for transit traffic to the LLCs.Over the last decade it has established several Inland Container Depots (ICDs), as hubsto facilitate this traffic. Currently there are 3 such hubs in Nairobi, Eldoret, and Kisumu(refer Figure II.12).Figure II.12 – Inland Container Terminals (ICDs) in Kenya (in red) at Nairobi, Eldoret, andKisumu, and the hinterland connections of Pipe Line (black), Railway (pink and orange), andRoad (blue)UgandaPresently the vast majority of Uganda traffic (98 % in 2006) is routed through Mombasa,due to its proximity, and existing infrastructure.DR CongoDR Congo is served by both Kenya and Tanzania. However, in practise all traffic to KivuProvince in the north east is directed through Mombasa, while cargo to Shaba Provincein the south east is shipped through Dar es Salaam. This is due to a combination of lowpopulation densities, rough terrain, and very basic and limited infrastructure. So, there isno real competition for this market between Kenya and Tanzania.Rwanda and BurundiThese two small countries have a real choice between Mombasa and Dar es Salaam,and their policy in recent years has been to diversify their access to the sea in order toavoid an exclusive dependency as used to be the case in the past, with Mombasaserving Uganda and Rwanda, and Dar es Salaam serving only Burundi.9R8821/R/903617/Rott Tanzania Ports Master PlanFebruary 2009 - II.28 - Final Report
  • 81. Development PlansThe port of Mombasa is currently suffering from congestion and delay in thetransmission of cargo due to lack of space at the port, limiting their share of the transitcargo to the LLCs. KPA has realised this and aims to overcome this congestion. It hasvast plans for the port of Mombasa, and aims to be among the top-20 worldwide portsby 2020.In December 2007, KPA has signed a loan agreement worth $235m with the JapanBank for International Cooperation (JBIC) for development of the Mombasa Port. Thesefunds will be used to finance the following plans: • Expand the existing container handling facilities as well as construct a second container terminal to cater for the present and expected traffic growth (total new capacity of 2 million TEU8). The Mombasa container terminal already has a throughput off 500,000 TEU, which is double its design limit of 250,000 TEU per annum. • A non-silo bulk grain handling facility at the conventional berths along Kilindini (Second bulk grain handling facility). • Dredge the channel to 15 m depth, and widen the turning basin to accommodate larger vessels. • Facilitate development of Free Trade Zones within and around the port. • Development of modern cruise ship facilities and other infrastructure to meet the demands of the modern cruise industry. • Enhancing the role of private sector participation in the provision of port services and other institutional efficiency related programs.The first phase of the expansion of the port is scheduled to be ready in 2012, while thefinal phase will end in 2015.II.6.2.2 Lamu PortIn 2006 a Kuwaiti company called Al-Bader International Development launched plans toconstruct a new port in the northern part of Kenya under a Built Operate and Transfer(BOT) contract. These plans comprise a commercial port, a FTZ, beach resort, airport,oil refinery and a railway, road, and pipeline close to the historic Lamu area.The plans were received with great enthusiasm, because the new plan would ease thepressure experienced by Mombasa Port over ship turn-around times and congestionoccasioned by limited space. Lamu Port is envisaged to be built with twice the size ofthan Mombasa, and with a deeper draft to attract bigger vessels. Currently Lamu is adhow harbour, and preserved as a UNESCO world heritage centre. After launching ofthe plans of the port in Lamu, the plans became dormant.Tanzania Ports Master Plan 9R8821/R/903617/RottFinal Report - II.29 - February 2009
