Improvement actions for reducing transport’s impact on climate: A shipper’s perspective |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Public Health Computational and Operations Research (PHICOR), Pittsburgh PA (formerly) and Baltimore MD (currently), United States;2. Pittsburgh Supercomputing Center (PSC), Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, United States;3. International Vaccine Access Center (IVAC), Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, United States;4. UNICEF, NY, NY, United States;5. Agence de Médicine Préventive (AMP), Paris, France;6. Agence de Médicine Préventive (AMP), Cotonou, Benin;1. EPRG, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge, Sidgwick Ave. Cambridge CB3 9DE, UK;2. Control and Power Research Group, Imperial College London, Exhibition Road, London, SW7 2AZ, UK;1. Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States;2. Public Health Computational and Operations Research (PHICOR), Pittsburgh, PA (formerly) and Baltimore, MD (currently), United States;3. International Vaccine Access Center (IVAC), Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, United States;4. Pittsburgh Supercomputing Center (PSC), Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, United States;1. Reliability Engineering Institute, School of Energy and Power Engineering, Wuhan University of Technology, Wuhan 430063, China;2. National Engineering Research Center for Water Transportation Safety (WTSC), MOST, Wuhan 430063, China;3. Key Laboratory of Marine Power Engineering & Technology, (MOT), Wuhan University of Technology, Wuhan 430063, China;4. Faculty of Mechanical, Maritime and Materials Engineering, Delft University of Technology, Mekelweg 2, Delft 2628 CD, The Netherlands;5. Department of Engineering, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB3 0FA, UK |
| |
| Abstract: | The purpose of this paper is to compare improvement actions for reducing transport’s impact on climate from the shipper’s perspective. To that end, it introduces an evaluation tool for comparing improvement actions in transport systems in terms of transport costs, impact on climate, and barriers to implementation. Within the context of five international flows involving a food producer, three actions—namely, engaging intermodal transport, increasing load factors by double-stacking pallets, and using high-capacity vehicles—were evaluated. Shipment data were collected to calculate reductions in transport costs and impact on climate, whereas interviews with the food producer were conducted to identify barriers. Results showed that reductions in transport costs and impact on climate attributed to the improvement actions differed among the five flows. Engaging intermodal transport reduced the system’s impact on climate by 27–53%, double-stacking pallets by 0–23%, and using high-capacity vehicles by 7–15%, with differences primarily due to different freight densities. Concerning barriers to implementation, the improvement actions also varied by flow. Altogether, unlike other papers, which have examined improvement actions separately, this paper offers an evaluation tool for comparing several improvement actions at once, as applied to a particular empirical case. Shippers with multiple flows and several possible improvement actions can use the evaluation tool to efficiently reduce their systems’ impact on climate. |
| |
| Keywords: | Improvement action Shipper Transport system Impact on climate Load factor Intermodal transport |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
