نوع مقاله : مقالات پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 گروه بهداشت محیط، دانشکده بهداشت و ایمنی دانشگاه علوم پزشکی شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران

2 گروه بهداشت محیط، دانشکده بهداشت و ایمنی، دانشگاه علوم پزشکی شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران

چکیده

زمینه و هدف : پایداری محیط زیست یک الزام برای سیستم های حمل و نقل شهری مدرن است. انتخاب گزینه ی مناسب حمل و نقل عمـومی در هر سیستم شهری نه تنها منجر به توسعه ی پایدار حمـل و نقل شهری میگردد، بلکه همچنین فرآینـد برنامـه ریزی را با خصوصیات افراد آن جامعه تطبیـق داده و ســبب تشــویق افــراد بــه اســتفاده از آن و در نتیجــه افزایش بهره وری آن می گردد. از این رو هدف از انجام پژوهش حاضر ارزیابی اثرات زیست محیطی توسعه سیستم حمل و نقل عمومی برقی در شهر تهران می باشد.
مواد و روش ها: در این مطالعه پس از اخذ داده های مستند و منتشر شده شامل (کتب ، مقالات حمل و نقلی و اخذ آمارهای حمل و نقل شهر تهران از شرکت های اتوبوس رانی و سازمان حمل و نقل و ترافیک شهرداری)، از روش AHP-TOPSSIS برای انتخاب بهترین گزینه جهت توسعه حمل و نقل عمومی در شهر تهران بهره گرفته شده است.
یافته ها: نتایج نشان داد که گزینه اجرای سیستم حمل و نقل برقی با سرمایه گزاری بخش خصوصی و اعطای تسهیلات دولتی (0.5798)، استفاده از سیستم حمل و نقل برقی در هسته مرکزی شهر (0.3972)، تبدیل BRT ها به برقی (0.2886) و گزینه عدم اجرا (0.2672) به ترتیب بالاترین و پایین ترین اولویت را در بین روش های توسعه سیستم حمل و نقل عمومی برقی شهر تهران داشته اند.
نتیجه گیری: برای نیل به هدف حذف استفاده از سوخت های فسیلی در آینده ای نه چندان دور برای جلوگیری از تغییرات آب و هوایی و حذف آلودگی های محیطی حاصل از سوخت های فسیلی، سیستم حمل و نقل شهری تهران باید در جهت حذف سوخت های فسیلی، توسعه و تبدیل ناوگان خود به سیستم های برقی روی آورد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Environmental Impact Assessment of Electric Public Transportation System Development in Tehran city

نویسندگان [English]

  • Saeed Motesaddi Zarandi 1
  • Rasul Nasiri 2
  • mahtab ahmadi 2

1 Department of Environmental Health, School of Health and Safety, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

2 Department of Environmental Health, School of Health and Safety, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

چکیده [English]

Background and purpose: The environmental sustainability is a requirement for modern urban transportation systems. Selecting the appropriate option for the public transport in any urban system does not lead only to the sustainable urban transportation development, but will adapt planning process to its people's characteristics and encourage the people to use it by increasing its productivity. Therefore, this study aims to assess the environmental effect of developing an electric public transport system in Tehran.
Materials and Methods: In this study, after obtaining the documented and published data, including (books, transportation articles, and obtaining transportation statistics of Tehran from the bus companies and Municipal Transportation and Traffic Organization), AHP-TOPSSIS method was used to select the best option for developing the public transportation in Tehran.
Results: The results showed that the option of implementing an electric transportation system with the private sector investment and government facilities (0.5798), using the electric transport systems in city center (0.3972), converting BRTs to electricity (0.2886), and non - implementation option (0.2672), respectively, had the highest and lowest priority among the development methods of public transport systems in Tehran.
Conclusions: To eliminate the use of fossil fuels in near distant future to prevent the climate change and eliminate environmental pollution from fossil fuels, Tehran's urban transportation system should be implemented to eliminate the fossil fuels, develop and transform its fleet into the electrical systems