  • 82. II.6.3 MozambiqueII.6.3.1 Port of NacalaPort Facilities and LayoutNacala is situated in the northern part of Mozambique, approximately 900km south ofDar es Salaam. The port is a natural deep water harbour at the Southern end of the Baiade Bengo. The bay is 800m wide and 60m deep (refer Figure II.13).Figure II.13 – Port Lay out of Nacala, with the Container Terminal, Railway connection, 3 generalcargo berths, and 1 Petroleum Oil and Lubricants berth (POL)There are 6 berths in total, with 2 berths dedicated to container handling (quay length372m, depth 12-14m), and another 4 for general cargo / dry bulk berths. One of theseberths can also be used for liquid bulk handling. The total capacity of the port is 2.4million tons per annum. As of now, there is no free zone at the port of NacalaThe railway layout in the port area of Nacala is adequate. There are seven rail-servedwarehouses. A portal crane serves the container depot and a siding for loading edible oiltraffic.The liquid bulk facilities are inadequate and will have to be upgraded if a significantportion of this traffic is to be regained for rail. The railway tank wagons have beencalibrated and repaired, and there is no reason, other than a shortage of locomotivepower, for POL traffic not to be moving by rail. The Malawian Minister of Transport has9R8821/R/903617/Rott Tanzania Ports Master PlanFebruary 2009 - II.30 - Final Report
  • 83. recently stated that his government has decided that POL in future should use theNacala Corridor9.Port OperationA private consortium called Corredor de Desenvolvimento do Norte, (CDN) holds thelease on the Nacala port and rail system in the Northern Province of Nampula.Cargo Commodities and VolumesThe cargo commodities and volumes handled in the Port of Nacala are shown in TableII.5 for domestic cargoes and in Table II.6 for transit cargoes. Throughput 2006 Containerized Cargo 45,000 TEU General Cargo 2,000,000 Tons Bulk Liquids NA Transit 14 %Table II.5 – Domestic Cargo handled at Nacala Port in 2006 Transit Country 2006 % Malawi 96,000 +/- 40 Zambia NATable II.6 – Transit Cargo [tons] at Nacala Port with DestinationsHinterland ConnectionsPipelineNacala Port has a terminal for bulk liquids and is linked by a 3.5km pipeline to fuel tanks,as well as to tanks for palm oil and cooking oil. There are currently no pipe lineconnections to any of the LLCs though plans are on the drawing board (refer below onDevelopment Plans).RailThe port of Nacala is the starting point of the privately owned Nacala Corridor that linkthe rail systems of Mozambique to Central and Southern Malawi (1,014 km to Lilongweand 803 km to Blantyre) and Eastern Zambia. Nacala handles a substantial part of theforeign trade to Malawi. The reported annual throughput over this rail link is 290,000tons consisting of maize, fuels, grain, fertilizer, tobacco, and sugar.The Nacala – Cuamba (533 km) line is a modern infra-structure and it is in goodcondition, while on the section to the border of Malawi at Nayuci (77 km) woodensleepers are being replaced by steel sleepers to increase its efficiency. The Malawirailway system consists of 797km of main line track. It extends from Mchinji in thenorthwest to the southern border of the country (see Figure II.14).9 http://www.nacalacorridor.com/English/039_economic_transportframe.aspTanzania Ports Master Plan 9R8821/R/903617/RottFinal Report - II.31 - February 2009
  • 84. Figure II.14 – Nacala Port and Rail corridor through Mozambique (blue) and Malawi (green)RoadThe only serious alternative to the rail corridor described above is the road route viaNampula, Mocuba, Milange and then on to Blantyre (see Figure II.15). Finance for theimprovement of this route has been secured but the distance is significantly greater byroad than by rail from Blantyre to Nacala10.Figure II.15 – Road Connections (in blue) from Nacala Port to the Hinterland of Malawi10 http://www.nacalacorridor.com/English/039_economic_transportframe.asp9R8821/R/903617/Rott Tanzania Ports Master PlanFebruary 2009 - II.32 - Final Report
  • 85. Market served by NacalaZambian dry cargo has shown a decline in re recent years. Much of this decline hasbeen due to changes in supply sources in favour of South Africa, and increased use ofSouth African ports, particularly for exports. Although the distance to Durban is muchfurther than to DSM, there are a lot of empty trucks bringing South African goods intoZambia which are happy to take copper exports as a return cargo.During the 1970s and 1980s Zambia was cut off from supply routes from the south bycivil wars in Angola and Mozambique, and the declaration of independence ofZimbabwe in 1965, leaving Dar es Salaam as the only supply option. In recent years,relationships between Zambia and Mozambique have improved, and Zambia hasdiversified in its supply routes and as a result the amount of transit cargo throughMozambique has increased.Historically Nacala was the main port for Malawi and Zambia, with as much as 95% ofMalawi’s imports and exports, and a sizeable proportion of Zambian goods, until a civilwar broke out in the mid-1970s. Since then these figures