South Bruce Peninsular - Trash Transparency Gets Closer - Comments

Town Shelves the Clear Bags idea.

garym — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 13:39:16 -0500

Let's see if I have this straight: the town holds a lengthy (and costly) Manufacturing Consent campaign to 'sell' us all on their whole ill-thought clear-bags thing, and the public, bless 'em, scream back a resounding 'NO' and that then prompts the Council Members, bless 'em, to only review their strategy??? Now just which strategy do you suppose that might be ...

Please take note that the proposed Waste Management By-Law for the Town of South Bruce Peninsula will not come into force on January 1, 2009, as first advertised by the Town.
The proposed Waste Management By-Law is currently being reviewed by the Waste Management and Recycling Committee, in conjunction with the public's comments and concerns received. The Waste Management and Recycling Committee will return the matter to Council for further consideration in early 2009. The passage of any future By-Law by Council will require notification to the public.
[ South Bruce Peninsula Crier: Waste Management By-Law Notice ]

garym: ict evangelist - musician - whatever

Um ... 'privacy' bags? Ouch.

garym — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 09:26:00 -0500

Vinylgirl, I'm not sure there are any husbands who'd want their privacy bags targeted.

This whole charade is like the OJ trials: it just gets more perverse the more we learn about it until eventually we just have to turn it off and let it take its course.

But thanks for posting this because you know what it tells us? It tells us that this 'solution' has not been thought out in the least detail, it is 100% pure and simple government by tarantella knee-jerk jumping on the bandwagon. This wasn't a solution tailored to anyone's needs, it is simply the latest municipal fad, a case of "Well, the JONESES have clear bags ..." precisely the sort of herd thinking we try to mature out of in our jeans/t-shirt teen years.

And the really sad part of it is, from Toronto to Blyth to our own great SBP, the players themselves do not matter, the peer pressure groupthink is universal, like Dark Matter it weighs everything down in all directions. This is the sort of 'leadership' that caused Carleton Council to mistakenly drop out of Shinerama and that caused one shire in England to ban Santa Claus errantly believing the myth he was a shill for Coca-Cola.

How does this happen? Would you or I also bow to these herd-flights of thoughtlessness were we in their place? Or is politics somehow a self-selecting demographic?

garym: ict evangelist - musician - whatever

Question

vinylgirl — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 15:02:52 -0500

Well, it's sort of a comment. They are starting the clear bag system in our area (hasn't hit Blyth yet),but talk of it in the surrounding area. There was a newspaper article stating that everything in the bag must be visible (no opaque bags within the clear bag) except for one small opaque bag that could be a "privacy bag". Now, I know that we are probably going to be in the same vote as my parent's in Sauble with this bag system. Yet, if everyone has a "privacy bag", and puts private things in the one bag that isn't clear within the clear bag, then couldn't identity thieves target everyones private bag? I am sure my husband does not want his private bag targeted.

Toronto's passes The Bag Tax

garym — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 17:29:48 -0500

And you can bet your sweet bippy we're not far behind ...

"We've done nothing but increase costs around here. It's been mentioned about all the water increases, the tax increases and the new taxes. We've got to quit doing that. We've got to come up with some concrete solutions here that don't raise taxes, that make us more efficient."
[ Toronto council approves plastic bag charge ]

garym: ict evangelist - musician - whatever

How about Waste PREVENTION?

garym — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 17:05:00 -0500

Some media coverage from the Sun-Times on the melt-down of the Recycler's PipeDream of Infinite Consumption Balanced By Magic Genies Who Eat The Trash we get the low-down on just how that dream fails to account:

Miller Waste Systems has an annual $500,000 contract with the city to handle everything from the curbside collection of blue box contents to sorting, processing, transporting and selling recyclable materials. Waste Diversion Ontario helps with that by paying 50 per cent of the city's cost for recycling residential blue box material.

The city gets 100 per cent of the revenue which, according to the city's environmental superintendent, has generally been about $300,000 a year.

"Things have certainly dropped and we don't know how far they're going to go. We're going to find out a lot more about what's happening at the meeting on Friday," Chris Hughes said Tuesday.

The recycling crisis is the latest in a host of financial problems that began earlier this year with a meltdown in the U.S. housing market and banking sector. Now, as people around the world curb their spending, manufacturers react by curtailing production, which means there is less demand for recycled material, leading to a drop in value of recycled goods.

