Abstract The development of underground infrastructures for the efficient management and collection of urban waste streams offers great advantages and solutions in tackling problems relating to these activities. Nevertheless, in order for such alternatives to gain acceptance and be further utilized, besides their advantages in effectiveness and in environmental friendliness, they must prove their efficiency in terms of financial performance. The paper analyses modern techniques available as the underground automated vacuum waste collection system (AVAC) and presents the financial and environmental assessment of a proposed system in replacement of an existing conventional waste collection scheme in Athens. The comparative financial assessment is undertaken using the equivalent annual cost methodology (EAC) where the capital expenditures and annual operational and maintenance costs for both alternatives are calculated. The findings show that these two systems have roughly the same cost performance using the equivalent annual cost analysis. Yet, they have noticeably differentiations in the operational and capital costs with the AVAC system having almost 40% lower operational cost requirements. Finally the environmental comparison of the alternatives focusing on the city’ air quality is further highlighting the superiority of the AVAC scheme. Thus, the selection of such a fixed underground infrastructure over a conventional one can be pursued as it offers equivalent financial performance and yet enhanced operational and environmental characteristics.
[1]
Rayman Mohamed,et al.
Cost of Underground Infrastructure Renewal: A Comparison of Open-Cut and Trenchless Methods
,
2008
.
[2]
Dimitris Kaliampakos,et al.
Underground space development: setting modern strategies
,
2008
.
[3]
Ulf Sonesson.
Modelling of waste collection - a general approach to calculate fuel consumption and time
,
2000
.
[4]
Aurèle Parriaux,et al.
Underground resources and sustainable development in urban areas
,
2006
.
[5]
Ilkka Vähäaho,et al.
Sustainability issues for underground space in urban areas
,
2012
.
[6]
Markku Ollikainen,et al.
Pneumatic vs. door-to-door waste collection systems in existing urban areas: a comparison of economic performance.
,
2012,
Waste management.
[7]
Nikolai Bobylev,et al.
Mainstreaming sustainable development into a city's Master plan: A case of Urban Underground Space use
,
2009
.