have plummeted. In 2001Mozambique took only 3.2% of Malawi’s imports, and 2.6% of its exports.11 The totaltransit portion has gone up in recent years with 14% of throughput in 2006 being transitcargo.A World Bank working paper published in January 2008 shows Zambia’s internationaltrade divided almost equally between DSM and Durban (47% and 49%) with a smallamount (4%) moving through Beira and virtually nothing through Nacala.Development PlansNacala is focusing on becoming an important transit port for not only Mozambique’s ownhinterland, but also for Malawi and Zambia.The Mozambican Government approved in September 2007 a project to build andoperate an oil refinery in the district of Nacala-a-Velha, in the northern province ofNampula. The refinery, valued at more than $1.3 billion, known as the Ayr Petro-Nacalaproject, is led by the privately owned American company Ayr Logistics, in partnershipwith three South African investors, and one from Mozambique. It will be able to producemore than 300,000 barrels of fuel per day, two-thirds of which will be exported toneighbouring countries such as Zimbabwe, Malawi and Zambia. The crude oil for therefinery will be unloaded at the Nacala port.Feasibility Studies have been done in 2004 on a pipeline connecting Nacala with theInland port of Liwonde in Malawi. These plans proved unsuccessful. However, newplans have emerged in early 2007 to built a pipeline from Nacala to Nsanje inland port(at the southern most point of Malawi), reducing the pipe distance with over 200km.The Zambian Government is currently planning a dry port at Chipata (just over theborder from Mchinja in Malawi) to access the rail link from Nacala through Malawi. Thiswould reduce the travel time to Zambia remarkably. Another plan is to establish anIndustrial Free Zone.11 http://www.nacalacorridor.com/English/039_economic_transportframe.aspTanzania Ports Master Plan 9R8821/R/903617/RottFinal Report - II.33 - February 2009
  • 86. II.6.3.2 Port of Beira, MozambiquePort Facilities and LayoutBeira port (refer Figure II.16) has a total of 11 berths, stretching over a total length ofsome 2,000m. Maximum depth in the port is 7m. Beira Port can now handle up to100,000 TEUs per annum, using two ship-to-shore gantry cranes with 40 ton containerhandling capacity and 50 ton hook lifting capacity. Currently, there is no free zone areain the port.Figure II.16 – Port Layout of Beira PortPort OperationsThe Port of Beira is managed by a joint venture between Cornelder Holding, based inRotterdam (67%) and the Mozambique Ports & Railways Company, CFM (33%).A major problem is that Beira port is not a natural deep-water harbour, and has anentrance channel which is prone to silting up. Dredging the channel is a majorheadache, and costs about $5 million a year. Besides this, properly dredging the port tomake up for years of neglect would cost up to $30 million.Large ships cannot enter the port and have to transfer their cargoes to and from smallervessels, thus further pushing up costs for users. As a result, only feeder services usethe harbour, on a four-port run from Durban and back, and not shipping lines directly.Vessels can also be held up by tides, and the loading of goods is said to be very slow,resulting in delays of up to three months for customers who are forced to clear theirgoods a second time if they miss their original schedule12.12 http://www.ccpm.pt/The%20Business%20View.pdf9R8821/R/903617/Rott Tanzania Ports Master PlanFebruary 2009 - II.34 - Final Report
  • 87. Cargo Commodities and VolumesThe cargo commodities and volumes handled in the Port of Nacala are shown in TableII.7 for domestic cargoes and in Table II.8 for transit cargoes. Throughput 2006 Containerized Cargo 54,268 TEU General Cargo 1,367,238 Tons Bulk Liquids NA Transit +/- 70 %Table II.7 – Domestic Cargo handled at Beira Port in 2006 Transit Country 2001 Malawi 125,000 Zambia 47,000 Zimbabwe 715,000 Total 887,000Table II.8 – Transit cargo handled at Beira Port in 2001Mozambique’s own exports through Beira – including tobacco, timber, prawns, cottonand sugar – is growing, and in 2006 made up 49,9 per cent of total container traffic. TheZimbabwe trade has not reduced so much as changed in terms of the nature of imports /exports. Where exports were once mainly agricultural commodities, the bulk of currentexports comprise granite, destined for Europe and Japan, and a variety of minerals suchas vermiculite, iron ore, and marble.Hinterland ConnectionsPipelineA pipeline