For example, aluminum was selling in the Toronto area in July for $1.17 per pound. Currently it's selling for 35 cents a pound. Newsprint was selling in the Toronto area in July for $180 per metric ton and actually hit zero at one point this month.

Similarly, the plastic used to make water bottles sold for 19 cents a pound in July, but today is selling for only a cent a pound.
[ Owen Sound Sun Times - Ontario, CA ]

As Myx said, sure, it's not about the money, and from what the numbers above tell us, I think the town comptrollers will all agree: no one is getting rich off this stuff anyway so any drop in the subsidy rebate from our self-destructuve obsession with plastic and paper packaging is just going to make the whole balance-sheet task of town councils a bit more dicey than it already is.

But what if ...

What if we simply cut down on the amount of this junk that we cart into the village in the first place? yeah, I know, with Christmas a-comin' that's another dicey proposition, but maybe this is precisely the right time of year to state unequivocably to the Manufacturing World that we are fed up to our gizzards with their trash, and either they take it back, or we just won't buy it.

May and I have started a new family habit on our visits to Heritage Place Mall: We buy our stuff, then sit down in the food court. So far, so normal and good right? Well here comes the really good part: We rip open all the packaging right there, check out the stuff to see its all ok (generally is) and then, without further adieu, we stuff the packaging in the Food Court recycle bins!

I will wager that if everyone in the Owen Sound hinterland already did this, even just with the stuff that its practical to do, the mound of trash per day during the Holiday Shopping span would become such a burden they would start posting signs and instructing their security guards to forbid the practice.

And in that stand-off, who knows, maybe there might arise a solution?

garym: ict evangelist - musician - whatever

Another great garbage idea ...

garym — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 14:19:08 -0500

How's this: We place a surcharge on the trash at the point of purchase and then, the best part, we let the vendor pocket the proceeds! Is that cool or what! This, my friends, is the staggering flash of brilliance that has bubbled out from the brains of those smart enough to become voting members of the Toronto city council:

Miller announced a 5-cent charge that is to be paid by consumers for each plastic bag used in, say, a grocery store. Most of these plastic bags end up in the garbage (most often used for containing the garbage), and this is seen as a Major Problem for solid waste management. The problem is that the profit from the sale of plastic bags ends up in the pockets of the grocery stores, who claim that they will use the windfall for things like "staff training" (presumably on how to handle customers who are upset at the increase in their grocery bill.
[ $0.05 of Knee-Jerk Stupidity from City Hall ]

garym: ict evangelist - musician - whatever

recycling for profit

mxyzptlk — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 21:11:23 -0500

i read with interest today in the sun times an article about the economic downturn and its effect on the recycling business. i guess i just dont get it ... are we not recycling to help preserve the environment? everything costs ... recycling and dumping. we need to move beyond focusing on the $ we can get from recycling and focus on the environment. this is what it has always been about for me.

and, speaking of the economy ... can you believe the gall of the grey county council giving itself a 30% raise while many families are struggling financially?

kltpzyxm

Waste Diversion Getting More Expensive.

Dodge — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 13:30:45 -0500

The price of recycled aluminium has fallen to $10/tonne. Paper is $50/tonne down from $130. Some municipalities on contract will see higher prices until the contract renewal.

The only thing that supports diversion is a lack of landfill space as costs of collecting, sorting, storing and shipping have moved further away from any cost recovery. In this environment low tipping fees will be the least cost alternative.

I find that most residents are making a reasonable attempt to recycle and I do not believe it is residential waste that is responsible for our so called shortage of reserve capacity. It is especially not seasonal residents.

The Rumour is True (obviously)

garym — Sun, 16 Nov 2008 15:24:39 -0500

as you can see from the above, yes, Virginia, there really is a clear-bag clause, and if you want to take another run at the kangaroos, take heart: there's the Allenford Jump-up on the 19th; the full road-show tour schedule was posted here with RSS and everything.

garym: ict evangelist - musician - whatever

no planning

mxyzptlk — Sun, 16 Nov 2008 14:00:23 -0500

i would like to know how we got to this situation in the first place. what the heck do we pay a planner for? especially one who works for both the county and the town .. talk about conflicting interests. i've said this before, our town has no plan that sets out what we collectively want our town to be in 20 to 30 years or even 5 years for that matter. why don't we fire the non-planner and get someone who knows what they are supposed to be doing? maybe if we didn't encourage tourism we could get another 100 years out of the landfill. i support recycling and also like the incineration idea particularly since the heat can be used to produce steam which can turn a turbine and generate electricity. i have also heard that the resulting slag can be used in place of gravel.
kltpzyxm

Suggestions For Changes To Proposal

Dodge — Sun, 16 Nov 2008 09:22:00 -0500

First put $150,000 per year into reserve for increasing the landfill capacity. The preliminary work should start in March 2011 with provision to start a year earlier if conditions require it. By then we should have real good numbers on the existing capacity and we will have had a good kick at increasing the diversion rate.

