[coffeebean]

Originally Posted by PatsyHedrick

A major source of non-biodegradable plastics are restaurants that routinely serve drinks with plastic straws and package takeout or leftovers in styrofoam containers. As their customers, perhaps we can change this practice.

Who is willing to work as a group to urge restaurantures to switch to biodegradable paper straws and take out containers? I am, anyone else?

Paper straws are not very good for drinking foo foo frozen drinks through. They get all mushy and colllapse before I can finish my drink. Having said that, the other day I was served a paper straw that was the best paper straw I ever saw. It held its shape and can easily stand up to a Pina Colada. I can't remember which restaurant uses this excellent paper straw.

[rlsjks1987@gmail.com]

You are correct. 1x per week does not work in the south due to smell and decomposing waste.

[rlsjks1987@gmail.com]

Why should residents have to pay more money when contractor(WMX) is willing to receive less money to drive more miles at a higher expense when a large portion of WTE waste ends up in landfills due equipment failures or too much volume!

[BossLady]

I’m terribly sad, heartbroken in fact for the planet, that recycling will be discontinued. Supposedly a plastic water bottle takes 450 years to degrade in a land-fill; 450 years. “Forgive them for they know not what they are doing”.

[coffeebean]

Originally Posted by BossLady

I’m terribly sad, heartbroken in fact for the planet, that recycling will be discontinued. Supposedly a plastic water bottle takes 450 years to degrade in a land-fill; 450 years. “Forgive them for they know not what they are doing”.

I'm not understanding your dismay. Or......maybe I'm not understanding what is going to happen to plastics with the Covanta program. Plastics will not be going into landfills but will be burned for energy. Isn't that correct?

[Red Rose]

I'm happy about the change. I think the waste to energy concept should have been implemented a couple of years ago. With all the new technology and safety restrictions in place, this is an environmentally friendly operation.

[twoplanekid]

comments made by me at the District 10 meeting on 6/4/20

Some at the final NSCUDD Waste workshop stated that recycling is not easy. While watching the US return to launching our spacecraft to orbit, the words of President Kennedy echoed in my mind. “We choose to go to the Moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard; because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills”. The option of burning all trash at the Covanta Waste- to-Energy plant is easy but doesn’t fit my view of a good recycling program nor lower costs.

I was told that a new Waste Management Plan was needed to improve recycling and reduce expected cost increases. Well, the Covanta only option is the most costly and will help to increase NSCUDDs total rate increases to almost 24% over a one year time from ($ 17.90 to $22.24) excluding our new 2.5 % yearly increase and the likely new charge for bulk white goods pickup . While burning trash does reduce the volume of waste by some 90% to a pile of ash, the recyclable materials collected is minimal. For me, burning recyclable material is not recycling. Plus, no one will think about recycling as we did when placing items in a recycling bin every day for a weekly pickup. Instead, we will have a situation where recycling is kind of out of sight out of mind. We now burn everything which is better recycling?

I would note that Villagers living south of 44 can’t complain to the developer that we have a recycling program and they don’t as all Villagers will soon have the same program of taking all trash to Covanta for burning. However, those under the NSCUDD trash program will pay about 10% more in monthly trash fees than Villagers south of 44 on a private system.

I suspected that a waste to energy option might be in the works as the NSCUDD board visited the Pasco Covanta WTE plant last summer. I thought the Covanta spokesperson explained that waste to energy facilities in the US were having a difficult time making a profit. There has been a reduction of WTE plants in the US from 87 ten years ago to 73 today. Never the less, several other board members were excited that NSCUDD might even build a new waste to energy plant to be used by Villagers until staff nixed those thoughts as being way too expensive.

If the intent of this Waste Management Plan study was to have NSCUDD provide the same service as found in the Villages south of 44, OK but don’t do it under the guise of improving recycling and reducing costs because that isn’t happening.

