Full metadata record
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | Tzeng, GH | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Lin, CW | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Opricovic, S | en_US |
dc.date.accessioned | 2014-12-08T15:18:49Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2014-12-08T15:18:49Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2005-07-01 | en_US |
dc.identifier.issn | 0301-4215 | en_US |
dc.identifier.uri | http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2003.12.014 | en_US |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/11536/13527 | - |
dc.description.abstract | The technological development of buses with new alternative fuels is considered in this paper. Several types of fuels are considered as alternative-fuel modes, i.e., electricity, fuel cell (hydrogen), and methanol. Electric vehicles may be considered the alternative-fuel vehicles with the lowest air pollution. Hybrid electric vehicles provide an alternate mode, at least for the period of improving the technology of electric vehicles. A hybrid electric vehicle is defined as a vehicle with the conventional internal combustion engine and an electric motor as its major sources of power. Experts from different decision-making groups performed the multiple attribute evaluation of alternative vehicles. AHP is applied to determine the relative weights of evaluation criteria. TOPSIS and VIKOR are compared and applied to determine the best compromise alternative fuel mode. The result shows that the hybrid electric bus is the most suitable substitute bus for Taiwan urban areas in the short and median term. But, if the cruising distance of the electric bus extends to an acceptable range, the pure electric bus could be the best alternative. (c) 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. | en_US |
dc.language.iso | en_US | en_US |
dc.subject | alternative fuel | en_US |
dc.subject | electric bus | en_US |
dc.subject | public transportation | en_US |
dc.subject | multi-criteria analysis | en_US |
dc.subject | compromise solution | en_US |
dc.subject | TOPSIS | en_US |
dc.subject | VIKOR | en_US |
dc.title | Multi-criteria analysis of alternative-fuel buses for public transportation | en_US |
dc.type | Article | en_US |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1016/j.enpol.2003.12.014 | en_US |
dc.identifier.journal | ENERGY POLICY | en_US |
dc.citation.volume | 33 | en_US |
dc.citation.issue | 11 | en_US |
dc.citation.spage | 1373 | en_US |
dc.citation.epage | 1383 | en_US |
dc.contributor.department | 運輸與物流管理系 註:原交通所+運管所 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.department | Department of Transportation and Logistics Management | en_US |
dc.identifier.wosnumber | WOS:000228628100002 | - |
dc.citation.woscount | 160 | - |
Appears in Collections: | Articles |
Files in This Item:
If it is a zip file, please download the file and unzip it, then open index.html in a browser to view the full text content.