The carbon (GHG) burnt every week hauling (trash) to a central location and then composting it and hauling it back out again, as well as the fertilizer requirements needed to replace the removed organic matter, could be considerable with yard waste collection. I can’t see that all this hauling would be the best solution, when you look at the whole process in a life cycle approach. Was there any thought by waste management to a digester process that would draw the methane off the waste material and pump the gas into the natural gas system? Teresen has done one of these project with a municipality in B.C. and is working on others.
Again, I say Campbell Mountain is a long way from Similkameen. That is why I am searching for viable alternatives that will benefit all residents of Area “G” and not lead to costly increases. I am currently entertaining the option of splitting Area “G” into two areas, G1 and G2, for the purpose of Curbside Garbage and Recycling service. G2 would be the Trailer Court near Red Bridge on Hwy. 3 to the border of Area “H” including Old Hedley Road and Hedley comprising approximately of 250 homes/households. G1 would comprise of the remaining approximately 820 households/residents in rural Keremeos, Olalla, along the highway and across Red Bridge.
I have received positive feedback from The Town of Princeton and Area “H” Director in considering allowing G2 to use the Princeton Landfill. I have communicated this request to the Princeton Contractor and he has indicated a willingness to enter into a five year contract. He has indicated that his price would be considerably lower than those quoted by ….. it would be the same service, excluding yard waste.
I respectfully requested that the RDOS Board of Directors support this endeavour by recommending that RDOS staff (waste management ) forward a request to BFI for a revised quote for Area “G1”. A revised quote lower than the current one would be an economic benefit to all of Area “G” and we can proceed to the next step.
The people of Area “G” believe that their 56 per cent increase above the previous contract pick-up price is unreasonable. The explanation for this is that Area ”G” is a long distance to drive with low density residences. If this factor is removed, by splitting the area into two Service Areas for cubside services, this point is no longer a factor, and the result is that Area “G1” has the same driving distance and density (if not better) than some of the other areas.
I run into a lot of opposition from the board and staff and at one point I had to ask the board, what is the mission statement of the RDOS? (To initiate and implement policies which preserve and enhance the quality of life and serve the broader public interest in an effective, equitable, environmental and fiscally responsible manner).
I asked, “are we not here to help and make things better, to improve living in our area in a cost-effective manner?”
I believe it is each director’s duty to his/her constituents to work for them to get what could/would be the best deal available and to speak for them, that is why they the people elected us.
The board voted in my favour, and staff were to talk to BFI re “G1”, I was verbally told no, they would not revisit it, again I asked and was told that BFI have spend $24,000 plus on equipment for Area “G” cubside pick-up, I asked to see the correspondence re this, perhaps soon I will be given a copy, as of today I have not seen the refusal and will not give up.
I would like to thank Colleen in Hedley, Flo Winfrey in Olalla, Louise Lamb and Ann Bertrand, rural Keremeos, and others who stepped forward to collect over 600 signatures against this increase.
The idea was to have “G1” re- assessed from BFI with a lower collecting fee and “G2” would go to Princeton. This would make all Area “G” happy, but if BFI will not re assess “G1”.
I see no fair solution to my/our problem re; unfair collection cost.
Any one got any ideas? Feel free to contact me with any suggestions:
– Elef Christensen