Papers Related to Cost-Environment Tradeoffs
in
Location and Transportation of Solid and
Hazardous Waste
Wyman,
Max M. and Michael Kuby. 1996. Proactive Optimization: A Multiobjective
Technology Location Model for Designing Toxic Waste Systems. Location Science 3:167–185. (This
paper compares solar and incinerator technologies for breaking down toxic waste
in the Phoenix area. The solar technology uses photons of certain wavelengths
to cleave the chemical bonds in toxic waste, rather than the heat from solar
energy. The model optimized the location of facilities and transportation of
waste according to three objectives: cost (processing and transport), risk
(processing and transport), and disequity. We found that the solar technology
can reduce cost, risk, and disequity compared with incinerators, and that these
benefits may not have been obvious until the solar technology was simulated in
a dense urban setting.
Wyman,
Max M. and Michael Kuby. 1995. Turning the Tables: Using Location Science to
Specify Technology Rather Than Using Technology to Constrain Location. INFOR–The Canadian Journal of Operational
Research and Information Processing 33:118–122. (This is a commentary
advocating the importance of simultaneous optimization of technology choice and
spatial networks. It argues that new technology cannot be adequately studied
just based on its laboratory performance. One needs to model how it will
perform in a spatial setting to fully understand its potential costs and
benefits.)
Rahman,
Mushtaq and Michael Kuby. 1995. A Multiobjective Model for Locating Solid
Waste Transfer Facilities Using an Empirical Distance-Based Opposition
Function. INFOR–The Canadian Journal
of Operational Research and Information Processing 33:34–49. (This paper
incorporates the distance-decay curves described in the 1992 paper below into a
multiobjective model for locating solid waste transfer stations for studying
the tradeoffs between minimizing costs and minimizing public opposition.)
Rahman,
Mushtaq, A. Essam Radwan, Jonathan Upchurch, and Michael Kuby. 1992. Modeling
Spatial Impacts of Siting a NIMBY Facility. Transportation Research Record 1359:133–140. (This paper reports
on a survey of public attitudes towards proposed solid waste transfer stations
in Phoenix, and fits logit models to the results to estimate a distance-decay
relationship for public opposition to the facilities.
Kuby,
Michael J. 1987. Programming Models for Facility Dispersion: the p-Dispersion
and Maxisum Dispersion Problems. Geographical
Analysis 19:315–329. (The p-dispersion problem aims to maximize the
minimum separation distance among a set of facilities. It is one way to define
the optimal “spreading out” of a set of facilities. This paper was the first
mixed-integer formulation of the discrete version of this problem. Although it
has obvious applications to equity situations or hazardous facilities that pose
a chain-reaction risk to each other, I initially developed this model to force
central places to spread out in my dissertation on modeling central place
theory.