Pay-as-you-throw might be coming
Thursday 4th March 2010, 2:29PM GMT.
ISLANDERS could be charged for the rubbish they do not recycle now mass burn is rejected.
Public Services has embarked on a zero waste strategy after the States last week voted out the Suez incinerator.
People might now be asked to sort their waste for collection and pay for the residual rubbish to be dumped.
Businesses could also be asked to do the same. And to remain competitive, supermarkets would have to change the way they sell products.
Shampoo, milk and wine could be sold through dispensers. Customers might also be expected to collect meat or fish in reusable containers.
The design of many products will have to change so that less packaging is used.
A zero or minimal waste initiative means that rubbish, where possible, must be reused, repaired or recycled – and every waste stream has to be analysed and dealt with.
- Read the full story in the Guernsey Press. See below for subscription details.
- To read Guernsey Press stories in full click here for subscription details. Individual editions are now available online.
Campaigns
Voice For Victims
Voice for Victims is a campaign aimed at promoting the rights of those affected by child sexual abuse.
This is Guernsey
Guernsey Press
Concerning the pay as you throw headline correct me if I am wrong but we pay extorniate amounts in our rates every year for out Refuse collection which is included in the bill for our parochial or parish rates! It is worked out on the size of your property which must be the biggest rip of by the States ever. We recycle most of our rubbish but we pay a helluva lot more that the smaller house down the road whose occupants throw all their rubbish out! Doesn’t make sense. They will have to take off that amount on our rates bill if ever they bring in pay as you throw otherwise the public will be paying twice. Pay as you throw is fine in principal but how it will work I cannot imagine. Remember people check your Parochial and Refuse rate bill that we receive every year.
Report abuse
A very good idea, and a step in the right direction! Not too keen on this though “Shampoo, milk and wine could be sold through dispensers. Customers might also be expected to collect meat or fish in reusable containers.” Through dispensers? Would it not just be more suitable to sell it in recyclable containers, I can just imagine the smell of out of date milk around the squirty bit of the dispenser.
Report abuse
I think the fairest way to pay for your rubbish to to end the charge for rubbish collection through the rates cahrge and go to a system where you buy rubbish bags for collection, similar I believe, to Switzerland. That way the more you recycle and the less rubbish you create the cheaper it is for the individual. Any fly tipping should then be penalised heavily through fines.
Report abuse
Hmmm, I actually agree with everything that is said in this article. Let’s hope it’s not another bit of Press misreporting.
Report abuse
didnt take long for the loonies to come up with that idea then !!!!!
Report abuse
All sounds good but i still have to take lids of plastic bottles on account of it being the wrong plastic, and im still having to bin half my plastic containers because the recycle bins will only take those marked with a 1 or 2 inside the recycle triangle mark, like i said sounds good but not good enough
Report abuse
I’m so pleased that the States are setting an example and moving towards a zero waste strategy. For this to work, we need to become more self-sufficient – produce more food on-island and rely less on importing food from elsewhere. If we still have to import most of our food from the UK etc, we will have more waste and less control on how it will be packaged – how would we deal with packaging that cannot be recycled? I also think it would be more sustainable to introduce dispensers in shops for liquid products where possible, as recycling bottles etc will still contribute to co2 emissions – either through transport or the actual recycling process.
Report abuse
@dellquay
I agree, the current system is crazy. Perhaps we could do it like the french, each house receives a wheely bin based upon the size of the household, that is how much rubbish you may throw out per week, if you need more you have to pay a higher rate to receive a bigger bin and if you recycle well you can pay a lower rate and have a smaller than household sized bin. No black sacks is a bonus, plus once the local dustbin men are able to handle wheelie bins, we can then introduce a wheelie bin for recycle-able waste too.
Report abuse
I could also see a lot of people starting bonfires a lot more to burn their rubbish, it’s bad enough as it is with people starting bonfires, there should be a set day of each month.
Report abuse
The principle of ‘polluter pays’ is a good one – and will help Guernsey ‘reduce, re-use and recycle’ waste. The States’ role is to enable – make it easier via kerb side collection of separated waste, for example. Much saner than building an incinerator…..
