Applying 3D-eco routing model to reduce environmental footprint of road transports in Addis Ababa City

Environmental Systems Research

Table 6 Eco routes CO₂ saving potential for each scenario cases (1–3) from its alternative routes parameter results

Routing scenario	Vehicle weight range and cases	% CO₂ emission savings from fast	% CO₂ emission savings from short	Shortest route		Fastest route		Eco route
Routing scenario	Vehicle weight range and cases	% CO₂ emission savings from fast	% CO₂ emission savings from short	CO₂ [kg]	Cost [$]	CO₂ [kg]	Cost [$]	CO₂ [kg]	Cost [$]
Scenario 1	3.5–7.5 ton (C1)	39.78	35.88	743.962	0.92	792.16	0.98	477.02	0.59
	3.5–7.5 ton (C2)	35.43	29.96	27,991.40	34.87	30,364.87	37.83	19,604.46	24.42
	3.5–7.5 ton (C3)	27.08	23.93	17,689.08	22.04	18,451.50	22.99	13,454.62	16.76
Scenario 2	7.5–16 ton (C1)	10.73	13.89	1321.69	1.64	1274.80	1.58	1138.00	1.41
	7.5–16 ton (C2)	13.20	11.22	41,722.13	51.98	42,671.03	53.16	37,037.95	46.15
	7.5–16 ton (C3)	8.96	9.81	27,962.18	34.84	27,700.64	34.51	25,216.77	31.42
Scenario 3	16–32 ton (C1)	19.48	16.27	2309.35	2.87	2401.62	2.99	1933.61	2.40
	16–32 ton (C2)	12.79	19.32	47,276.36	58.90	43,735.45	54.49	38,139.80	47.25
	16–32 ton (C3)	8.39	12.61	21,284.08	26.52	20,303.11	25.29	18,599.39	23.17