Clear Full Forecast

Waste Management Plan Up For Public Input

By 250 News

Thursday, July 17, 2008 03:45 PM

Prince George, B.C. – The Regional District of Fraser Fort George has approved  heading to public consultation on the  draft plan to manage garbage in the region for the next 10-20 years.
 
The plan is aimed at reducing the amount of garbage heading to the landfill sites while encouraging recycling.
 
Some of the highlights:
  • with one half of all garbage recyclable,  a curbside recycling program is the top priority
  • New $30-$40 dollar a year fee per household in Prince George for a curbside recycling program. The plan suggests residents may see some cost savings as they be able to move to a smaller garbage bin, or the City may see some savings in the tipping fees if the amount of garbage is less than had been dumped in the past. The City of Prince George will continue to operate the Quinn Street and Vanway waste management centres as a “one stop shop” for a range of waste materials, including recyclables, yard waste and a range of household hazardous wastes.
  • Depot based recycling for the balance of Regional District
  • Distribution of up to 1,000 backyard composters every other year (or as long as demand is sustained)
  • A user pay policy for garbage disposal will be established that will ultimately require that all users of the RDFFG garbage disposal facilities will be assessed a fee for disposal.
  • There will also be a policy of banning items from the landfills  if there are recyclable  programs in place.Once a material or product has readily available recycling or composting alternatives in the RDFFG, this material/product will be banned from disposal as garbage. Currently, recyclable cardboard, metal, motor oil and tires have readily available recycling opportunities so these items will be the first materials banned from the garbage in the RDFFG. A disposal ban would be phased in, with the first phase being promotion and education, the second phase being notifications given to haulers bringing in garbage containing banned materials, and the final phase being a ramp-up of financial penalties.
  • Expand the composting facility at Foothills Landfill
Residential users are not the only ones to face changes, construction and demolition waste accounts for about 21% of the waste  dumped at the Foothills Landfill site, and there will be discussions with planning departments to deal with those issues.
 
Ideas for handling such waste include:
  • variable permit costs (deconstruction vs. demolition) to encourage source-separation,
  • reuse and recycling of C&D Waste;
  • mandatory solid waste management plans for large construction projects to ensure that waste diversion is considered in the planning for construction; and
  • adopting green building standards (e.g., LEED) that will reduce the amount of waste generated during construction and through the life of the building.
Some of the transfer stations  serving smaller areas will be closed,  and three landfill sites ( Mackenzie, Dome Creek, Sinclair Mills)  would be closed.  Closing landfills is not cheap,  its estimated to it will take $4.7 million  to deal with the three added to the list, and 13 others that are  already no longer receiving  garbage.  Director Denis Gendron says having people drive to and from Prince George to drop their garbage doesn't seem to be very 'green'  "It would seem to me that having one truck picking up material once a week would have less impact  than  800 people driving to P.G."
 
The consultants say the impact  from the methane created by one landfill is far more than the impact of the vehicles travelling to another  site.
 
The Municipal solid waste currently being collected in Mackenzie will be shipped to Foothills.  
It is thought the changes will extend the life of the Foothills Landfill to 18 years from the current expected 13 years.
 
The changes will be phased in, with recycling in place in Prince George by 2012, but the changes are not cheap.  The annual bill for the new programs will be  in the $11 to $13 million dollar range.
 
 The most significant new costs are:
• capital expenditures for yard waste composting facilities ($595,000)
• a transfer station for Mackenzie ($740,000 capital cost)
• final closure of landfills and on-going monitoring (an average of $647,000 in capital costs annually).
 
There are only a few ways to recover those costs:
 
�� User fees;
�� Revenues from landfill tipping fees;
�� Tipping fees;
�� Grants, and
�� Taxation;
�� Sponsorships.
�� Sales (e.g., backyard composters, compost,recyclables)
 
The plan aims at reducing garbage  heading to the landfill by 35% by 2012, and 50% by 2015 Director Harvey Clark says total recycling is very labour intensive (to sort the garbage) and it gets very expensive "I hope we don't go there."
 