Report abuse
Absolutely right, Mr. Emberson. Here in the area of Switzerland where we live, we recycle as much as possible (glass and cans going into underground recycling bins, PET into containers outside supermarkets), other household rubbish goes into black sacks onto which we affix a sticker – value depending on size of bag. No sticker, no collection.
Report abuse
It will be interesting to go down B%Q to see if they order in loads of garden incinerators. If not you can make a decent ones from plans online.
Report abuse
Jason- I don’t think that it will be long before all the different plastics will be recyclable….. there are already factories opening up in England that deal with all plastics…… so be patient, hopefully it won’t be too long. As the price of oil rises…. which it is going to do, it will become increasingly profitable to recycle all plastics.
Meanwhile, making sure you only recycle plastics 1 & 2 as you are doing is important so that the loads are not contaminated and get the best price in the market place.
Also, we can decrease the amount of non recyclable plastics in our bin by leaving them on the shelf in the shops.
Report abuse
I recycle as much as possible already and would like to see measures, such as those Switzerland have put in place, introduced here.
However keen I am to recycle I most certainly would not like to purchase wine, milk or anything similar from dispensers.
Report abuse
GG, Slightly off topic but thats a really really good idea. I wish i’d of thought of it. One day (maybe two) a month then no-one can moan about their washing getting dirty/smelly etc.
Report abuse
PS Omissions: all kitchen waste that can be is composted.
Newspapers/cardboard is collected free of charge every few weeks.
Garden refuse is put in reusable sacks and collected regularly (and composted)- sticker system.
Collection of bulky goods – sticker system (done on weight).
Every household receives the annual collection timetable at the beginning of the year.
Also, a few tips/dumps around but you have to pay to dispose, and this is done on weight.
General rubbish is incinerated!
Report abuse
Bart – so we make all that effort to stop a controlled incinerator, only for us to start having our own uncontrolled incinerators onto which people will throw all sorts of recyclable materials and belch out unfiltered toxic fumes? I think that GG was being cynical, rather than advocating it as the way to go.
I don’t think that wheelie bins would work in Guernsey. Too many houses have limited front space, and the lanes would become littered with eyesores 7 days a week rather than bin sacks for a few hours before collection.
I would support a system of paying per bag as long as it was part of a co-ordinated refuse management system and not just a revenue raiser. We need to do something to reduce our waste. But it would also require improved scope for recycling, to enable us to reduce the waste we throw out.
Report abuse
@TL – I was refering to the moderation and control of the fires you plank. But thanks for being so patronising… sweetheart.
Report abuse
Have a look at the info on this link.
http://www.southhams.gov.uk/index/residents_index/ksp_rubbish_and_recycling.htm
This how to do it. Simple and efficient.
This information was sent to Environment Dept 3 years ago!
And obviously ignored.
Report abuse
Paying for how much you throw away wouldn’t work for me. I live in a block of apartments and we have a big bin which fits many sacks in it. I recycle but other tenants might not. I don’t want to pay for them being lazy!
Report abuse
Bart – my apologies
Report abuse
Did I miss something? I did not notice the States deciding to implement zero-waste. I thought I heard Scott Ogier recommend “waste minimisation.”
In reality, I believe we are to await a green paper from PSD detailing the many options.
Gilthead – I was not entirely impressed with the South Hams example. Quite a lot seems to go to landfill.
Pay-as-you-dispose, either through special sacks or with stickers is obviously the fairest way, although the stickers/bags will still cost us about £2 per week. Additionally, there is the problem of the disorganised households who can barely get their waste to the roadside now – how will they manage the purchase of bags or stickers? Then you have those who will fly tip.
Elsewhere in the world, as more and more products become recyclable, the best practice seems to be just 2 bins or bags. One for all dry recyclates, mixed because they are easier to collect that way and they can be easily separated by machinery later. The second bag or bin for wet waste like food, nappies, non recyclables etc, that can be treated by autoclaving or pyrolysis.
It takes a very special community for ALL its members to be organised enough to achieve zero waste. Guernsey would need at least one generation of specialist education, if not more before that could be achieved.