Second, increase tipping fees to $225/tonne for mixed loads and $250 for 2010. Direct the increased amount to the reserve. This would put rates higher than Owen Sound and other nearby areas and protect any capacity we have from outside garbage sources without tying up manpower to monitor registration plates and police the source.

Third warn all non commercial users who would qualify for the bag tag clear bag program that the program will be started in fall of 2010 if we do not get diversion up to a 40% target. I don't want to leave it for the next council to decide. Future realistic targets would be higher with the same result if not met. We are a resort and rural community and we will not compare well with city diversion because some collection and other costs are higher. That is what realistic means.

Fourth make a renewed effort to do everything possible to increase diversion and educate everyone what will happen if targets are not met. There is room for improvement.

Fifth a program for handling stray and excess garbage resulting from the tourist trade should be created. Possibly increase fines and enforcement for dumping garbage and litter and redirect some parking revenue for homeowner help with unauthorized dumping.

Pros
So far seasonal residents have not been part of this discussion and that is a very good reason to hold off on this proposal (that is what it is as of now) for a time period through 2009 and even until fall 2010 as suggested.
There are some councillors who are not ready to vote for this to start in 2009 as proposed and this would put them in a better position to justify if the program is deemed needed by fall 2010.

We will always generate garbage and the landfill will have to be expanded that is inevitable. We have to have a plan in place for this to happen.

There will be some urgency to plan for incineration in Bruce and Grey so I would predict something in place by 2025 possibly sooner. This means we could lay out strategy and goals to meet for garbage starting now.

With this strategy a clear choice will be given to residents about which path they take in fall 2010. The fact we have capacity means we are luckier than most we have time to make choices.

Bag Tag Meeting Was Held At The School Today

Dodge — Sat, 15 Nov 2008 21:31:00 -0500

A slick presentation using power point from Dan Kerr. We were told we need bag tags because our recycling was too low at 23% based on comparison of tonnage recycled vs tonnage dumped. Jay Kirkland asked if that statistic was skewed because our landfill has been a favourite dumping ground for garbage sourced outside the municipality for years because of cheaper rates.

The answer - yes. Our real recycling rate could be in the range 30-40% based on the opinion of someone I spoke to who should know. Not mentioned was the hundreds of loads of recycling the contractor has dumped in landfill because of contamination in the recycling load. I have seen this myself at our landfill site. This has to skew our recycling numbers.

This renders everything Kerr said as unreliable speculation and suspect. For example Kerr said that the life expectancy of our landfill could be 7-8 years or based on another 3 year average could be 17 years. Pick one. A current Councillor who I will not name here advised me that the numbers Kerr was using were suspect because of certain assumptions used and that the expected life was much longer. So our own Council is divided on the honesty of this presentation. Kerr forgot to mention that.

All of this suspect information is being used to sell a very complicated pay per bag program and complexity always breeds increased cost. We are a resort community with a heavy tourist load in the summer that largely does not give a damn where the garbage goes as long as they leave it here with the rent cheques. This makes it impossible to conclude outcomes based on the experience in other municipalities.

Now I am speculating but I will tell you that so take it any way you want. It would not take a great effort to move our recycling capture up 15% to 50% by improving our collection system. There were many cmplaints today about current programs. There is little justification for draconian measures as proposed. We will always have garbage and need more landfill space but the cost of expanding the landfill will go much higher if we delay the process a few years. Yet we are being told we must delay it.

