12 May 2010

Speed Blogging

  • Groundwater tapping out in North China says the communist party paper. I guess that's a good reason for the Party to build the south-north canal. What happened to restrictions on groundwater extraction and higher prices?!? Oh yeah, sustainability isn't so exciting...

  • "TaKaDu can take sparse and spiky data from existing sensors and fold that in with weather data, acoustic data, and GIS data to enable the smart water grid... TaKaDu's water network management can prevent, weeks or months ahead of time, significant events in real-world networks by alerting utilities to the small changes that precede bursts and other anomalies."

  • Berkeley people are throwing away too little garbage and too much recycling, so the City is thinking of raising the price for recycling above zero, which will create accounting headaches. Better to lay off workers. (In the future, the price may have to rise; keep it below 50% of the normal garbage price...)

  • Water trading is worth $2.5 billion in Australia. Interested?
Hattips to AA, JC, DL, SJ, AZ

1 comment:

  1. “Berkeley people are throwing away too little garbage and too much recycling, so the City is thinking of raising the price for recycling above zero, which will create accounting headaches. Better to lay off workers. (In the future, the price may have to rise; keep it below 50% of the normal garbage price...).”

    Many cities are struggling with recycling in this recession as the bottom fell out of recycling and hence demand has fallen. Recycling brokers can not find the markets to place the recycling material even at lower prices. Many cities are now picking up recycling material every other week rather than weekly but are still removing garbage weekly.

    For the consumer, recycling rates could be above zero as fixed and variable costs exists to deploy special recycling containers, remove recycling material from a household, sort, store, and bail recyclable materials. Hence buried in the total garbage removal cost is a subsection of recycling cost. There is also free labor being provided by the consumer of sorting recyclables from garbage.

    Absolutely it can be argued that revenue received via recycling material reduces the recycling cost. Which begs the question if in the current economic environment there exists a loss, zero cost or a profit. Is it zero cost, marginally losing money, highly profitable, etc.

    ReplyDelete

Spammers, don't bother. I delete spam.