Report abuse
Katy, Majority of people live in apartment blocks in Switzerland, and system works well with everyone putting the appropriate sticker on individual sacks before putting them in huge bins. And yes, they are “policed”! I heard of someone who hadn’t put the sticker on her sack and she had to pay a hefty fine!
Report abuse
For any system to work, you must think how the laziest person on the island is voluntary going to implement any ideas we come up with!! The people who think that paying anymore than their rates is extortion, and would rather dump there household rubbish on the golf course at Lancresse, than pay a couple of quid extra. I’m sure the police have better things to do than go round checking on peoples rubbish, and all that paperwork just to fine somebody over a misplaced empty tin of baked beans. At present, we have a good way of collecting our rubbish, and all the States have to do is find a way of sorting it, so that it can be recycled.
Report abuse
I’m in the same situation as Katy and if there is one thing I cannot stand its recyclable material going to the landfill. Thanks to Guern in Switzerland for the enlightening posts :)
Report abuse
It appears patently unfair that households are charged for the collection and disposal of their residual waste on the basis of the area of their property rather than on the amount of waste they generate. However one must not expect too much from a proportional charging system. Currently each household in a typical rural parish is paying a weekly average of 35p to have their waste collected and £1.65 to have it disposed of into Mont Cuet. With a proportional charging system these averages would obviously remain the same and they do not leave a large margin for financial incentives to reduce residual waste or for funding new recycling initiatives as I will explain below.
Introducing a single, weekly kerbside collection of recyclables and compostables would cost households at least an additional 35p a week for collection (probably nearer 50p given the need to finance specialized, double-manned vehicles). What the ‘disposal’ costs, if any, of the recyclables & compostables would be is anybody’s guess because the figure will depend upon market rates & shipping costs.
For all this to balance out and for the average cost per household to remain the same as now clearly the current disposal charge, £1.65, would have to reduce to compensate for any nett cost of collecting, shipping & processing the recyclables. I acknowledge there is already ‘fat’ in the figure of £1.65 because the gate fee is inflated to finance our current recycling initiatives (amongst other things) but it is hard, when considering pence per week, to see much room for financial incentives to recycle more than households are doing at the moment.
To put the margin for financial incentives into perspective, the average weekly disposal charge of £1.65 would have had to increase to £2.15 in order to fund the capital and operating costs of the Suez plant (based on £175/tonne). So the difference between what households are paying now, which generates very few complaints, and what has been described as an intolerable burden on households is 50p a week. It is because these financial margins, both up and down, are so slim that my guess is household residual waste minimization will have to rely on mandatory, policed recycling and composting.
Far too much emphasis has been placed on household waste rather than on the bigger and more complex problem of commercial and industrial waste, the collection of which is chaotic relative to the ordered world of household waste collections.
Report abuse
MalB- Unless I have misunderstood your post, you would seem to be saying that we should all be dragged down to the level of the laziest person in Guernsey and those that are happy to fly tip. I do agree that whatever system is implemented, it must be made easy for us all to do the right thing…to recycle. However, that will require that we take the time to put the different materials into the right bins. If the recyclates are collected from your home….. it would require even more effort to take it somewhere else to fly tip.
Report abuse
Probably the best way to stop all the waste is to stop it from source, the supermarkets put way too much packaging on all their products, and half of which isn’t even grown/made here. Take M&S for example, there are no products in the store other than the Milk, that are locally grown, even the potatoes are from the UK!
Report abuse
Pay as you throw, bring it on, as there are a lot of households that cannot be bothered to recycle even the easiest items.
Report abuse
Well if it does come so will flytipping and some very unhygeinic activities. Recycling is the answer.
Report abuse
Shane,
I am always delighted to see deputies on here engaging in debate and all the more so when you have clearly spent some time thinking about it.
