Advertisement

Networks and Spatial Economics

, Volume 12, Issue 1, pp 147–165 | Cite as

Dual Toll Pricing for Hazardous Materials Transport with Linear Delay

  • Jiashan Wang
  • Yingying Kang
  • Changhyun Kwon
  • Rajan Batta
Article

Abstract

In this paper, we propose a dual toll pricing method to mitigate risk of hazardous materials (hazmat) transportation. We aim to simultaneously control both regular and hazmat vehicles to reduce the risk. In our model, we incorporate a new risk measure to consider duration-population-frequency of hazmat exposure. We first formulate the model as a Mathematical Program with Equilibrium Constraints (MPEC). Then we decompose the MPEC formulation into first-stage and second-stage problems. Separate methods are developed to solve each stage. A numerical example is provided and possible extensions are discussed.

Keywords

Hazardous materials Toll pricing Congestion Risk 

References

  1. Alp E (1995) Risk-based transportation planning practice: overall methodology and a case example. Inf Syst Oper Res 33(1):4–19Google Scholar
  2. Arnott R, Small K (1994) The economics of traffic congestion. Am Sci 20(2):123–127Google Scholar
  3. Bai L, Hearn DW, Lawphongpanich S (2006) Relaxed toll sets for congestion pricing problems. In: Lawphongpanich S, Hearn DW, Smith MJ (eds) Mathematical and computational models for congestion charging. SpringerGoogle Scholar
  4. Bard JF (2006). Practical bilevel optimization: algorithms and applications (nonconvex optimization and its applications). Springer-Verlag New York, Inc, Secaucus, NJ, USAGoogle Scholar
  5. Bergendorff P, Hearn D, Ramana M (1997) Congestion toll pricing of traffic networks. In: Pardalos PM, Hearn DW, Hager WW (eds) Network optimization, Springer, pp 51–71Google Scholar
  6. Cekyay B, Verter V (2010) Transportation of hazardous materials in urban areas. Working paper, McGill UniversityGoogle Scholar
  7. Dial RB (1999) Minimal-revenue congestion pricing part i: a fast algorithm for the single-origin case. Transp Res, Part B: Methodol 33(3):189–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dial RB (2000) Minimal-revenue congestion pricing part ii: an efficient algorithm for the general case. Transp Res, Part B: Methodol 34(8):645–665CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Erkut E, Ingolfsson A (2000) Catastrophe avoidance models for hazardous materials route planning. Transp Sci 34(2):165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Erkut E, Alp O (2007) Designing a road network for hazardous materials shipments. Comput Oper Res 34(5):1389–1405CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Erkut E, Gzara F (2008) Solving the hazmat transport network design problem. Comput Oper Res 35(7):2234–2247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Falk JE, Soland RM (1969) An algorithm for separable nonconvex programming problems. Manage Sci 15(9):550–569CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fisk CS, Boyce DE (1983) Alternative variational inequality formulations of the network equilibrium-travel choice problem. Transport Sci 17(4):454–463CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fletcher R (1993) Resolving degeneracy in quadratic programming. Ann Oper Res 46(2):307–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Florian M, Hearn D (1995) Network equilibrium models and algorithms. Handb Oper Res Manag Sci 8:485–550CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gallamore R, Barkan C, Bowditch Jr B, Brinson J, Bronzini M, Bugg O, Burke C, Chapman E, Egan T, Garber NJ, Kelley P, Moreland M, Morrissette M, Veerman G, Menzies Jr TR (2005) Cooperative research for hazardous materials transportation: defining the need, converging on solutions. Special report 283, Transportation Research BoardGoogle Scholar
  17. Hearn D, Ramana M (1998) Solving congestion toll pricing models. In: Marcotte P, Nguyen S (eds) Equilibrium and advanced transportation modeling. Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp 109–124Google Scholar
  18. Hearn DW, Yildirim MB (2002) A toll pricing framework for traffic assignment problems with elastic demand. Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp 135–145Google Scholar
  19. Johansson-Stenman O, Sterner T (1998) What is the scope for environmental road pricing? Gothenburg U: Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, Mass., pp 150–170Google Scholar
  20. Kara B, Verter V (2004) Designing a road network for hazardous materials transportation. Transport Sci 38(2):188–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Luo Z-Q, Pang J-S, Ralph D (1996) Mathematical programs with equilibrium constraints. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge; New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Marcotte P, Mercier A, Savard G, Verter V (2009) Toll policies for mitigating hazardous materials transport risk. Transport Sci 43(2):228–243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. May AD, Milne DS (2000) Effects of alternative road pricing systems on network performance. Transp Res, Part A Policy Pract 34(6):407–436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. More J, Wright S (1993) Optimization software guide. Society for Industrial MathematicsGoogle Scholar
  25. Movassaghi K, Daly J, Dinh-Zarr T, Herbel S, Joavanis P, Porter L, Robertson H, Songer T, Sweatman P, Tay R, Welch T, Menzies Jr T (2007) Building the road safety profession in the public sector. Special report 289, Transportation Research BoardGoogle Scholar
  26. Outrata J, Kocvara M, Zowe J, (1998) Nonsmooth approach to optimization problems with equilibrium constraints. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  27. ReVelle C, Cohon J, Shobrys D (1991) Simultaneous siting and routing in the disposal of hazardous wastes. Transp Sci 25(2):138–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Saccomanno F, Chan A (1985) Economic evaluation of routing strategies for hazardous road shipments. Transp Res Rec 1020:12–18Google Scholar
  29. Schaible S (1981) Quasiconvex, pseudoconvex, and strictly pseudoconvex quadratic functions. J Optim Theory Appl 35(3):303–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Sivakumar R, Batta R, Karwan M (1993) Establishing credible risk criteria for transporting extremely dangerous hazardous materials. In: Saccomanno F, Cassidy K (eds) Transportation of dangerous goods: assessing the risks. Institute for Risk Research, University of Waterloo, Canada, pp 335–342Google Scholar
  31. Verhoef E (2002) Second-best congestion pricing in general static transportation networks with elastic demands. Reg Sci Urban Econ 32(3):281–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Verter V, Kara BY (2008) A path-based approach for hazmat transport network design. Manage Sci 54(1):29–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Yan H, Lam WHK (1996) Optimal road tolls under conditions of queueing and congestion. Transp Res, Part A Policy Pract 30(5):319–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Yildirim MB, Hearn DW (2005) A first best toll pricing framework for variable demand traffic assignment problems. Transp Res, Part B: Methodol 39(8):659–678CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Yin Y (2002) Multiobjective bilevel optimization for transportation planning and management problems. J Adv Transp 36(1):93–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Yin Y, Lawphongpanich S (2006) Internalizing emission externality on road networks. Transp Res, Part D Transp Environ 11(4):292–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jiashan Wang
    • 1
  • Yingying Kang
    • 1
  • Changhyun Kwon
    • 1
  • Rajan Batta
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering, University at BuffaloThe State University of New YorkBuffaloUSA

Personalised recommendations