with a capacity to pump 1.2 million m3 of per day stretches for 287km fromBeira to the Feruka Oil Refinery in Mutare on the Zimbabwean border.RailwayThe Sena railway at Beira is operated by Beira Railroad Corporation (CCFB), acombination of Indian Rites and Ircon International from India. They hold a lease on thisrailway. The rail links the networks of Zimbabwe and Zambia (see Figure II.17).Malawi used to be a major user of Beira port. But during the apartheid period rebelsdestroyed the Sena line in the early 1980s, and for quarter of a century there was notraffic along the line. In 2007, work has started to rebuild the entire Sena railway.Unfortunately, the Malawian traffic can still not be routed over the Sena line unless therailway system inside Malawi is also rehabilitated.Tanzania Ports Master Plan 9R8821/R/903617/RottFinal Report - II.35 - February 2009
  • 88. Figure II.17 – Rail connections from Beira port to Zimbabwe and Zambia (in pink), as well as theconnections from NacalaRoadThe shortest road corridor from Beira to Malawi is via Gondola – Bandula – Mwanza(Malawi) to Malawi, covering a distance of 883km to Blantyre, and 1,194km to Lilongwe(see Figure II.18). The road has two lanes, is tarred, and is usable in all weather.Road haulage is presently the dominant mode of goods transport serving Malawi. Of anestimated total of 997,800 tons import/export cargo, the railways only carry about145,000 tons of traffic.Malawi is served by the M1 highway which runs the whole length of Malawi, andprovides the main artery for freight movements both between the main centres andbetween production areas and processing plants/markets.9R8821/R/903617/Rott Tanzania Ports Master PlanFebruary 2009 - II.36 - Final Report
  • 89. Figure II.18 – Road connections from Beira Port to Malawi and ZimbabweMarket served by BeiraThe Beira Corridor has served as an alternative route for Malawi when there has beencongestion at Nacala. The flexibility and speed of road haulage makes it the preferredroute for time-sensitive cargo.Development PlansThere are plans to increase the depth of the access channel to the port from 7m to itsoriginal depth of 8m. Environmental Impact Assessment studies have been done in2007, and dredging is done at the moment with “local” equipment. For further deepeningof the channel, more funds and foreign equipment is required. Funds now are alsoearmarked for the upgrading of the railway and road systems. The objective of Beiraport is to become a central player in the transit cargo for Zimbabwe, Zambia and Malawi.A programme of refurbishment and modernisation worth US$ 900 million is proposed forthe upgrading of the ports of Beira and Nacala in order to receive more ships and morecargo. The funding needed for this programme will be the responsibility of thecompanies that obtained concession contracts for management of the ports. It isexpected that around US$ 400 million will be invested in the port of Nacala and theremaining US$ 500 million in the port of Beira.Tanzania Ports Master Plan 9R8821/R/903617/RottFinal Report - II.37 - February 2009
  • 90. II.6.4 South AfricaII.6.4.1 Port of DurbanPort Facilities and LayoutDurban is the largest port of Africa, and the main port of South Africa, on the East Coast.The port comprises dry bulk, liquid bulk, and container handling facilities as well asgeneral cargo and vehicles (refer Figure II.19). Maximum depth within the port is 12.5m.The container terminal operates 14 gantry cranes, 4 of which are post-Panamax sizeand 10 have a working load of 40 tons. There is no free zone area in the Port of Durban.Figure II.19 – Port Layout of DurbanPort OperationsThe National Port Authority (NPA), a government owned body, is responsible for safetyand accessibility of the South African ports and acts as a landlord of the port areas.Momentarily, all container terminals are operated by the public sector Transnet PortTerminals (TPT). Around 30% of the bulk business is also operated by S.A. PortOperations which also operates 50% of the break bulk and multipurpose business.In 2005, the Port of Durban suffered from severe congestion, caused by a combinationof dilapidated equipment due to under-investment, slow working practices, and badweather. Several container lines applied congestion surcharge fees, and othersthreatened with them. Since then investments in the port of Durban have released thecongestion, and the congestion surcharges have been dropped since.9R8821/R/903617/Rott Tanzania Ports Master PlanFebruary 2009 - II.38 - Final Report