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Keywords: Environmental Impact Assessment
  • Electric Public Transport
  • AHP-TOPSIS
  • Tehran
  1.  Mikulčić H, Duić N, Dewil R. Environmental management as a pillar for sustainable development. Journal of Environmental Management. 2017;203:867-71.
  2.  Mottaghi A GA, Mohammadi Z. Analysis of the role of local governments in sustainable urban development (case study; Iranian cities. Journal of New Attitudes in Human Geography. 2019;11(4):349-25.
  3. Muñoz-Villamizar A, Santos J, Montoya-Torres JR, Velázquez-Martínez JC. Measuring environmental performance of urban freight transport systems: A case study. Sustainable Cities and Society. 2020;52:101844.
  4. Raza SA, Shah N, Sharif A. Time frequency relationship between energy consumption, economic growth and environmental degradation in the United States: Evidence from transportation sector. Energy. 2019;173:706-20.
  5.  Abas AP, Yong J, Mahlia TMI, Hannan M. Techno-economic analysis and environmental impact of electric vehicle. IEEE Access. 2019;7:98565-78.
  6.  Fattah A, Morshed SR. Assessing the sustainability of transportation system in a developing city through estimating CO2 emissions and bio-capacity for vehicular activities. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives. 2021;10:100361.
  7. Gallet M, Massier T, Hamacher T. Estimation of the energy demand of electric buses based on real-world data for large-scale public transport networks. Applied Energy. 2018;230:344-56.
  8.  Danaie H GF. examining the effect of users ' perceptions and satisfaction of the public transport system on their loyalty ( studied : region 11 tehran ). New Applied Studies in Management,Economics and Accounting. 2019;16.
  9. Hrelja R, Khan J, Pettersson F. How to create efficient public transport systems? A systematic review of critical problems and approaches for addressing the problems. Transport Policy. 2019.
  10. 10. A M. Modeling and Evaluation of Factors Affecting Public Transportation System User Satisfaction (Case Study: Tehran Metro and BRT). Journal of Road Science. 2021;17.
  11. 11. Holmberg K, Erdemir A. The impact of tribology on energy use and CO2 emission globally and in combustion engine and electric cars. Tribology International. 2019;135:389-96.
  12. 12. Lemonde C, Arsenio E, Henriques R. Public transportation multimodality in the City of Lisbon. Transportation research procedia. 2021;58:75-82.
  13. 13. Desta M, Lee T, Wu H. Life cycle energy consumption and environmental assessment for utilizing biofuels in the development of a sustainable transportation system in Ethiopia. Energy Conversion and Management: X. 2022;13:100144.
  14. 14. Illgen S, Höck M. Electric vehicles in car sharing networks – Challenges and simulation model analysis. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment. 2018;63:377-87.
  15. Lemme RFF, Arruda EF, Bahiense L. Optimization model to assess electric vehicles as an alternative for fleet composition in station-based car sharing systems. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment. 2019;67:173-96.
  16. Li Y, Zhong Z, Zhang K, Zheng T. A car-following model for electric vehicle traffic flow based on optimal energy consumption. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications. 2019;533:122022.
  17. Xylia M, Silveira S. The role of charging technologies in upscaling the use of electric buses in public transport: Experiences from demonstration projects. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice. 2018;118:399-415.
  18. Ahmadi P. Environmental impacts and behavioral drivers of deep decarbonization for transportation through electric vehicles. Journal of cleaner production. 2019;225:1209-19.
  19. Gabsalikhova L, Sadygova G, Almetova Z. Activities to convert the public transport fleet to electric buses. Transportation Research Procedia. 2018;36:669-75.
  20. Shirazi H. Review of Public Transportation Policies in Tehran, Necessity of an Integrated Policy Package. Strategic Studies of public policy. 2020;10(37):336-58.
  21. Fallah E. Investigating barriers and problems facing sustainable transportation in Tehran. Conference on Sustainable Urban Development; University of Tehran2011.
  22. Gheitasi Vand F SF, Hoseinpour D. designing a general policy framework with a network governance approach ; study : public transport in tehran. Public policy. 2021;6:89-113.
  23. Conti V, Orchi S, Valentini MP, Nigro M, Calò R. Design and evaluation of electric solutions for public transport. Transportation Research Procedia. 2017;27:117-24.
  24. Zhang X, Nie S, He M, Wang J. Charging system analysis, energy consumption, and carbon dioxide emissions of battery electric buses in Beijing. Case Studies in Thermal Engineering. 2021;26:101197.
  25. Hosseini S, Sarder MD. Development of a Bayesian network model for optimal site selection of electric vehicle charging station. International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems. 2019;105:110-22.
  26. Jabari E SS. A new method for solving public transportation problem using linear programming and combined PS-ACO metaheuristic algorithm. Transportation Engineering. 2017;20.
