INC NEWS - Is the new solid waste plan based on solid ground?

Wed Apr 19 11:19:38 EDT 2006

Anne,

I find it very hard to believe that there are no long-term solutions that
will help us deal with our trash in a more responsible and cost-effective
manner.  With all the intelligent and environmentally astute residents who
live in Durham, I feel confident that we could come up with long term
solutions that help us address some of the questions Mike has raised.  I
agree with Mike, that we must take a closer look at how we deal with our
trash over the long term and find more reasonable long-term solutions.

Separate from long-term solutions, however, I acknowledge that we have a
broken yard waste program.  In the short-term, I believe the proposed plan
will leave us in a better place then our current plan.  I recall, along with
other PAC2 members, taking issue with our current plan with the former
director, who was confident that we were all wrong.  This discussion is on
the record of the PAC2 minutes.  Without a more sustainable long-term
component, it seems likely that the costs of the proposed plan will create a
problem for Durham residents.

Newman

  _____  

From: inc-list-bounces at rtpnet.org [mailto:inc-list-bounces at rtpnet.org] On
Behalf Of Mike - Hotmail
Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2006 10:38 AM
To: Anne Guyton; RW Pickle
Cc: inc-list at durhaminc.org
Subject: Re: INC NEWS - Is the new solid waste plan based on solid ground?

Then this may be an instance (a rare event) that we disagree.

I still feel it's a cop-out for Durham to ship waste somewhere else.

For me,  I have to believe that there's got to be a better solution.

Educated minds, much more than mine,  surely have answers.

I just keep seeing this getting more and more expensive for us with no end
in sight.

Randy mentioned once that he'd done some research on this.  I'm just
advocating that we keep looking at it for a longer term solution and willing
to listen to the new Director BEFORE taking these steps (new plan).

mike

----- Original Message ----- 

From: Anne Guyton <mailto:annemguyton at yahoo.com>  

To: Mike - <mailto:mwshiflett at hotmail.com>  Hotmail ; RW
<mailto:randy at 27beverly.com>  Pickle 

Cc: inc-list at durhaminc.org 

Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2006 4:02 PM

Subject: Re: Is the new solid waste plan based on solid ground?

Mike,

I do agree that the best policy would be to keep our trash in Durham but
every alternative you mentioned was studied in detail before the transfer
station was built and they were all either too polluting or cost prohibitive
or both.  Have there been huge leaps in technology in the last 10 years that
would justify the expense of revisiting these questions?  

These alternatives all have major downsides:  For example where would a
steam/incinerator plant be built?  Where would the emmissions go?  Scrubbers
to clean the emissions produce hazardous waste that has to be carefully
handled and probably trucked to an appropriate landfill.  If you site a new
landfill within the county where will it be?  In whose neighborhood?  Last
time this was done years were spent identifying sites without reaching an
agreement on the location.  We are now much, much more urban and less rural
with much of the remaining rural land in the the watersheds for Falls and
Jordan lakes.  Those factors will make it extremely difficult to find a
site. 

I think that building materials and appliances are currently removed from
the waste stream being sent to VA.   

Part of the decision to go with the transfer station was that it was what
other cities with similiar circumstances to Durham were doing.  You have to
remember that Durham is a very small county that straddles two watersheds.
We are not like Wake County which is large enough to continue development at
the present rate for decades without running out of land.

I also don't see that VA will be able to hold us hostage because there is
competition among regional landfills.  Pender County here in NC built one
within the last few years.

I just don't think its justifed to spend more time and money on these
questions without knowing that technology has changed significantly.  

Anne Guyton

Mike - Hotmail <mwshiflett at hotmail.com> wrote: 

All,

If my memory serves correctly,  working out the contract to ship trash out
of state was one of Lamont's first major decisions after becoming city
manager.

At the time,  the decision was held with very high accolades.   But for
many, it was a very short sighted answer to a much larger growing problem.

What are we going to do with our trash?

For me,  it was and continues to remain patently dangerous and eventual
financially ruinous for us, as a municipality, to haul our waste out of
state.

It's both environmentally and morally wrong.

But before we start moving forward on any 'new' plan we need to answer the
questions posed earlier and find alternatives for bulky items (they weight
more) to be picked up and trucked out of town!

WE SHOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR OUR OWN TRASH!!!!!

As a community we must look at what options there are available first,
before we continue to make it worse.   The plan presented by Solid Waste at
this point in time only adds more weight and money to its cost(s).

I'd suggest we look at what other cities have done.   What the latest
technology regarding steam generation/incineration plants,  massive
recycling of building materials, scrap metals and larger household items
that could cut back (or hopefully eliminate) the need to sent it to
Virginia.

Wouldn't it make sense to have a system in place that could reuse and/or
co-generate something positive out of our waste stream rather than pay
millions of dollars to haul it up I-85? 

No where in the plan that's being currently passed around is a financially
stable and physically viable long term solution.

Incorporating ideas other cities have been successful with and implementing
ways to drastically reduce the truckload after truckload leaving Durham
seems to me to be a better way to go about it.

If this new Director is even worth half the weight (no pun intended) of what
we're going to pay him,  he ought to at least have some of these solutions
in his tool box.

Why not take advantage of what he can bring to the table.

Maybe we could make some changes that everyone could agree upon and make
sense?

Now that would be a 'plan' a lot more people could get behind!

mike shiflett

  _____  

New Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Call
<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/mail_us/taglines/postman5/*http:/us.rd.yahoo.com/evt
=39666/*http:/beta.messenger.yahoo.com>  regular phones from your PC and
save big.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/private/inc-list/attachments/20060419/1fbbbd7e/attachment-0001.htm 