Optimal location of mass logistics centers: improving transport efficiency for circular material flows
Mats Janné & Niki Matinrad
Abstract
• Mass logistics centers (MLCs) are hubs used to upscale and sort mass materials. • A mixed-integer linear programming model for optimal location of MLCs is developed. • Evaluation of the model using experimental data based on a real development project. • Showing the possibility of improving transport efficiency by optimized MLC location. • Transport efficiency, space utilization, and circularity should be balanced. Mass logistics centers (MLCs) are lately facing increasing recognition for their potential to improve transport efficiency in soil and rock material flows and to support circular mass systems, resulting in reduced CO 2 emissions. Despite this, decisions about where to locate MLCs are often made without any systematic analysis and instead are done ad hoc or, at times, based on opinions of experts. This study addresses that gap by proposing an optimization model to determine the optimal location for an MLC within a mass logistics system, where all materials are routed through one or several MLCs. We test the model using experimental data generated based on a real development project in Sweden. Furthermore, we perform a sensitivity analysis on several parameters to investigate their effect on the performance of the proposed model. The results show that a close relationship between transport efficiency, circularity and upscaling rate, transport capacity, and need for space at MLCs exists – the higher the circularity rate, the better the transport efficiency with reduced CO 2 emissions. They also indicate the necessity of finding the right balance between these factors in a given system rather than solely focusing on transport efficiency, to ensure the applicability of the solutions in the real-life system. This study, in a broad way, contributes to understanding how MLCs can reduce the environmental impact of mass transport and supports more strategic planning in infrastructure development.
Evidence weight
Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40
| F · citation impact | 0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20 |
| M · momentum | 0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07 |
| V · venue signal | 0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03 |
| R · text relevance † | 0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20 |
† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.