4.7 Article

Supporting an integrated transportation infrastructure and public space design: A coupled simulation method for evaluating traffic pollution and microclimate

期刊

SUSTAINABLE CITIES AND SOCIETY
卷 52, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.scs.2019.101796

关键词

Multiscale simulation; Urban design; Traffic pollution; Microclimate simulation; Thermal comfort; Agent-based model

资金

  1. UCAS Joint PhD Training Program scholarship [158]
  2. Dame Julia Higgins Engineering Postdoc Collaborative Research Fund
  3. EPSRC [EP/N032861/1] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Traditional urban and transport infrastructure planning that emphasized motorized transport has fractured public space systems and worsened environmental quality, leading to a decrease in active travel. A novel multiscale simulation method for supporting an integrated transportation infrastructure and public space design is presented in this paper. This method couples a mesoscale agent-based traffic prediction model, traffic-related emission calculation, microclimate simulations, and human thermal comfort assessment. In addition, the effects of five urban design strategies on traffic pollution and pedestrian level microclimate are evaluated (i.e., a twofold evaluation). A case study in Beijing, China, is presented utilizing the proposed urban modeling-design framework to support the assessment of a series of transport infrastructure and public space scenarios, including the Baseline scenario, a System-Internal Integration scenario, and two External Integration scenarios. The results indicate that the most effective way of achieving an environmentally- and pedestrian- friendly urban design is to concentrate on both the integration of transport infrastructure and public space to mitigate system externalities (e.g., air pollution and heat exhaustion). It also demonstrates that the integrated blue-green approach is a promising way of improving local air quality, micro-climatic conditions, and human comfort.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据