2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2018.10.055
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Prioritizing the gaseous alternatives for the road transport sector of Pakistan: A multi criteria decision making analysis

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 23 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“… Author(s) and year Research focus GDM Parameter type SA CA Method(s) Country (Main) criteria Sub-criteria Alt. Barbosa et al (2017) PT indicator evaluation Yes Deterministic No No AHP Brazil 10 30 Nassereddine and Eskandari (2017) PT system evaluation Yes Deterministic Yes No AHP, PROMETHEE Iran 6 5 Awasthi et al (2018) Urban mobility project evaluation Yes Fuzzy Yes No TOPSIS, VIKOR, GRA Luxemburg 4 31 3 Barfod (2018) Transport project appraisal No Deterministic No No SMARTER Denmark 3 8 4 Güner (2018) Bus route assessment Yes Deterministic No Yes AHP, TOPSIS Turkey 2 9 10 Lee (2018) Advanced PT mode evaluation Yes Deterministic No No AHP Korea 4 13 3 Ullah et al (2018) Transp. fuel technology selection No Deterministic Yes No AHP …”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“… Author(s) and year Research focus GDM Parameter type SA CA Method(s) Country (Main) criteria Sub-criteria Alt. Barbosa et al (2017) PT indicator evaluation Yes Deterministic No No AHP Brazil 10 30 Nassereddine and Eskandari (2017) PT system evaluation Yes Deterministic Yes No AHP, PROMETHEE Iran 6 5 Awasthi et al (2018) Urban mobility project evaluation Yes Fuzzy Yes No TOPSIS, VIKOR, GRA Luxemburg 4 31 3 Barfod (2018) Transport project appraisal No Deterministic No No SMARTER Denmark 3 8 4 Güner (2018) Bus route assessment Yes Deterministic No Yes AHP, TOPSIS Turkey 2 9 10 Lee (2018) Advanced PT mode evaluation Yes Deterministic No No AHP Korea 4 13 3 Ullah et al (2018) Transp. fuel technology selection No Deterministic Yes No AHP …”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“… Lee (2018) investigated appropriate advanced public transport modes for specific city types. Ullah et al (2018) appraised three gaseous alternatives for the road transport sector from aspects in the context of sustainable development. Li et al (2019) prioritized clean-energy vehicle alternatives by taking into account electricity, gas, ethanol, and methanol propulsions.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A stabilization unit is also installed to stabilize the condensate, and heavy liquids are removed from the stream and converted into fluid fuel. The (Thimm and Sullivan, 2004;Getzinger et al, 2015;Ullah et al, 2018). red solid line region in Figure 2 indicates the separation section of the LPG production from natural gas.…”
Section: Separation Sectionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…LPG was introduced in the market as an auto gas due to its sole usage in automobiles. Almost 10 companies are operating in Pakistan for the production of LPG while more than 80 companies are providing their services for its marketing purposes (Ullah et al, 2018).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We also referred to a similar study that was done for photovoltaic energy [15], which included specific criteria for this energy source. More recently, other studies have investigated multi-criteria decision making in the energy sector (Ullah et al [16]; Malkawi et al [17]; Saracoglu et al [18]; Otay and Jaller [19]; Emeksiz and Demirci [20]; Ayodele et al [21]; Ali et al [22]; Gigović et al [23]).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%