3 ms·
Which are definitely more efficient than having every individual that needs something hop in a car and drive for 20+ minutes. One delivery person with goods for
by cloverich 2y ago
Which are definitely more efficient than having every individual that needs something hop in a car and drive for 20+ minutes. One delivery person with goods for 100 people in their truck is literally one truck replacing one hundred drivers. It is absolutely much more efficient carbon wise. All of the warehouses and 18 wheelers exist either way, since the local shops still need all the same supplies, although presumably more widely distributed.
The only way it works out is if people buy much less, which given prices would be much higher, they likely would.
- themaninthedark 2y agoThey didn't exist prior to Amazon deciding to offer 2day delivery, that's my point. Why else would they invest all that money, when they could use the already existing services that deliver to people's houses fairly quickly: FedEx, UPS and DHL or the slightly slower but goes everywhere every day USPS? Your one person is a truck delivering to 100 homes ignores the fact that at least 80% of the people in those homes have a car that they use everyday, often passing a grocery store and most other local shops. I have a longer reply talking about the Carbon usage below: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42463832 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42463832
- therealdrag0 2y agoThere are studies about this. I don’t know how good they are or what specific scenarios they apply to (urban vs rural vs rural are all different calculations). But what I’ve seen is it’s about 14 items you’d have to buy before going to the store yourself is more efficient than shopping online.