If $1.8 million for additional pollution controls adds $.11 to the $90/ton tipping fee, then at that rate the other $32 million would add only $1.95/ton to the current fee. ($32/1.8 X $.11) Is the current tipping fee $88.05/ton? I don't think so.
If the average residence is going to pay $25 more per year, this suggests that the average residence generates more that 12 tons of waste per year ($25/$1.95), or about 490 pounds per week. I don't think so.
$25 represents a 10% increase in my current refuse collection bill. Let's take a guess and say that the tipping fee represents 1/5 of the total cost of collection, with the remainder going to labor, fuel and equipment costs, etc. This implies a 50% increase in tipping costs, not 2.2% ($1.95/$88.05)
What kind of reporting is this, that let's such obviously wrong data go unquestioned, or, perhaps, for accurate information to be reported inaccurately ?
How hard would it be to report the current tipping cost, and better yet to tell us how many tons (or ounces, or milligrams) of mercury are going to be captured with the $1.8 million added investment, and the added operating cost associated with that investment?
This is a serious issue that deserves serious reporting. The fluff needs to be sent to the landfill.
More information about formatting options