Quote:
Originally Posted by s211
I think that most people would agree that the idea of pneumatic garbage removal should reside in the same category as the jet packs we were promised. I hear that may have already been deep-sixed?
|
i'm not sure this one ever got past the "we might as well use jet packs" simile/preconception which is too bad.
i don't know about the initial construction costs - i have heard them estimated from 16 million to 92 million which means there are no real numbers to analyze and make an informed decision.
in making that analysis, from an operational cost perspective a garbage truck is only 100% efficient on it's use of equipment and manpower for the short trip at the end of its route when it's on its way to the dump. at the beginning of it's route, that same garbage truck is 0% efficient - it start's its route running around completely empty.
the system that was proposed would have collected the garbage at a central location from which the truck leaves at 100% efficient and with less labour (it only needs a driver, not a driver plus one or two labourers per truck to pick up and empty cans all day long). that's the "system" that was proposed - some initial capital costs and some long-term operational savings forever as a result. in addition, i'm not sure what "price" was placed on not having to construct garbage areas and roads capable of servicing them or the value placed on not having to have garbage trucks running through a neighborhood and where the "back units" are potentially as attractive as the "front units".