However, following on from what you write, consider this:
Household waste is currently about a third of the waste that will go to the plant. I believe businesses and commercial entities will find ways of minimising their waste due to the gate fees – it is already falling as a result of recent increases. No-one is going to pay £175 or more to send wood to the plant for a start and this represents 20% of the proposed waste stream! So let us assume that commercial and industrial entities cut their waste by half (probably by some enterprising soul undercutting Suez – it won’t be hard) then households now find themselves paying not £1.65 per week (I prefer to say £85 a year) but £3.50 a week (£182 a year). Cut it whichever way you want, we will have to find £8m+ a year to run this thing even if we only send one tonne of waste. The only people to benefit from the financial structure of this deal are Suez, which is not surprising as they designed it!
As to mandatory recycling – don’t underestimate the will of the people to do the right thing. I have visited friends all over the UK and they take keeping waste streams separate in their stride.
regards
Islander.
Report abuse
I’m sorry But we’re going to have to have a burner cuz some stuff is just not recyclable..
Lets take hospital waist ???.
Who would like to recycle human body parts.
Or
Ladies towels that they use every month.. ???.. why don’t all the girls use washable ones ?.
or
how about nappy liners.. Even if you use terry towels
or
or
or
or
I could carry on and on..
The truth of the matter is there is loads of stuff we can’t reclcye that we have got to get rid of.. and the only way is BURN it. Like it or not.
C### is C###.. you can’t reclcye it.. just talk it.
Report abuse
Islander,
You are right it will cost us £8million a year to fund the capital and operating costs of the Suez plant (the now legendary ‘£200million over 25 years!’). However we are already paying £5.7million pa in charges for our existing system. The States, if it so wished, would only have to raise taxes by 0.7% and we could fund the Suez plant whilst keeping waste charges as they are at the moment. There would then be no additional incentive for companies to circumvent the system. An extraordinary level of concern about costs has been generated by some people and the media which has grossly distorted the debate. Yes, the Suez plant is expensive but so will be any waste management solution other than landfill in a small, affluent island; from exporting our waste right through to ‘moving towards zero-waste’.
Pretty much everybody I know is an avid re-cycler too, but firstly it is a big mistake to make judgements in life based on personal experience and secondly the two year free kerbside collection of re-cyclables in my parish had virtually no effect on the tonnage of residual waste also collected (don’t ask, I cannot understand it either).
‘Moving towards zero-waste’ has a similarity with other credos such as communism; if it is seen as failing its proponents can always argue it is not being implemented rigorously enough.
Report abuse
melc
I could be wrong here but I thought there was an incinerator at the hospital for ‘waste’?
Report abuse
Shane:
Could you explain how a waste strategy based on a move towards Zero Waste could approach the cost of the £8m annual cost of Suez. I have noticed a few posts saying a similar thing and yet I have not seen any evidence to warrant such a comment.
I am glad that most people you know are avid-recyclers. I would say the same thing although I know of some who see no point as they pay for the rubbish collection in their rates irrespective of how much they put out. If Suez does get built….. we can guarantee that they and many more like them will give up any notion of recycling.
Report abuse
Hi Shane,
You say that we are paying £5.7m a year for our existing system. But I don’t think it is costing that – I think that is what we are being charged which is clearly not the same thing at all. Does it not include a levy to pay off the costs on Lurgi (and no doubt will have to include a levy to pay off Suez – surely no-one will try a third time)
Suez however will cost £8m – so the difference in the cost of the two methods is much greater than you infer. (Don’t worry – this is not going to be an argument to keep landfill).
However even if the true difference was a (mere?) £2.3m a year (and I have no idea how much this represents as a percentage of taxes (rates?) but will accept 0.7%) are you suggesting that it would be an acceptable way to ensure that waste does not get diverted from the plant to increase rates rather than gate fees? I thought the whole idea was that this plant was self-funding? If this is the latest thinking, should it not be run past the public first?
Clearly one way of making it cheaper to get rid of our waste is to not to make so much in the first place. Clearly what is needed is a costing of a multi-stream waste minimisation programme but I fail to see how it can be anywhere near the price of Suez when there will be no need for a flagship building and no need to contribute to the profits of a large multinational company.
Report abuse
R E Cyler..
You are correct.. There are a number of industrail incinerator all ready here and working in the Island. There are 7 that I know of.
But nothing like the monster thing like Suez want to build. and I don’t think we really need.
