Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I reviewed the $20k trash cans SF is testing. Here’s what I found

sfchronicle.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–47 of 47 posts

Re: I reviewed the $20k trash cans SF is testing. Here’s what I found

#41

Post by m0llusk »

nradov wrote: post #13
m0llusk wrote: post #8

These are not $20k trash cans. The program is designing and producing prototypes. This is because various designs tried so far have had significant problems. How much mass produced final designs might cost is not yet known.

Those "problems" are not real problems worth wasting money on. Regular trash cans used in other cities are cheap and work fine. SF city leadership is just dysfunctional and over complicating things as usual.

SF has huge problems with street people emptying out garbage cans in search for food and tradable goods. The Big Belly options that were tried turned out to be targets for vandals and when they did work out the compacted trash ended up being too heavy for haulers to handle without specialized equipment.

The reason you think this is overcomplicating things is that you haven't bothered to actually investigate the problem or attempts that have been made to solve it.

Re: I reviewed the $20k trash cans SF is testing. Here’s what I found

#42

Post by m0llusk »

iancmceachern wrote: post #30
jerlam wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The main competitor for these trash cans is the BigBelly, which cost $3,000 a year to lease. They've already been deployed in some parts of SF and surrounding cities. https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/heatherknight/article/Ci...

Not true. The main competitor is a regular dumb trash can you can buy from home depot for $50. Edited to say $50 not $10 per below comment.

Simple trash cans like this do not endure long in dense city environments. The most common designs currently found have lasted for decades and cost way more than $50 when put in place. Have you ever done trash hauling in a city or are you just a reactionary?

Re: I reviewed the $20k trash cans SF is testing. Here’s what I found

#43

Post by nuodag »

Berlin also had a trash problem. But it got better when they decided to standardise on a really cheap bright orange trashcan and really flooded the town with those. You see them everywhere in the city, and especially in inner city you might see 15, so whatever you have in your hand the easiest is to just step to the bright orange thing and throw it inside.

Before usually they had also metal ones that needed construction to mount in the ground, those current ones the trash workers can just metal ziptie to lampposts and if one breaks they have a new one in their car.

Re: I reviewed the $20k trash cans SF is testing. Here’s what I found

#44

Post by nradov »

m0llusk wrote: post #41
nradov wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those "problems" are not real problems worth wasting money on. Regular trash cans used in other cities are cheap and work fine. SF city leadership is just dysfunctional and over complicating things as usual.

SF has huge problems with street people emptying out garbage cans in search for food and tradable goods. The Big Belly options that were tried turned out to be targets for vandals and when they did work out the compacted trash ended up being too heavy for haulers to handle without specialized equipment. The reason you think this is overcomplicating things is that you haven't bothered to actually investigate the probl…

Those are not serious or widespread problems. Other cities manage to make do with cheaper options. This is just another case of lazy, overpaid government employees trying to justify their jobs.

Re: I reviewed the $20k trash cans SF is testing. Here’s what I found

#45

Post by m0llusk »

nradov wrote: post #44
m0llusk wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SF has huge problems with street people emptying out garbage cans in search for food and tradable goods. The Big Belly options that were tried turned out to be targets for vandals and when they did work out the compacted trash ended up being too heavy for haulers to handle without specialized equipment. The reason you think this is overcomplicating things is that you haven't bothered to actually investigate the probl…

Those are not serious or widespread problems. Other cities manage to make do with cheaper options. This is just another case of lazy, overpaid government employees trying to justify their jobs.

This is filthy, wretched, evil garbage. San Francisco is very much unlike most cities. Instead of being satisfied with overflowing and consistently pillaged bins people are trying to better. You are against this because you are not observing the situation, because you are not capable of understanding how complex human systems like our biggest cities function, because you have contempt for everything outside your experience. Instead of trying to understand what is going on you just project. You rely on government employees and their works, but see all of them and lazy and useless. This is just another case of lazy critics trying to justify their ennui.

Re: I reviewed the $20k trash cans SF is testing. Here’s what I found

#46

Post by nradov »

m0llusk wrote: post #45
nradov wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those are not serious or widespread problems. Other cities manage to make do with cheaper options. This is just another case of lazy, overpaid government employees trying to justify their jobs.

This is filthy, wretched, evil garbage. San Francisco is very much unlike most cities. Instead of being satisfied with overflowing and consistently pillaged bins people are trying to better. You are against this because you are not observing the situation, because you are not capable of understanding how complex human systems like our biggest cities function, because you have contempt for everything outside your expe…

Nonsense. Most government employees do good work. I only complain about the ones who are wasteful and obviously incompetent, like in this case.

Re: I reviewed the $20k trash cans SF is testing. Here’s what I found

#47

Post by iancmceachern »

m0llusk wrote: post #42
iancmceachern wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not true. The main competitor is a regular dumb trash can you can buy from home depot for $50. Edited to say $50 not $10 per below comment.

Simple trash cans like this do not endure long in dense city environments. The most common designs currently found have lasted for decades and cost way more than $50 when put in place. Have you ever done trash hauling in a city or are you just a reactionary?

I've designed a lot of street furniture for companies like Cemusa, Jcd, etc.

Even nice fancy stainless steel things that are built better to withstand a city are very inexpensive when ordered in quantity from overseas. A good example is a shipping container. They cost about $2k to manufacture in China.

So, yes, I think a trash can should cost less to manufacture than a shipping container.

Source: https://www.quora.com/How-much-cost-to-make-a-new-shipping-c...

Post reply on HN