Cost, Emissions, and Customer Service Trade‐off Analysis in Pickup and Delivery Systems: Final Report [2011-01]
Advanced Search
Select up to three search categories and corresponding keywords using the fields to the right. Refer to the Help section for more detailed instructions.

Search our Collections & Repository

All these words:

For very narrow results

This exact word or phrase:

When looking for a specific result

Any of these words:

Best used for discovery & interchangable words

None of these words:

Recommended to be used in conjunction with other fields

Language:

Dates

Publication Date Range:

to

Document Data

Title:

Document Type:

Library

Collection:

Series:

People

Author:

Help
Clear All

Add terms to the query box

Query box

Help
Clear All
i

Cost, Emissions, and Customer Service Trade‐off Analysis in Pickup and Delivery Systems: Final Report [2011-01]

Filetype[PDF-1.34 MB]


  • English

  • Details:

    • Resource Type:
    • Geographical Coverage:
    • Abstract:
      Executive Summary The following general results can be obtained from the project summarized in this report. 1. Diversity of Fleets There is a great diversity of pickup and delivery companies. They differ in terms of cost per mile, cost per hours, emissions per mile, and capacity. The customers can be clustered or spread out. Trucks can mostly travel on highways, local roads or a combination of them. Customer demand presents variability and there are different time window requirements. Thus, it is very worth to find common operational features and operational conditions that reduce cost and emissions. 2. Both cost and emissions rate decrease when vehicles travel closer to 60 mph Total emissions are just the multiplication of distance and emissions rates. Emissions per mile decrease when vehicles travel faster, and do not start increasing until speeds higher than 60 mph are reached. Cost continues to decrease with increasing speed. This is true for both CO2 and NOX. Thus, it is both cost and emissions efficient to drive faster (up to 60 mph). Any infrastructure or management investment, or flexibility that allows companies to operate in less congested hours positively impacts both cost and emissions. The only external control will be speed limit. 3. Density reduce cost and emissions Higher customer densities reduce the total VMT of a fleet. This means a lower cost and fewer emissions. Thus, urban policies encouraging dense developments have a positive impact on reducing emissions from freight sector and benefit transportation companies because reduces their operational cost. 4. External restrictions increase cost and emissions All else being equal, any restriction on road use will increase cost and emissions. If these policies are to reduce cost and emissions, other aspects must also change, such as delivery times or service guarantees. This kind of change would need to be spearheaded by a multiagency or multijurisdictional effort
    • Format:
    • Main Document Checksum:
    • File Type:

    Supporting Files

    • No Additional Files

    More +

    Related Documents

    You May Also Like

    Checkout today's featured content at rosap.ntl.bts.gov

    Version 3.18