But the truth is we need an incinerator for some stuff and there is no getting away from it
Couple of smaller ones would be better. and cheaper
Report abuse
Whta about people without cars etc?! And if their old or unable to get to a recycling site?! Unless kirb side is brought in this will never work!
Report abuse
Rosie,
‘Moving towards zero-waste’ is a philosophy not a strategy. The fact that costs cannot be quantified until a strategy is developed is a reason why, within a fortnight, ‘moving towards zero-waste’ has been adopted by so many as the alternative to the Suez proposal. It has even ousted the previous hot favourite, the patented Vantage steam autoclave and that was advertised as being free.
There is of course also some basic human psychology regarding our attitude to waste involved but I won’t go into that now.
As Professor Connett was at pains to point out repeatedly during his presentation ‘moving towards zero-waste’ is a great way to create employment. He mentioned figures in the hundreds several times. Appropriate for Costa Rica, but for Guernsey? Where are we going to find the workers and how much will it cost given that labour is usually the biggest expense in any enterprise.
Nobody can predict what income, if any, could be derived from recyclables in say five years time. It is premature to develop an economic model for a waste strategy for the next twenty-five years on the basis that oil prices are going to go through the roof permanently in that timeframe.
As has been pointed out there are unknowns and assumptions in the States waste management strategy but no more than will be inevitable in any strategy derived from the ‘moving towards zero-waste’ philosophy.
As I pointed out in a previous post the margins are too slim for effective financial incentives to recycle more. It will be necessary, as you have acknowledged in the past, to introduce a more authoritarian regime including mandatory re-cycling and the policing that will be necessary to enforce it.
Report abuse
Roy Bisson – well of course there will be landfill! You’ll never ever be able to recycle everything.
Where, pray, do you think the fly ash from the Suez plant would have gone – the planet Zurb?
Shane Langlois – “moving towards zero waste” is a strategy. Its a bit buzzy granted. Would you prefer…”Guernsey will introduce the worlds most advanced recycling practices and turn its back on outdated, precious resouce hungry, polluting and climate changing incineration”
Is that better?
Even if we have to give our recycled material away it better than burning it.
Report abuse
I would like to conduct a survey among all those who support a zero waste approach
to see how honest and committed they are to their strategy.
Ask yourselves the following four questions:-
1) What percentage of your current wardrobe is composed of second hand clothes?
2) In the last three months have often have you been down to the Longue Hougue
re-cycling site and taken something out of the scavengers skips?
3) Was your main car bought second hand or did you buy it new?
4) What proportion of the food that you eat on a weekly basis is ‘home’ grown, either
by yourself or at least ‘hedge veg’?
If you are going to try to impose zero waste on the people of this island, you will never
convince anyone until you score maximum marks on these sort of questions.
How will Rosie and Rupert Dorey or Richard Lord fare I wonder?
Report abuse
pay as you throw? throw where? we will have no place to put our rubbish. you cant recycle any old rubbish. it has to be sorted and graded first. you also need a market for the recycled items. i seem to remember we had the same problem with the glass not too long ago. everybody put the green glass in the green bin and the clear glass in the clear bin…then what happened? it was all crushed together !!
i am afraid if you dont start thinking beyond next week, then the island will become one giant fly tip.
as far as i can see, waste to energy is the only way for a small island.
Report abuse
Baphomet- Your rubbish only needs sorting if you muddle it all up together. Keep it separate and most of it is no longer ‘rubbish’….. it is a material that can be reused or recycled.
It is because we must start to think beyond next week that we should be looking at a waste strategy that moves Guernsey towards becoming a sustainable community.
Report abuse
Shane:
I would agree that the difference in opinion between those that would like a large end solution that relies on a technological fix and those that seek to minimise the problem is a philosophical one. But this is exactly the debate that needs to be had..
The first strives to ‘accommodate’ a problem and even plans to provide provision for the problem to grow. It accepts that the problem exists but does not attempt to look at the consequences of allowing that problem to continue nor of the consequences of using that technology – ie toxic end products and large emissions.
