Increasing transport costs, increasing CO₂ pressure and infrastructural bottlenecks pose a fundamental question for many medium-sized companies: Is traditional road transport still enough — or is it worthwhile switching to multimodal solutions?

Multimodal transport combines several modes of transport within a transport chain, typically road and rail or road and short-sea transport. While large corporations have been using such models for years, many medium-sized companies are reluctant. Too complex? Too expensive? Too inflexible? The answer depends heavily on the specific application.

What multimodal transport means in everyday life

Multimodal does not automatically mean “complicated.” In practice, it often means:

• Delivery by truck to the terminal
• Main route by train or boat
• Follow-up again by truck to the recipient

The decisive difference lies in the main course. Instead of traveling hundreds of kilometers exclusively by road, the train or boat takes over the longest stretch of route. For companies, this does not necessarily reduce the organization — but it does reduce the risk profile and often also the emissions balance.

Profitability: From what distance does it pay off?

One of the key questions is: When is multimodal cheaper?

In practice, it has been shown that:

• Pure road transport is usually less expensive under 300-400 km.
• At around 500 km, railways often start to become competitive.
• With regular volumes and predictable shipments, cost efficiency increases significantly.

It is not only the price per kilometer that is decisive, but the overall package: diesel prices, tolls, driver shortages, downtime and predictability are included in the calculation. Especially when there are stable, recurring relationships — for example between production site and central warehouse — a multimodal concept can quickly pay off.

CO₂ reduction as a measurable advantage

With increasing sustainability requirements, the emissions aspect is becoming more important. Transport by rail causes significantly less CO₂ per tonne-kilometer on average than pure road transport. Short-sea connections in the Mediterranean region or in northern Europe can also reduce emissions, particularly at high volumes.

For medium-sized companies that need to sharpen their sustainability reports or ESG indicators (environmental, social, governance), this factor is becoming increasingly relevant. Multimodality is therefore not only a cost issue, but also a reporting issue.

Infrastructure limits as drivers

Bridge closures, traffic jams, construction sites and restricted truck driving bans clearly show that road infrastructure is reaching load limits in many places. At the same time, access to urban areas is becoming more restrictive.

Multimodal concepts can alleviate the burden here:

• Main routes via rail
• Equalizing peak times
• better predictability over long distances

However, it is also true that not every region has efficient terminals or sufficient rail capacity. The change is therefore always dependent on location.

For whom is the switch worthwhile in concrete terms?

From a practical point of view, the main benefits are:

• Companies with regular, predictable transport flows
• Manufacturing companies with stable sales regions
• High-volume shippers on fixed routes
• Sectors with CO₂ reporting requirements

On the other hand, highly fluctuating spot traffic or highly time-critical individual transports are less suitable.

Realistically assess challenges

Multimodal transport also brings new requirements:

• more precise time window planning
• Coordination with terminal timetables
• potentially longer overall run times
• higher coordination requirements

Without stable interfaces between scheduling, terminal and receiver, the efficiency advantage can quickly be lost. Multimodality does not replace organization — it requires it.

Practical example: Production site — central warehouse

A medium-sized machine manufacturer transports 20 full loads a week from southern Germany to northern Italy. Pure road solution: fast, but expensive and CO₂-intensive.

Alternative:

• Forward by truck to the combined terminal
• Main run by train
• Delivery by truck to the warehouse

Outcome:

• stable runtimes
• lower emissions
• less dependence on lack of drivers
• calculable costs for regular quantities

It is precisely with such relationships that the greatest benefit comes from.

conclusion

Multimodal transport is not a future project for SMEs, but a realistic option — provided the distance, volume and predictability are right. The change is not worthwhile for every transport, but for clearly defined relationships with regular needs.

Profitability, CO₂ reduction and infrastructure stability form the three decisive factors. Multimodality is not an end in itself, but an instrument for minimizing risks and increasing efficiency.