Pneumatic vs. door-to-door waste collection systems in existing urban areas: A comparison of economic performance

N. Teerioja, K. Moliis (Corresponding Author), E. Kuvaja, M. Ollikainen, Henna Punkkinen, Elina Merta

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

33 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Pneumatic waste collection systems are becoming increasingly popular in new urban residential areas, and an attractive alternative to conventional vehicle-operated municipal solid waste (MSW) collection also in ready-built urban areas. How well pneumatic systems perform in ready-built areas is, however, an unexplored topic. In this paper, we analyze how a hypothetical stationary pneumatic waste collection system compares economically to a traditional vehicle-operated door-to-door collection system in an existing, densely populated urban area. Both pneumatic and door-to-door collection systems face disadvantages in such areas. While buildings and fixed city infrastructure increase the installation costs of a pneumatic system in existing residential areas, the limited space for waste transportation vehicles and containers cause problems for vehicle-operated waste collection systems. The method used for analyzing the cost effects of the compared waste collection systems in our case study takes into account also monetized environmental effects of both waste collection systems. As a result, we find that the door-to-door collection system is economically almost six times more superior. The dominant cost factor in the analysis is the large investment cost of the pneumatic system. The economic value of land is an important variable, as it is able to reverse the results, if the value of land saved with a pneumatic system is sufficiently high.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1782-1791
Number of pages9
JournalWaste Management
Volume32
Issue number10
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2012
MoE publication typeA1 Journal article-refereed

Fingerprint

urban area
economics
cost
environmental effect
municipal solid waste
comparison
waste collection
infrastructure
vehicle
residential area
land

Keywords

  • Built urban environment
  • pneumatic system
  • social life cycle costs
  • waste collection

Cite this

Teerioja, N. ; Moliis, K. ; Kuvaja, E. ; Ollikainen, M. ; Punkkinen, Henna ; Merta, Elina. / Pneumatic vs. door-to-door waste collection systems in existing urban areas : A comparison of economic performance. In: Waste Management. 2012 ; Vol. 32, No. 10. pp. 1782-1791.
@article{a95108b50169471488725d8a051538bc,
title = "Pneumatic vs. door-to-door waste collection systems in existing urban areas: A comparison of economic performance",
abstract = "Pneumatic waste collection systems are becoming increasingly popular in new urban residential areas, and an attractive alternative to conventional vehicle-operated municipal solid waste (MSW) collection also in ready-built urban areas. How well pneumatic systems perform in ready-built areas is, however, an unexplored topic. In this paper, we analyze how a hypothetical stationary pneumatic waste collection system compares economically to a traditional vehicle-operated door-to-door collection system in an existing, densely populated urban area. Both pneumatic and door-to-door collection systems face disadvantages in such areas. While buildings and fixed city infrastructure increase the installation costs of a pneumatic system in existing residential areas, the limited space for waste transportation vehicles and containers cause problems for vehicle-operated waste collection systems. The method used for analyzing the cost effects of the compared waste collection systems in our case study takes into account also monetized environmental effects of both waste collection systems. As a result, we find that the door-to-door collection system is economically almost six times more superior. The dominant cost factor in the analysis is the large investment cost of the pneumatic system. The economic value of land is an important variable, as it is able to reverse the results, if the value of land saved with a pneumatic system is sufficiently high.",
keywords = "Built urban environment, pneumatic system, social life cycle costs, waste collection",
author = "N. Teerioja and K. Moliis and E. Kuvaja and M. Ollikainen and Henna Punkkinen and Elina Merta",
year = "2012",
doi = "10.1016/j.wasman.2012.05.027",
language = "English",
volume = "32",
pages = "1782--1791",
journal = "Waste Management",
issn = "0956-053X",
publisher = "Elsevier",
number = "10",

}

Pneumatic vs. door-to-door waste collection systems in existing urban areas : A comparison of economic performance. / Teerioja, N.; Moliis, K. (Corresponding Author); Kuvaja, E.; Ollikainen, M.; Punkkinen, Henna; Merta, Elina.

In: Waste Management, Vol. 32, No. 10, 2012, p. 1782-1791.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Pneumatic vs. door-to-door waste collection systems in existing urban areas

T2 - A comparison of economic performance

AU - Teerioja, N.

AU - Moliis, K.

AU - Kuvaja, E.

AU - Ollikainen, M.

AU - Punkkinen, Henna

AU - Merta, Elina

PY - 2012

Y1 - 2012

N2 - Pneumatic waste collection systems are becoming increasingly popular in new urban residential areas, and an attractive alternative to conventional vehicle-operated municipal solid waste (MSW) collection also in ready-built urban areas. How well pneumatic systems perform in ready-built areas is, however, an unexplored topic. In this paper, we analyze how a hypothetical stationary pneumatic waste collection system compares economically to a traditional vehicle-operated door-to-door collection system in an existing, densely populated urban area. Both pneumatic and door-to-door collection systems face disadvantages in such areas. While buildings and fixed city infrastructure increase the installation costs of a pneumatic system in existing residential areas, the limited space for waste transportation vehicles and containers cause problems for vehicle-operated waste collection systems. The method used for analyzing the cost effects of the compared waste collection systems in our case study takes into account also monetized environmental effects of both waste collection systems. As a result, we find that the door-to-door collection system is economically almost six times more superior. The dominant cost factor in the analysis is the large investment cost of the pneumatic system. The economic value of land is an important variable, as it is able to reverse the results, if the value of land saved with a pneumatic system is sufficiently high.

AB - Pneumatic waste collection systems are becoming increasingly popular in new urban residential areas, and an attractive alternative to conventional vehicle-operated municipal solid waste (MSW) collection also in ready-built urban areas. How well pneumatic systems perform in ready-built areas is, however, an unexplored topic. In this paper, we analyze how a hypothetical stationary pneumatic waste collection system compares economically to a traditional vehicle-operated door-to-door collection system in an existing, densely populated urban area. Both pneumatic and door-to-door collection systems face disadvantages in such areas. While buildings and fixed city infrastructure increase the installation costs of a pneumatic system in existing residential areas, the limited space for waste transportation vehicles and containers cause problems for vehicle-operated waste collection systems. The method used for analyzing the cost effects of the compared waste collection systems in our case study takes into account also monetized environmental effects of both waste collection systems. As a result, we find that the door-to-door collection system is economically almost six times more superior. The dominant cost factor in the analysis is the large investment cost of the pneumatic system. The economic value of land is an important variable, as it is able to reverse the results, if the value of land saved with a pneumatic system is sufficiently high.

KW - Built urban environment

KW - pneumatic system

KW - social life cycle costs

KW - waste collection

U2 - 10.1016/j.wasman.2012.05.027

DO - 10.1016/j.wasman.2012.05.027

M3 - Article

VL - 32

SP - 1782

EP - 1791

JO - Waste Management

JF - Waste Management

SN - 0956-053X

IS - 10

ER -