The second strives to reduce the size of the problem with the ultimate aim of eradicating the problem (where possible). It recognises that the consequences of allowing the problem to continue cannot be ignored so it looks at how the problem can be turned into an advantage and how the problem can be designed out of the system. The waste minimising philosophy acknowledges that the linear economy (cradle to grave) of the 20th C. cannot continue and that we need to develop a circular economy (cradle to cradle) and we all need to be responsible for making that happen.
Given these two philosophies, I believe that there is a growing consensus on which option is the ‘right’ one to go for. By taking the example of other communities and businesses who have gone down this road of waste minimisation before us, it appears that there are considerable financial savings to be made. It is shocking that we have been looking into how to deal with our waste for so many years, and this approach has not yet been properly costed out. The previous waste strategy, by setting out the size of a desired end-of-line waste plant precluded any chance of looking at strategies that would seriously reduce our residual waste. It is no different to the continuous improvement programmes adopted by most competitive businesses who constantly drive out ‘waste’ of all kinds from their business model as it make sound commercial sense.
However even if aiming for a Zero Waste strategy was more expensive than mass-burn incineration in the short term, I would still say that it is the right philosophy for a small, wealthy, high-consuming, self-governing community to adopt – in the full knowledge that over time the problem and the costs would reduce – hopefully significantly.
You point out that there are ‘unknowns’ & ‘assumptions’ in the States Waste Strategy (what to do with the bottom ash being one) and that similarly there are some in a Waste Minimisation Strategy. The difference between the two is that every problem and challenge that is overcome with a Waste Minimisation Strategy, is another step towards making Guernsey a more sustainable island and that is going to become crucial over the next 20 / 30 years. The same cannot be said of a waste solution that accommodates a problem, ignores the consequences that are created because of it and will delay us from operating our community in the most responsible manner for a quarter of a decade.
Report abuse
Islander
Yes, there is a difference between what a service costs the States and what the States charges, as I said in my first post;
“I acknowledge there is already ‘fat’ in the figure of £1.65 because the gate fee is inflated to finance our current recycling initiatives (amongst other things)…”
‘Polluter pays’ and ‘self-funding’ have become mantras but they are not egalitarian concepts. They can easily be misused as justification for imposing, in effect, flat rate taxes regardless of ability to pay. I brought an amendment to the Fiscal & Economic Policy Plan to make transparent the effect of Departments raising their charges to compensate for tighter budgetary constraints.
I was using the current charge only as an indicator of the narrow margin between what households & companies are willing to pay now and the anticipated cost of the Suez plant.
There is a big difference between residual waste minimization, which could be simply a re-categorisation of waste arisings, and actually reducing the tonnage of waste arisings. Re-categorisation still leaves us with the same tonnages to deal with, albeit with more in the ‘re-cyclable’ category. Quite how anybody expects to get the waste arisings tonnage itself down to below those anticipated in the States waste management strategy without draconian controls on imported goods I do not know.
Whether we like it or not I believe we will have at least 35 – 40,000 tonnes pa of residual waste to dispose of for the foreseeable future.
Report abuse
Shane:
“Polluter Pays” has been a terminology that has been used extensively to sell the Suez proposal and yet paying for the plant was so clearly not going to be a polluter pays system. As you say…. the terminology can be misused. Another example is that the Suez plant has repeatedly been described as a ‘sustainable’ solution when…. again… clearly it was not. It is very misleading when words that people associate with being ‘green’ or doing the right thing are used to sell something that is environmentally very poor. Greenwashing is what I would call it.
It is not hard to see how we could reduce our current ‘residual’ waste stream down to about 20,000 tonnes. I don’t know why you think that we have to provide for 35 to 40,000 tonnes.
Report abuse
Rosie,
In a previous post today you state that we need leadership to make zero waste a reality. See quote below:-
“When Paul Connett was here, he told us that in all the places that he has visited promoting a Zero Waste philosophy, he has never come across anywhere where the people are the problem. It is always the leadership……. or lack of it!