I am disappointed to see recycling disappear and the selection of the highest cost trash option which will add about 1.5 million of additional yearly costs based on estimated budget numbers. Yet, I understand many see and hear things differently like watching commentators on CNN rather than FOX news or vice versa. As a District 10 representative on the NSCUDD board, I wanted you to hear my personal views/the other side of the story on what is taking place.

I would add that facts are sometimes hard to picture and my failure to ask enough questions didn’t help.

P.O.A. One of the poll questions asked at the second NSCUDD workshop in August was "I am willing to pay slightly more (less the $2 per month) to maintain the current waste and recycling program" So, the starting figure of $19.38 should be used and not compare one rate increase with another as the POA did in stating that “shows an initial impact of +$1.39 I would compare 19.38 to 22.24 which is a $2.86 increase thus more than the $2 comfortability level. I should have asked to review the questions presented by Jacobs and add a few of my own questions at the poll gathering workshop.

And, I should have questioned the comparing of option one actual recycling rate to the Covanta rate of recycling which is based on recycling credits as I feel it’s like comparing apples to oranges. In the same comparison of final options chart, miles driven were listed to suggest that fewer miles would mean less pollution. However, no mention or inclusion was given to things coming out of the Covanta stack which is also regulated by the same government agency as cars and trucks so far as pollution is concerned. It could be argued that both trucks hauling trash and Covanta burning waste pollute the earth to some degree.

Everyone tries to put a spin on things which makes it that much harder to arrive at a clear understanding. Thanks again for listening to my perspective. As the devil is in the details, please question facts presented by everyone including myself to fully understand the picture presented.

P.S. I wish a representative from Covanta and Waste Management had been in attendance at any of the NSCUDD workshops to clarify more of the positives and negatives representing their specific options after having talked to some of you at this District 10 meeting today. As the Covanta only option will be passed at the NSCUDD meeting on June 18th, I probably won’t vote in protest as I can ask more questions specifically on the perceived benefits of burning recyclable materials of the Covanta rep that will finally be in attendance at this meeting. I always try to keep an open mind except on rising cost figures which I detest.

[coffeebean]

I look at it this way......I'm happy to pay more for the convenience of Corvanta "Waste to Energy" being easier to lump everything into two pick ups per week. Don't have to think about which day is for yard waste or recycles. Just put it all out on trash days. Easy peasy.

I also like the fact that EVERYTHING will be used for energy with the exception of metals. Metals will be recycled as they will be removed from the rest of the trash and yard waste. I honestly think this is a win win.

[NotFromAroundHere]

What I don't understand are the economics of this. Covanta will be driving by my house 1/2 as many times a week, so saving money on trucks, fuel, labor, etc. Then they're going to burn my trash and sell the energy to somebody. Plus they're going to take out the metal and sell it, presumably for a profit, or they wouldn't be doing it.

So they're spending less and bringing in more, but somehow this costs me more?

[twoplanekid]

It is my understand that Jacobs (CH2M Hill)), our current trash hauler will continue to pick up all trash (everything) twice a week starting in October. They will then transport the waste to the Covanta plant to be burned. In the budget is a $2,288,100 line item which I am told is the yearly amount we will pay Covanta. I will ask for more details at the NSCUDD meeting on June 18th. Anyone and everyone interested is invited to attend this public meeting the details of which will be published late next week on Village Community Development Districts under Your District NSCUDD.

[PugMom]

'I also do not understand why the garbage pick ups cannot be only once a week instead of twice a week, reducing carbon footprint.'...i would think the hot weather & pests are the main reason we need pick up 2x a week. it was diff back up 'north'. there trash could sit all week with no ill effects. just my valued opinion, lol

[coffeebean]

Originally Posted by PugMom

'I also do not understand why the garbage pick ups cannot be only once a week instead of twice a week, reducing carbon footprint.'...i would think the hot weather & pests are the main reason we need pick up 2x a week. it was diff back up 'north'. there trash could sit all week with no ill effects. just my valued opinion, lol

As it is now, we have a truck making four passes a week by our house. With this new program, there will be two passes per week. I would not want it any less than that.