A combined Bruce Grey incineration plant is economically feasable and will make our non recycleable garbage problems go away for the next 50 years or forever take your pick. We have far more problems handling and sorting and finding end users for our recycled garbage then the amortized cost of expanding our landfill site. I am speculating that incineration will also solve many of these recycling problems. For example a tonne of aluminium for scrap has dropped from $100 to $10. If it is contaminated with tin foil pie plates it is worth nothing. A bale of water bottles with some detached lids is worth nothing because of the loose lids. Prices are $250/tonne for polyethylene down from the $700 range. Paper is down to $50/tonne. The reality is that it is cheaper for a business to lanfill cardboard as a mixed load compared to shipping it to Toronto for recycling. The same applies to the Municipality and again this is a source of skewed figures when determining recycling rates. Sorting is the million dollar headache here. Toronto is currently debating what to do about plastic coffee cup lids contaminating paper recycling.

All this headache goes away with incineration. The temperatures are just too high. Sorting not required. For those gullible enough to listen to the anti incineration camp we have so many wood heated homes an incineration plant would never show up on the graph.

When we put the scales in at the landfill it was supposedly to generate fees and avoid the necessity of bag charges. Come on Council lets keep a promise.

rumour clarification

wayne tanner — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 15:49:44 -0500

I heard that there is going to be a meeting at the school tommorrow ( Saturday) to discuss this topic... I must of missed the ad, and I don't have the patience for the web site or is this nothing other than a rumour.
wt

Kangaroo Courts

garym — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 09:12:27 -0500

I could not bring myself to attend, the insanity of the whole issue was just too much to fathom. Instead I keep having that town-plan phrase, "milked for all its worth" swishing in my brain and wondering what sort of a terrible mistake it might have been to move here. The conversation out at the TH one evening turned to that whole lure in more cash fraud and I couldn't help it, I said, "This is the last naturally balanced ecology left in Southern Ontario; you people are already rich, fabulously rich beyond the wildest dreams of nearly the entire planet. Why are you so bent on ripping it up just to 'make money'?" I didn't get any answer, didn't really expect one.

'milked for all its worth' ... oh and lets not forget 'properly monetized' and other swell euphemisms for 'resource' exploitation. I wonder if this is what the Easter Islanders were chanting as they cut down the last tree. "It's all about the jobs!" I'll bet one of their 'leaders' said. At least once.

"looking for a way to avoid paying for a basic service so they can have money for frills such as a full time tourism promotion officer" -- thanks for that tip; it will be worth watching out for as the agenda unfurls over us.

garym: ict evangelist - musician - whatever

What Did Council Do?

Dodge — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 21:15:00 -0500

The bag tag bylaw still stands ready for third reading but first Council feels they need to sell this bylaw to the public.

Several "open house" information sessions have been scheduled. The notice states only that these are presentation sessions for the proposed bag tag clear bag bylaw.

I fully expect a slick sales job. Zero tolerance for Lamont and Kerr if they try to sell you on paying for garbage bags this is not what they were elected for. Some members on Council are just looking for a way to avoid paying for a basic service so they can have money for frills such as a full time tourism promotion officer which is not a basic service and gives zero return to residential taxpayers for the money spent. In fact every tourist they bring in costs us all more money just to provide basic services such as garbage pickup. Bottom line we pay more taxes to promote tourism so we can pay more taxes.

The real reason for a bylaw that forces you to buy bag tags is not waste diversion it is wasteful spending and money diversion.

First session is Nov 12 at Wiarton Legion See schedule on Town website.

Trash Transparency Gets Closer

garym — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 10:53:44 -0400

Clear-bagged trash is back, maybe to stay, and other than the monopoly supplier and user-fee mentality, I wouldn't mind so much if they would just tell us what is and what is not 'recycle material', because for the life of me I cannot tell the difference between the roast chicken packaging from Kirklands vs the cake packaging from Independent. To name but one. But then again, it's not really about community services, its about the money:

"It has become apparent that we must ask those who make garbage to pay for what they make."
The committee says the system being proposed will not only extend the life of the landfill, it will reduce municipal costs by an estimated $309,000 per year -- the equivalent of a five per cent tax reduction.
Under the proposed bylaw, garbage would only be picked up if it was in a transparent bag stamped with the municipality's logo. The bags would be sold for $1.50 apiece at approximately 20 locations in the town.
Lamont and Coun. Dan Kerr, also a member of the committee, plan to visit local schools and service clubs to explain the process before the bylaw, if passed, goes into effect. Ratepayers will receive information sheets promoting the program -- ideas borrowed from Saugeen Shores, which heavily marketed the idea before it was implemented there.
[ Council proposes clear bags for trash ]

Final reading is set for the October 14th meeting, no word at all as to whether the committee has at all considered recycling the dump itself.