I am not saying that a waste strategy built around the philosophy of minimising waste will not have its challenges… it will. But with committed leadership that can demonstrate determination and enthusiasm for a strategy that will lead Guernsey (at last) in the right direction…. the people and community will get behind it. There is already a huge amount of impetus amongst the people that just needs nurturing and encouragement”
Could you therefore answer the four simple questions I posed on the 10th March above, to prove to everyone you practice what you preach?
If you strive to live in a ‘zero waste world’ show us how it is done. How have you overcome the challenges?
Report abuse
@Tim
1)40%
2)10
3)4th hand
4)60%
Report abuse
Tim:
Let’s remember that a zero waste strategy does not mean that we would have zero waste tomorrow or possibly, ever. It means that you devise a strategy that takes you in that direction…. ‘towards zero waste’….. that becomes your target, something to aim for. With mass-burn incineration, you are being taken in the opposite direction…. your target becomes one of ensuring that you generate waste and in our case it would be a minimum of 37,000 tonnes if you want your energy for 2,000 homes. It’s… (and I mean figuratively not politically) a case of do we turn right or do we turn left?
You want me to give examples of what I do currently while in a system that does NOT encourage me to minimse my waste. Personnally, I think that that is completely irrelevant and I dislike the attempt you are making to personalise this discussion. I do not set myself up as a ‘leader’ in Zero Waste as you would imply, I merely ask that our ‘elected leaders’ set up the infrastructure so that it is easier for us all to reduce our waste so that Guernsey can avoid the expense and other negative consequences of a mass-burn incinerator. I believe that this would be a much better route for our community to take…. irrespective of how good or bad I am personally at it. If I am really bad…. then my behaviour should not be ‘accommodated’…. the infrastructure should be set up to encourage me to do better.
In order to avoid you accusing me of trying to duck awkward questions, here are my answers:
1. I don’t score well on clothes. I am not a great follower of fashion so don’t buy often but I know I still have way too much. I get things off ebay and very ocassionally from the Bourges hospice or Red Cross, not necessarily for me but for my children. Generally, I buy new.
2. I visit Longue Hougue pretty regularly, particularly if I am down that way in the car. Rarely find anything there other than garden things because everything gets ruined in the rain. A proper reclamation / re-use yard would be quite different….. that would be brilliant. I would really enjoy to get things like that and did enjoy it when living in England.
3. ‘Main’ car? What’s that? We have only ever had one car at a time. All the cars we have ever had since the early 80’s have been 2nd, 3rd or 4th hand cars. Having said that, when we returned to Guernsey 6 years ago, we exchanged our too big 2nd hand estate car for a Guernsey sized small car and the first new one we have ever had. That we will stick with for the duration….. (much to the annoyance of the garage that is constantly trying to tempt us with the latest models with gimmicks such as zero interest etc etc.)
4. All the veg we eat is homegrown or at least Guernsey grown. We eat meat & fish ocassionally, either local or British. But none of it is ever packaged.
A more relevant question would be to ask how much waste we put out for collection and the answer to that is approx one black bag every 5 to 6 weeks. So far this year we have put out a total of 8kgs of waste…… approx equivalent to 50-60kg for our household for an entire year.
Report abuse
Asking consumption questions like this would prove as much as asking Londoners if they use coal fires before the great smog of 1952 – most of whom did. Clearly before the Clean Air Act most Londoners used coal to heat their homes. It was only after the introduction of the CAA along with the the rise of central heating consumer habits were changed.
You can’t use current consumption habits to disprove the success or otherwise of a waste minimisation strategy. Waste minimisation is a strategic process agreed by government and backed by legislation and education.
What it isn’t is an excercise in counting how much homegrown vegetables we currently eat or how long we keep our cars.
Report abuse
Tim
Wouldn`t it have been better to ask what direction the waste stratergy would take us in rather then your feeble attempt to discredit Rosie.
I wouldn`t have even bothered to answer such rubbish if i was her.
The only preaching is comeing from the very few people like yourself telling the vast majority of the Island that we can not or will not do the things Rosie suggests and we have to have an incinerator, but you know beat eh Tim?.
Report abuse
I totally agree Neil. I can’t figure out how Tim’s mind works but clearly he is struggling with the concept of a community working collectively to reduce a problem for the common good.