Director Colin Kinsley says there are some communities in Europe  which use the garbage to  fire up  heat creating plants,  which then produce electricity which is sold on the grid.  The consultants say yes, the economics of using garbage for "energy" now make sense as  fossil fuel costs  are shooting through the roof, however, the Regional District is not quite big enough to  economically produce energy from garbage and there is still a need to deal with the  residuals contained in the emissions and the ash.
 
The draft plan will now be offered for public consultation.  It is not a done deal says Director Don Zurowski "I just want people to  know this is not a done deal, the doors are still wide open."
 
That input will be used to revise the plan before it is finalized.
 
You can read the full report by clicking here.

Previous Story - Next Story



Return to Home
NetBistro

Comments

Heads up Regional District, the more expensive you make it to get rid of garbage, the more you're going to see illegal dumping.

The curbside recycling program sounds like a good idea.
These Einsteins then wonder why more "stuff" is being dumped in the bush.
They still don't get it. These highly-paid "experts" are still completely out of touch with reality. Sad. Expensive. Counter productive
Well, since my wife and I believe that recycling is a public responsibility, just as the garbage is that we create. Heads in the sand will lead to nothing but runny eyes and noses.

I have watched the Regional District manage the stations as well as the Landfill site on Foothills. I also have relatives that work there, so here the the scuttlebut.

I cast my vote with the plan.... the alternative to doing nothing but criticizing without some viable, realistic alternatives is chaos.
I know nothing about the technical specs of our foothills landfill ...

Here is one from Anchorage.

http://wasteage.com/Landfill_Management/waste_alaska_landfill_covered

Looks like they are prepared to pick up the methane for energy production if there is enough.
I think that the plan sounds good 'in theory', but what I can see happening is if you start telling people they can't dump this or that or it's going to cost this much, they'll just take a drive down some forestry road and dump their stuff there.

I don't know if the plan is worth seeing piles of garbage dumped all over the place.

It's about time, PG and the RDFFG are finally moving in the direction most communities have been for some time now. We are years behind and I would applaud these changes.

Household waste is something each person can manage and should. Purchasing habits can make a huge difference, for starters. It does not have to hit your pocket book as much, if you produce less to start with. We have a small garbage bin we put out about once every 4-5 weeks, for example. How much packaging crap out there just goes straight from the store to the garbage - a lot from what I see in people's shopping carts.

So how do we deal with the those who choose to just dump their bags and appliances in the woods? Like anything, it will change as people become less ignorant of the impact their backwards habits have on the common good. And on their children's futures.

Bravo - bring on the whole enchilada and let's get with the times!

People take responsibility for your garbage!




As far as the curbside recycling goes I am wondering why they cannot start within a year - 2009 .... 2012 sounds like we are in some underdeveloped country ....

maņana
This has a funny story.

A house was condemned so a fellow bought the place for the price of the lot, and now has to dispose of the house. The house is a shack. It has no vapor barrier, sawdust insulation, no gyproc and just tarps for roofing. No concrete foundation, or even footings. The "law" says you call in the bins and take the house to the landfill. Instead he knocks it down flat and burns it.

This happened in two locations in the last month. The one in the city limits ended up with a $575.00 fine and lots of hassles and a muddy mess the fire department left behind to put in a dumpster. The owner of the lot just outside the city limits had a fire practice by the local volumteer fire department and a new trailer is now on that lot.

The end result was the same. But the lack of support in the city for non-mainstream disposal or help, results in more illegal and risk taking activities than in the PGRD.


Packaging the items we buy is a big problem. Much of it not being biodegradable. Ever notice how the ink cartridges are packaged for your printer. You need a knife a pair of sissors and gorilla hands to get into them.

And the planing for garbage reduction by the City is out of the stone ages. Remember how we were told that the new garbage collection system would reduce the amount of garbage collected and the cost of tipping fees. What did they do they gave us a choice in the size of garbage can we could have. And guess what most took a large garbage can (four bag size) an are now filling them.

Before these monster size garbage cans were issued it was rare to see more then two bags of garbage at a household on garbage collection day.

We used to recycle but have but have done very little in the last while. Our small garbage can is never full so why bother.


Cheers