Sustainability in parcel delivery is a growing area of interest, especially for third-party logistics providers (3PLs). The recent increase of urban population is directly related to the increase request of goods in urban areas, and consequently to the growth of the urban freight transport and CO2 emissions. For these reasons, national and local institutions carried out regulations and incentives to reduce urban pollution and promote zero-emission vehicles. In particular, daily tickets to access to city centers is a common regulation applied to reduce freight transport. This paper presents a new SPD model that compares Eclectic Vehicles (EVs) and Fossil Fuel Vehicles (FFVs) considering economic savings and CO2 emissions, for parcel delivery from a single distribution center to a set of delivery point located inside and/or outside an urban area. Limitations as the daily ticket, the fuel cost, the battery duration are considered to provide 3PLs an innovative model to evaluate both the economic convenience and the environmental impact of its vehicles fleet. Through an explanatory study, economic considerations are carried out, related to the length of the route, the daily ticket cost, and the fuel cost to evaluate and to assess the different transportation options. It demonstrates that EVs are more convenient in terms of economic savings when the route (urban distances) and the daily ticket cost increase.

The Sustainable Parcel Delivery (SPD) Problem: Economic and Environmental Considerations for 3PLs / Pilati, F.; Zennaro, I.; Battini, D.; Persona, A.. - In: IEEE ACCESS. - ISSN 2169-3536. - 8:(2020), pp. 71880-71892. [10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2987380]

The Sustainable Parcel Delivery (SPD) Problem: Economic and Environmental Considerations for 3PLs

Pilati F.;
2020-01-01

Abstract

Sustainability in parcel delivery is a growing area of interest, especially for third-party logistics providers (3PLs). The recent increase of urban population is directly related to the increase request of goods in urban areas, and consequently to the growth of the urban freight transport and CO2 emissions. For these reasons, national and local institutions carried out regulations and incentives to reduce urban pollution and promote zero-emission vehicles. In particular, daily tickets to access to city centers is a common regulation applied to reduce freight transport. This paper presents a new SPD model that compares Eclectic Vehicles (EVs) and Fossil Fuel Vehicles (FFVs) considering economic savings and CO2 emissions, for parcel delivery from a single distribution center to a set of delivery point located inside and/or outside an urban area. Limitations as the daily ticket, the fuel cost, the battery duration are considered to provide 3PLs an innovative model to evaluate both the economic convenience and the environmental impact of its vehicles fleet. Through an explanatory study, economic considerations are carried out, related to the length of the route, the daily ticket cost, and the fuel cost to evaluate and to assess the different transportation options. It demonstrates that EVs are more convenient in terms of economic savings when the route (urban distances) and the daily ticket cost increase.
2020
Pilati, F.; Zennaro, I.; Battini, D.; Persona, A.
The Sustainable Parcel Delivery (SPD) Problem: Economic and Environmental Considerations for 3PLs / Pilati, F.; Zennaro, I.; Battini, D.; Persona, A.. - In: IEEE ACCESS. - ISSN 2169-3536. - 8:(2020), pp. 71880-71892. [10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2987380]
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
parcel delivery.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipologia: Versione editoriale (Publisher’s layout)
Licenza: Creative commons
Dimensione 2.3 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
2.3 MB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11572/286316
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 20
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 16
social impact