  • 91. Cargo Commodities and VolumesThe port of Durban handles the greatest volume of sea-going traffic of any port insouthern Africa (refer Table II.9). For the 2006/07 financial year, it handled a total of4,545 sea-going ships. Throughput amounted to 41.5 million tonnes,(excluding containers).Container throughput was equal to 2.3 million TEUs (26.4 million tones), which gives theport a total tonnage of 73 million tons (43.2 million tons of imports, 22.4 million tonnes ofexports and 7.4 million tons of transhipment). The Durban Car Terminal – the countryslargest import and export facility for the motor industry –handled 386,062 motor unitsduring the fiscal year 2005/06. Imports 2006/2007 Exports 2006/2007 Containerized Cargo 9.7 Containerized Cargo 10.2 Break Bulk 4.4 Break Bulk 3.2 Dry Bulk 26.9 Dry Bulk 6.7 Bulk Liquids Bulk Liquids Total 43.2 Total 22.4 Container Traffic Total Import & Export 73.0 2.335 (million TEU) Transhipment 7.4 10% Vessel Calls 4,545Table II.9 – Cargo Throughput Port of DurbanMarket served by DurbanSouth Africa is connected with the South Africa Development Corridor (SADC) North /South Road Corridor from Gaborone at the border of Botswana through Zambia to theDR Congo (see Figure II.20). The road is not in a very good condition, though upgradingis in progress.Tanzania Ports Master Plan 9R8821/R/903617/RottFinal Report - II.39 - February 2009
  • 92. Figure II.20 – Port of Durban and the road corridor to Zambia and the DR CongoThe port of Durban is also connected to the rail networks of South Africa and Zimbabwe,which can be used to transport cargo to Zambia. Since the end of the Apartheid regimeand the improved relationship between Zambia and Zimbabwe, Zambia has opened upan alternative supply route to the one from Dar es Salaam, through Zimbabwe andSouth Africa. For Durban, this is the only market served that is in competition withTanzania. Durban’s market share in this region has increased over the last years.Development PlansThere are plans to dredge out two new basins within the existing harbour (the Bayheaddevelopment), which will increase container capacity from 2.4 million TEU per annum to9.1 million TEU. However, this plan faces environmental objections, and is alreadydelayed.As an alternative, Transnet is now acquiring the site of the existing airport, which is to berelocated, and has plans for the phased development of 6.8 million TEU of capacity.There are also plans to consolidate and rebuild a substantial part of Maydon Wharf, themain general cargo berths, most of which are leased to private operators. Durban hasbeen steadily expanding its car storage facilities, and trade in vehicles (imports andexports) is expected to continue growing strongly.9R8821/R/903617/Rott Tanzania Ports Master PlanFebruary 2009 - II.40 - Final Report
  • 93. In addition, the port has embarked on a project of widening and deepening the entrancechannel to enable safer access and access to larger ships. The widened channel willhave a width of 220m and a minimum depth of 16m. Work on completing this project isexpected to be completed by the end of 2009.II.6.5 Other Potential Competitive PortsII.6.5.1 NamibiaWalvis Bay has become a strong competitor for DSM port for Zambian and SouthernDRC for traffic to/from Europe and North America since Maersk won a concession tooperate this port a couple of years ago.II.6.5.2 AngolaThere is also a SADC plan sponsored by Zambia and Angola to upgrade the Beguelarailway from Lubumbashi (DRC) and the Ndola (Zambia) to Lobito (Angola). When thiswas first announced in 2005 the two governments could only provide US$ 60 million, butsince then China has stepped in with an offer of US$ 300 to 500 million. However,Angolan ports are unlikely to be very competitive over the next10 years, but couldbecome important thereafter.II.6.6 SummaryTable II.10 below comprises a summary of the key statistics of the ports in East Africathat can be considered as competitors of Dar es Salaam.Tanzania Ports Master Plan 9R8821/R/903617/RottFinal Report - II.41 - February 2009