  27. E{Esmaeili Alavijeh sA, Elham, Karimi S, Alavipoor F. Vulnerability Assessment in Urban Areas against Flood with Fuzzy Logic (case study: Tehran District 22). Journal of Environmental Science and Technology. 2020;22(3):349-61.
  28. Organization TMIaCT. TehranStatisticalYearBook-98. 2018;474.
  29. Gharehbakhsh H, Mollaei M, Taghavi L. Interactions of Tehran Urban Management Indices and Environmental Performance Indices (EPI). Human & Environment. 2020;18(1):35-48.
  30. Faridi S, Niazi S, Yousefian F, Azimi F, Pasalari H, Momeniha F, et al. Spatial homogeneity and heterogeneity of ambient air pollutants in Tehran. Science of The Total Environment. 2019;697:134123.
  31. Jafari AJ, Delikhoon M, Rastani MJ, Baghani AN, Sorooshian A, Rohani-Rasaf M, et al. Characteristics of gaseous and particulate air pollutants at four different urban hotspots in Tehran, Iran. Sustainable Cities and Society. 2021;70:102907.
  32. MOTESADDI ZS, Nasiri R. Spatio-temporal Analysis of PM2. 5 Pollutant in Tehran Metropolis During the Years 2014-2017. 2020.
  33. Duarte CG, Sánchez LE. Addressing significant impacts coherently in environmental impact statements. Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 2020;82:106373.
  34. Mareddy AR. Conceptual facets of EIA. In: Mareddy AR, editor. Environmental Impact Assessment: Butterworth-Heinemann; 2017. p. 1-29.
  35. Nouri J, Nourbakhsh Z, Nourbakhsh M, Tahmasbpour A, editors. Managing Environmental Aspects and Impacts of Pulp and Paper Industries using Analytical Hierarchy Process ( AHP ).
  36. Omidvari M, Ghandehari M. A pattern of Environmental System Assessment in Urban Management by AHP Method. Journal of Environmental Science and Technology. 2019;21(7):207-19.
  37. Samari Jahromi H, Hossein Zade Asl H. Comparing and ranking methods for monitoring NO2 in the air by using Analytical Hierarchy Process Model. Human & Environment. 2012;10(22):17-26.
  38. Azar A MA. AHP is a new technique for group decision making. Management Knowledge Quarterly. 1373;11.
  39. Mehri A, Salmanmahiny A. A review of rural land use planning models. Human & Environment. 2017;15(1):71-92.
  40. Feyzi A, Hashemi T, Hashemi A. The Fuzzy Multiple Attribute Decision Making Model for Performance Evaluation of Employees in Environmental Offices. Human & Environment. 2017;15(3):13-30.
  41. Amini S. The combined method of AHP and TOPSIS: Sanaye20.ir; 2021 [
  42. Wu YA, Ng AW, Yu Z, Huang J, Meng K, Dong ZY. A review of evolutionary policy incentives for sustainable development of electric vehicles in China: Strategic implications. Energy Policy. 2021;148:111983.
  43. Hoseini T MM. Unpolluted urban logistics;Use of electric vehicles in the distribution chain and distribution of goods and urban traffic. Scientific Quarterly of Traffic Management Studies. 1395(41):91-114.
  44. Rasti-Barzoki M, Moon I. A game theoretic approach for analyzing electric and gasoline-based vehicles’ competition in a supply chain under government sustainable strategies: A case study of South Korea. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2021;146:111139.
  45. Mohamed M, Ferguson M, Kanaroglou P. What hinders adoption of the electric bus in Canadian transit? Perspectives of transit providers. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment. 2018;64:134-49.
  46. Soltani-Sobh A, Heaslip K, Stevanovic A, Bosworth R, Radivojevic D. Analysis of the Electric Vehicles Adoption over the United States. Transportation Research Procedia. 2017;22:203-12.
  47. Jung J, Yeo S, Lee Y, Moon S, Lee D-J. Factors affecting consumers’ preferences for electric vehicle: A Korean case. Research in Transportation Business & Management. 2021:100666.
  48. Moradi E MS. Factors affecting the willingness of consumers to pay for electric vehicles in the country. Journal of Energy Planning and Policy Research. 2020;6(1):195-227.
  49. Schlüter J, Weyer J. Car sharing as a means to raise acceptance of electric vehicles: An empirical study on regime change in automobility. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour. 2019;60:185-201.
  50. Shi X, Wang X, Yang J, Sun Z. Electric vehicle transformation in Beijing and the comparative eco-environmental impacts: A case study of electric and gasoline powered taxis. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2016;137:449-60.
  51. Pardo-Ferreira MdC, Rubio-Romero JC, Galindo-Reyes FC, Lopez-Arquillos A. Work-related road safety: The impact of the low noise levels produced by electric vehicles according to experienced drivers. Safety Science. 2020;121:580-8.
  52. Uslu T, Kaya O. Location and capacity decisions for electric bus charging stations considering waiting times. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment. 2021;90:102645.
  53. Lin Y, Zhang K, Shen Z-JM, Ye B, Miao L. Multistage large-scale charging station planning for electric buses considering transportation network and power grid. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies. 2019;107:423-43.
  54. Miao Q, Welch EW, Sriraj PS. Extreme weather, public transport ridership and moderating effect of bus stop shelters. Journal of Transport Geography. 2019;74:125-33.
  55. Wu J, Liao H. Weather, travel mode choice, and impacts on subway ridership in Beijing. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice. 2020;135:264-79.