Asthehills Posted January 1, 2023 Share Posted January 1, 2023 1 minute ago, Gladys said: I agree, but the argument seems to be the recycling is driven either by reducing the gate fees paid or due to an environmental desire and it cannot be both. I think, very easily, it can be both. It’s neither. It’s purely to be seen to be trying to do something to save the planet without actually having thought it through or looking at the details. Its embarrassing. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happier diner Posted January 1, 2023 Share Posted January 1, 2023 1 hour ago, Gladys said: Perhaps it is both. Others have said the EFW contract should be reviewed. If it is generating 10% of the island's electricy you have to wonder why the gate fees are so high. You would think there would be no fee for the right (high calorific value and dry) rubbish and a charge made for the not so good rubbish. Do we know the various calorific values of recyclables? Glass and tin you can't burn, but plastic and paper/cardboard? I reckon its about 4 to 5% on average but yes agree. There is a lot of energy in plastic, not as much in cardboard and cardboard has a very high Ash content. The fees are related to calorific content and that's why they spectate out the wood. Wood is the cheapest thing to take there AFAIK 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happier diner Posted January 1, 2023 Share Posted January 1, 2023 28 minutes ago, Steady Eddie said: That gate fees are so high as it probably shouldn’t have been built in the first place. It want built to save money. It was built to get rid of all the crap so landfill wasn't needed and it generates a bit of electricity which is a side benefit. The old style incinerators only burn it to reduce volume and sterilise it. They don't produce power. It was never intended to pay for itself as far as I know. It couldn't. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted January 1, 2023 Share Posted January 1, 2023 6 minutes ago, Albert Tatlock said: It probably could be...but only if we had something like 3 times the current population. You will have to explain that. The incinerator is there and needs to be dealt with. The size of the population doesn't alter that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted January 1, 2023 Share Posted January 1, 2023 Just now, Gladys said: You will have to explain that. The incinerator is there and needs to be dealt with. The size of the population doesn't alter that. I meant, the population affects the supply of economically viable combustibles...to keep it running at efficient levels to make a profitable return, whilst at the same time enabling it to lower gate prices. 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finlo Posted January 1, 2023 Share Posted January 1, 2023 5 minutes ago, Albert Tatlock said: I meant, the population affects the supply of economically viable combustibles...to keep it running at efficient levels to make a profitable return, whilst at the same time enabling it to lower gate prices. Indeed, the less that goes there there the more it will cost, H&B type economics! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asthehills Posted January 1, 2023 Share Posted January 1, 2023 14 minutes ago, Happier diner said: I reckon its about 4 to 5% on average but yes agree. There is a lot of energy in plastic, not as much in cardboard and cardboard has a very high Ash content. The fees are related to calorific content and that's why they spectate out the wood. Wood is the cheapest thing to take there AFAIK When we went recently they didn’t even ask what we had? Just if it was burnable and have us a list of stuff that couldn’t go in Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finlo Posted January 1, 2023 Share Posted January 1, 2023 Just now, Asthehills said: When we went recently they didn’t even ask what we had? Just if it was burnable and have us a list of stuff that couldn’t go in Yeah, they're not overly keen on Calor gas cylinders apparently! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Non-Believer Posted January 1, 2023 Share Posted January 1, 2023 (edited) 52 minutes ago, Happier diner said: Wood is the cheapest thing to take there AFAIK Didn't they just raise the gate price for wood by 200%? We had to have an incinerator, we were running out of holes in the ground and in any case it was increasingly unacceptable to dispose of refuse in that fashion,although the challenges to the incinerator proposal were interminable if I recall correctly. But if I were involved in any Local Authority finances (I'm not), I'd be dreading the annual gate prices announcement from the EFW. Short of staff costs, it's the biggest component of any Rates calculation and as I've questioned previously (still waiting for an answer, Amadeus), nobody ever seems to challenge or question the gate fees being charged. It's just hike the Rates time for everybody and one can understand DBC wanting to reduce their exposure. Think also of the haulage costs for the outlying LAs to transport one or more wagons a day to EFW as well at 8mpg. Simplistically, the taxpayers paid for an incinerator to be built which via some financial transactions ended up in the hands of an apparently unregulated monopoly concern who charge us a fortune for us to supply them with fuel to generate electricity to sell back to us. Win, win for them or what? Edited January 1, 2023 by Non-Believer extra bit 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finlo Posted January 1, 2023 Share Posted January 1, 2023 Does anyone know how many staff the incinerator employ? Or is it the oft rumoured 4K a day in red diesel that's pushing the gate prices up? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
genericUserName Posted January 1, 2023 Share Posted January 1, 2023 People need to stop imagining that disposing of rubbish is ever going to be economically a break-even. Especially in a remote place like this. We should, quite properly, expect to pay ever more for what we get rid of. It is one of those coming changes. In the same way as we should expect to pay a much great percentage of our income for our food and energy. The aim should be to get rid of as little as possible and the way to make that happen is to charge people such that the least wasteful pay the least. Obviously some of that cost could be shifted by taxing some sectors just a little. They are not going to run away because of a small amount of corporation tax. Not when so many of their key staff have happily escaped places which are much less politically level. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moghrey Mie Posted January 1, 2023 Share Posted January 1, 2023 5 minutes ago, genericUserName said: People need to stop imagining that disposing of rubbish is ever going to be economically a break-even. Especially in a remote place like this. We should, quite properly, expect to pay ever more for what we get rid of. It is one of those coming changes. In the same way as we should expect to pay a much great percentage of our income for our food and energy. The aim should be to get rid of as little as possible and the way to make that happen is to charge people such that the least wasteful pay the least. Obviously some of that cost could be shifted by taxing some sectors just a little. They are not going to run away because of a small amount of corporation tax. Not when so many of their key staff have happily escaped places which are much less politically level. Reduce Re-use Recycle. Now do you see the logic? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
genericUserName Posted January 1, 2023 Share Posted January 1, 2023 6 minutes ago, Moghrey Mie said: Reduce Re-use Recycle. Now do you see the logic? Reduce is the most important part of that. We don't really need ever more stuff - even if that stuff is made out of recycled old stuff. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apple Posted January 1, 2023 Share Posted January 1, 2023 37 minutes ago, genericUserName said: We should, quite properly, expect to pay ever more for what we get rid of. Remember the old adage care of Thatcher -user pays. Eventually there will be a system that will mean that individual households will pay for what rubbish they create. We need to get ready for that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted January 1, 2023 Share Posted January 1, 2023 So, the argument really should be about an all island waste management strategy, using the incinerator in the most effective way (generating the most electricity at the least cost) whilst recycling what can be recycled, ideally locally, to generate the most return. Not whether DBC collects bins once a week or fortnightly. 2 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.