Multi-Depot Green Vehicle Routing Problem to Minimize Carbon Emissions
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The paper “Ant Colony Algorithm for A Multi-Depot Green Vehicle Routing Problem” was submitted for publication to the journal “Sustainability” [sustainability-760208]. It deals specifically with a solution to the Multi-Depot Green Vehicle Routing Problem (MDGVRP). The paper is interesting, the problem is clearly highlighted, and the solution is correctly designed.
This paper has a huge deal about being suitable for this journal. It is essentially more dealing with operational research than with sustainable transport. In order to lie within the province of “Sustainability”, at least one point should be added, regarding the addiction of a further constraint to the problem formulation, taking care of the sustainability of the solution calculated in terms of impacts. Constraint (8) calculates fuel consumption, but what is for instance the quantity of the emissions possibly spared? How is it possible to calculate it? What about its effects? Please refer to these papers for further details: Miao Fu, J. Andrew Kelly, J. Peter Clinch. Estimating annual average daily traffic and transport emissions for a national road network: A bottom-up methodology for both nationally-aggregated and spatially-disaggregated results. Journal of Transport Geography, Volume 58, January 2017, Pages 186-195. A. Can, P. Aumond. Estimation of road traffic noise emissions: The influence of speed and acceleration. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, Volume 58, January 2018, Pages 155-171. Silvio Nocera, Cayetano Ruiz-Alarcón-Quintero, Federico Cavallaro. Assessing carbon emissions from road transport through traffic flow estimators. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, Volume 95, October 2018, Pages 125-148
The authors are encouraged to deeply take this into account before resubmitting to this journal
Author Response
Please see attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The work is well structured although there are typos and spelling mistakes.
1) It is considered appropriate to turn rows 175-189 into a table
2) a greater description of the values in table 1 is required
3) it is requested to insert a greater discussion of the results obtained by improving the paragraph of the conclusions
Author Response
Please see attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The paper proposes two algorithms, Two-stage Ant Colony System (TSACS) Algorithm and Partition Based Algorithm (PBA) to solve a Multi-Depot Green Vehicle Routing Problem (MDGVRP).
The paper approaches a quite interesting research question, but its original aspects should be highlighted by authors. The methodology is sufficiently explained. The results of numerical experiment seem adequate and convincing. The discussion is lacking. The conclusions are properly supported.
- “Introduction” section: The motivation and scope of the study should be better and extensively specified. Please, explain which gaps in the current literatures you want to address in your research, if any.
- “Literature” section: The literature review should not be a mere descriptive list of the available research works. It should provide the readers the knowledge and the ideas that have been established on the specific topic, highlighting strengths and weaknesses. Please, explore the past works with more detail and critical sense.
- “Problem Description and Formulation” section: Please, indicate clearly the original aspects of the proposed methodology.
- It is more than appropriate to integrate a discussion section in the article, before section 6. This section should address a general and critical evaluation of each of the proposed algorithms, stressing on its advantages and limitations, with a performance and accuracy comparison.
- The implications of this work should be shown much more explicitly.
Author Response
Please see attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The authors have considered all the points that I had highlighted in the new version submitted to this journal. The result is an interesting and innovative paper, that is ready for publication according to my opinion
Reviewer 3 Report
All my comments are adequately addressed by the authors.