Report abuse
Shane,
a nice breakdown of the cost per week pre suez and post suez.
Perhaps you could also advise how much of the £2 per week per household would no longer be in the Guernsey economy if Suez had won?
Report abuse
Rosie
Thanks for your open and honest reply to my four questions. I can see you
clearly do practice what you preach. I apologize for personalizing this issue around
you and don’t intend to continue in that vein. I have in fact asked all Deputies who
supported the Lowe amendment the same four questions. Of those who have replied,
Scott Ogier is way out in front.
What I don’t understand is why you see a solution to solid waste management in such stark,
black and white terms?.The Suez proposal involves us reaching a 50% recycling target
and you yourself say that we may never reach zero waste, but must move in that direction.
Surely therefore there must be some common ground in the middle of all that?
There is very little, or no, incentive for people to re-cycle in Guernsey and Longue Hougue
is pretty basic, as you say, but people do re-cycle never the less. I don’t see why you feel
re-cycling will stop just because we build an Energy from Waste plant, especially if it includes a
materials recovery element? I won’t stop recycling.
The two questions I would really like answered are:- a) How long will it take to get sixty one
thousand or more people to change their lifestyles and consumer habits, formed over several
generations, and to fall into line with a zero waste strategy?, and b) What effect will the subsequent
reduction in consumer spending have on the islands economy?
I will answer my own four questions, as best I can:-
1) I have never considered buying second-hand clothes other than for fancy dress parties. I don’t
have a large wardrobe and most of my clothes are bought by my wife. I only buy what I feel I need
2) I occasionally go to Longue Hougue, to dump things off, but the scavenger’s area has no appeal,
not even the free wood pile. As you say, that area could be so much better..It needs far more
investment.
3) Many families in Guernsey have two or more cars, hence my reference to the ‘main’ car. Ours is
new, but small and economical. I have a horror of large 4x4s which seem to dominate our roads.
4) We don’t grow our own veg. but could if we took the time and trouble, as we have an old glass
house. We do buy hedge veg, but M&S invariable wins out, on quality and convenience grounds.
l
I can’t say if my ‘consumer profile’ is nearer the Guernsey average than yours, but I know somebody
is going to have one hell of a job getting islanders to radically change their buying patterns. How long
will it take to change the habits of a lifetime, without resorting to draconian measures?
It will require a whole new approach to life, to embrace waste minimization, and we can’t even
get people to accept environmentally green paid parking over here!.
How much longer will our one toxic land fill site last? What is the best estimate at the moment?
What are we going to do if a zero waste strategy does not deliver in time? Burning in Jersey is not
an option on ethical grounds, so what happens when Mont Cuet closes? An environmental
disaster, is my best guess.
How does the business community feel about their customers re-cycling, reusing and reducing?
You say your garage is already annoyed at you for not buying a new car every so often. What about
the effect of the whole island’s population spending less and less on clothes, food or luxury goods?
Will business back a zero waste strategy then? How will we convince large UK or foreign companies to re-package their goods just to ship across to ‘zero waste Guernsey’? It is a huge ‘ask’. .
It just will not happen overnight and we have so little time left it is really scary.
Rosie, you say a more relevant question in my survey would be to ask how much waste you
put out in black bins? It is admirable that you have got it down to 50-60kg per year, and black bin
waste is what most people talk about in discussion like this. All the focus is on bring bins versus
kerbside etc., when the real problem is industrial and commercial waste.
The tonnage of which dwarfs any domestic waste, but it is largely ignored by the man in the street,
because they don’t really see or experience it.
I can’t imagine there will be anybody on the steps of the Royal Court next week waving placards
saying ‘NO TO RECYCLING’, but there will be a lot of people at home thinking “What has the anti-incinerator group let the island in for?”.
Report abuse
Tim
When you look at a half glass of water do you see a half empty glass or a half full glass?
Report abuse
Oops. This string seems to have dried up since I posted my reply to Rosie. Can I assume that the realization of exactly what a zero waste strategy
will mean to all the consumers out there, has made them think twice about supporting such an unachievable goal? We just do not have the time left.
Report abuse