  • 94. Tanzania Kenya Mozambique South Africa Facilities DSM Mombassa Nacala Beira Durban Port Operator TPA - KPA - CDN - Cornelder National Port Government Government Private Holding + Authority CFM, JV- (NPA) - Private government Annual Volume 7,206,000 14,419,000 2,000,000 1,367,238 42,668,000 handled (Ton) Annual volume 334,000 585,400 45,000 46,775 2,335,000 handled (TEU) Annual Transit 117,544 3,586,140 NA 887,000 7,400,000 volumes (Ton) Annual 40,000 60,000 NA 0 7,377,166 Transhipment volumes (TEU) Annual Transit 38% 27% 14% +/- 70 % 10% volumes % on containers Entry Channel Depth 10,4 14 60 7 13 (m) Container Quay 12,2 10 14 12 13 depth (m) Panamax access? NO NA NA NO YES Container quay 720 598 372 645 2,128 length (m) Total quay length 1990 3,044 1,047 1,994 > 10.000m (m) Container quay 3 5 1 2 8 gantries Dry bulk facilities YES YES YES YES YES Liquid bulk facilities YES YES YES YES YES Dedicated terminals General General General General General Cargo Cargo Cargo Cargo Cargo Container Container Container Container Container Dry Bulk Dry Bulk Bulk Dry Bulk Dry Bulk Liquid Bulk Liquid Bulk Liquid Bulk Liquid Bulk Ro-Ro Ro-Ro Ro-Ro Free Zone available NO NO NO NO NOTable II.10 – Summary of Key Statistics of DSM Competitors in East Africa9R8821/R/903617/Rott Tanzania Ports Master PlanFebruary 2009 - II.42 - Final Report
  • 95. II.6.7 SWOT Analysis DSM versus Regional Competitive PortsTable II.11 presents a summary of the competitive position for DSM port to attract transitcargo in relation to competitive regional ports. Strengths Weaknesses • Good geographical position to serve • Insufficient port capacity, leading to Rwanda, Burundi, DRC, Zambia, and Malawi congestion • Direct borders and access to all LLCs (some • Inadequate rail infrastructure and railway multi-modal) operations, pushing freight on the road, while rail is a more cost effective mode of • Possibility to create capacity ahead of transport demand • Incomplete national road network • Limited ICDs to facilitate transit system Opportunities Threats • Political instability in Kenya • Return to political instability in Congo, while much traffic from DRC is forecasted • Political stability and economical continued growth in LLCs • Drop in transit market share of transit cargo due to continued congestion at DSM • Upgrading of Tanzanian infrastructure resulting in shorter transit times to LLCs • Strategy of Kenya focusing on LLCs with ICDs • Increase of market share on Uganda traffic • Construction of bypass roads in Kenya • Establishing a EDZ at or close to DSM port around major cities leading to reduction in (no other currently exists in the region) transit times • Improved performance of human resources • Mombasa might gain access to Burundi through training market • Integrated development of ports and • LLCs opening up alternative supply routes to infrastructure through cooperation between decrease dependency on DSM ministries, municipality and stakeholders: create trust • Upgrading of infrastructure in the region (rail in Kenya, Sena Rail and N4 highway in • Increased market share Malawi / Zambia Mozambique) can lead to faster lead times cargo through improvement of TAZARA rail off competitors performance • Uganda setting up own oil refinery, and join supplies to Rwanda & Burundi • A downturn in world economic activityTable II.11 – SWOT Analysis for DSM PortTanzania Ports Master Plan 9R8821/R/903617/RottFinal Report - II.43 - February 2009
  • 96. II.6.8 Transhipment MarketDSM port is also capable of handling transhipment cargoes. Its competitive ports in thisrespect are briefly described belowII.6.8.1 Port Louis, MauritiusThe transhipment activity in Port Louis is fast growing, since an agreement has beensigned with Maersk Sealand, MOL, MSC and P&O Nedlloyd. The port has a maximumdepth is 14.2m and this is also the depth at the quay where containers are beinghandled. In the year 2000, the container terminal reached a productivity of 17.8 to 20moves per hour per crane.The Mauritius Freeport Authority (MFA) was created in 1992 with the objective ofpositioning Port Louis as a hub and promoting it as a warehousing, distribution,marketing and logistics platform for the development of trade in the Indian Ocean region.The MFA area covers 70,000 m2.Transhipment container volume has risen sharply from 37,000 TEU (in 2002) to 70,000TEU (in 2003), and 100,000 TEU (38% of total throughput) in 2006. Total containerthroughput in 2006 was 260,000 TEU.II.6.8.2 South AfricaCoega on the Southern tip of South Africa has the potential to become a largetranshipment port, though the current government of South African’s is not intending tooffer any of the major shipping lines a concession for this port. This policy might changewhen a new government takes office.II.7 Basis for traffic forecastsKey considerations underlying the trade and traffic forecasts for the PMP project havebeen described in this section and address the following issues:• Competitive position of ports• Overview of past trends• Drivers of port growthCargo forecasts for the period 2008 – 2028 for each port are included in the portsections of this report (refer Sections III to X).9R8821/R/903617/Rott Tanzania Ports Master PlanFebruary 2009 - II.44 - Final Report
