From: | Paul Gettle <RunnerPaul@*****.COM> |
---|---|
Subject: | Re: Demolish or Recycle (back on topic!) [was: Sleeping In Light] |
Date: | Sun, 3 Jan 1999 13:32:50 -0500 |
At 09:39 AM 1/3/99 -0700, David B. wrote:
>For this same reason decommisioned navel vessles are often sunk
instead of
>dismantled. Ditto for disposal of old tanks and such. Also, the
structure
>probably had all sorts of stress fractures which would require that
it be
>melted down and reforged, which would significantly add to the cost.
>
>Also, when you take something apart you're paying for it twice. The
price
>to build it, and the price to take it apart and break it down. In
private
>industry and on a small scale you see this being done. But for
something
>as large as B5 that's owned by a beaurocracy...
So, would a triple-A megacorp have the same ammount of red-tape
mentality?
What I'm getting at, is... Might we see at one point, Renraku, make
the decision to stop throwing good money after bad, and just demolish
the arcology from the outside?
This raises an interesting question: how would you go about
demolishing a huge hardened building in the middle of downtown, from
the outside, without damaging the surrounding area?
(Just wanted to bring this one back On Topic... now that my good deed
for the day is done, I'm going to set nomail, because I'm off on
Federal Grand Jury duty starting Tuesday. Might be back by Wednesday,
might be gone for a lot longer. See you when I get back.)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP Personal Privacy 6.0.2
iQCVAwUBNo+3t6PbvUVI86rNAQHdHgP+NSVRmLMk5TY5hIPNPuaElJt7ZrMt68Pb
SOhWyYLEGvbV5oRjBASJRIxhSWDG1lIyScD7+abJG+3IoqiL/AUQ2PU89jddmQ5o
YN+gu1e9khkCgAiIeXKwKt1EyYEJ8pyHnlI3JIyS8eRvHkJB+BTE0C5ppDo/CUIX
eWdIWeWqnoY=
=Q/i/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
-- Paul Gettle, #970 of 1000 (RunnerPaul@*****.com)
PGP Fingerprint, Key ID:0x48F3AACD (RSA 1024, created 98/06/26)
C260 94B3 6722 6A25 63F8 0690 9EA2 3344