  • 97. II.7.1 Overview of past trendsBase year traffic figures (for 2007) for Dar es Salaam, Tanga and Mtwara are given inTable II.12. The total volume of traffic amounted to just over 8.0 million tons, of which93% was handled at Dar es Salaam. Traffic Volumes in 2007 (‘000 tons) Dar Es Salaam Tanga Mtwara Dry bulks Wheat 691 6 0 Maize/sorghum 17 0 0 Fertilizer 207 0 0 Clinker 208 0 0 Gypsum 20 0 0 Sulphur 18 0 0 Coal 0 50 0 Total : dry bulks 1,161 56 0 Liquid bulks Crude oil 537 0 0 Petroleum products 1,439 97 6 Other 213 0 0 Total: liquid bulks 2,189 97 6 Containers Total: containers 3,259 98 21 Break-bulk Bagged imports 79 30 0 Bagged exports 145 92 29 Metals 145 0 0 Vehicles 85 3 0 Other 61 69 34 Total : break-bulk 515 194 63 GRAND TOTAL 7,124 445 90 Containers (000 TEU) 334 10 5Table II.12 – Traffic Volumes in 2007 (‘000 tons)Note: (a) transhipment traffic is counted once [Source: TPA Port Managers’ offices]The latest year for which traffic statistics for the smaller coastal ports are available is2005 / 2006. In that year Mafia handled 4,800 tons of cargo, Kilwa 700 tons and Lindi22,300 tons.The Lakes ports operated by TPA handed a total of 607,000 tons of cargo in 2007,broken down as follows: ‘000 tons (of which oil) Lake Victoria 481 (112) Lake Tanganyika 108 ( 3) Lake Nyasa 18 ( -)Tanzania Ports Master Plan 9R8821/R/903617/RottFinal Report - II.45 - February 2009
  • 98. The ports also handle significant volumes of passengers. In 2007 Dar es Salaamhandled 732,000 passengers (in + out), whilst in 2007 passenger traffic through theLakes ports was as follows: ‘000 passengers 2005-6 Lake Victoria Mwanza 206 Nansio 189 Bukoba 87 Kemondo Bay 9 Lake Tanganyika Kigoma 16 Lake Nyasa Itungi 7 Mbamba Bay 1The main traffic trends and figures for 2001 to 2007 are shown in Table II.13 and can besummarised as follows:• Since 2001, the average cargo growth through coastal ports has been 9.2% per annum (8.5% per annum for imports and 9.1% per annum for exports).• There has been a sharp increase in dry bulk cargoes through Dar es Salaam, from 385,000 in 2001 to 1.16 million tons is 2007. The increase has been mainly in wheat (+390,000 tons), fertilizers (+190,000 tons) and cement (+150,000 tons) and has been due to a mixture of strong underlying growth in these markets and conversion from bagged to bulk cargo. New bulk imports have occurred recently in sulphur at Dar es Salaam and coal at Tanga, whilst a coastal trade is gypsum is developing but has still to decide which ports to use.• Liquid bulk traffic has been growing at around 5.4% per annum. It is mainly petroleum (92%), with the balance between crude oil and products affected by major rehabilitation works at the Ndola oil refinery in Zambia. Oil imports through Tanga have declined because of the substitution of local gas for oil in power generation.• Container traffic has been growing at around 13.5%, mainly in Dar es Salaam. Since the start of the TICTS container terminal lease, transhipment traffic has grown to around 30,000 TEU in each direction.• Break-bulk cargo has been fairly static. There has been a large decline in bagged imports, which have either transferred to bulk (wheat, maize, fertilizers and cement) or containers (rice, flour, sugar). Bagged exports these commodities – mainly to Indian Ocean islands – are small and variable. Imports of iron and steel and vehicles have grown strongly, but exports of other general cargo have fallen as copper exports from Zambia have been containerised.• Transit traffic to the land-locked countries makes up a growing proportion of Dar es Salaam’s traffic. Since 2001 it has increased from 10% to 41% of liquid bulks, and from 25% to 39% of containers. Dry bulk and break bulk flows to/from the transit countries have remained fairly small, and fluctuate from year to year.• There is a growing amount of coastal traffic, in addition to container transhipment to Zanzibar, Tanga and Mtwara, although the volumes are still fairly small in total. This has occurred in spite of improvements to the coastal road network.9R8821/R/903617/Rott Tanzania Ports Master PlanFebruary 2009 - II.46 - Final Report