Recology's Nevada landfill blocked

|
(6)
Winnemucca, Nevada, says "no thanks" to Bay Area trash

The Las Vegas Review-Journal is reporting that the Planning Commission in Humboldt County, Nevada blocked Recology's landfill expansion application in Winnemucca, which is halfway between San Francisco and Salt Lake City.

The news comes close on the heels of the Guardian's report that San Francisco has tentatively selected Recology to dispose of the city's waste in Yuba County.

The LVRJ articles notes that "Recology wants to haul in 4,000 tons of garbage a day from Northern California communities for the next 95 years and dump it on the desert playa about 28 miles west of Winnemucca."

Adam Alberti, a spokesman for Recology and the Jungo Land Co., is quoted as saying that the commission's decision "could cost the region more than $660 million and new jobs."

And U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., is quoted as calling the proposed dump a threat to Nevada's "sovereignty and dignity."

"The proposal to dump a mountain of California trash in Nevada is a lose-lose proposition for our state," Reid said. "The people of Humboldt County have made it clear they don't want other states dumping trash in their backyards, and I applaud their decision. "

Asked if there was a connection between the proposed Nevada dump and San Francisco's trash, given that the city is only proposing a ten-year contract with Recology in Yuba County, Alberti said the landfill Recology was pursuing in Nevada is a "speculative effort" and that San Francisco "prohibits its waste from being taken out of state."

"Recology has no contract in Winnemucca, and you have to have a landfill open before you can enter into a contract," he said.

Here in San Francisco, District 10 candidate Eric Smith said he wants to see a whole lot more light being shone on the debate about what to do with the city's trash.

"There needs to more transparency and accountability in the debate, which needs to include looking at all aspects of the issue, including where and how we transport our trash," Smith said. "Should we barge, rail or truck it? What are the economic and environmental consequences? And is this something the citizens and ratepayers of San Francisco can support? Instead, there appear to be three main companies duking it out under cloak of darkness."

Comments

Re the comment above that the decision on the Jungo Road Landfill results in throwing away $660Million in revenue and new jobs, Alberti is also quoted as saying “The Nevada Department of Economic Development (actually Nevada Commission, NCED) identified projections that, if extrapolated over the life of the project, would generate $323 million in economic activity in the region and $237 million in local and state taxes,” he added. “The project would also generate an additional $100 million in local host fees for Humboldt County.” (http://bit.ly/bUpucn)

The NCED notes their involvement in the numbers Alberti quotes was minimal.(http://bit.ly/cm4YkA). “Recology sent us numbers, we put it into our software and sent the results back. That was pretty much the extent of our involvement,” said Anderson (Dir,BusDev). That's a very different level of involvement than 'identifying projections'. No 3rd party reviewed the numbers Recology provided.

It's interesting Alberti is quoted as saying Jungo was 'speculative' (http://bit.ly/bA0DtL) when talking San Franciscans (that don’t send their trash out of state) into giving Recology their contract. 'Speculative' certainly IS an accurate word for the $660MIL and further re-enforces concerns on the revenue credibility. And while Alberti is being accurate, it's interesting to see phrases from him that indicate an actual figure of $660 million is being thrown away without putting the 'speculative' word in front of it. All one has to do to re-enforce that 'speculative' is the correct word is to look at the Recology/Lincoln county financial outcome.

Guess it just depends on the audience as to which way you spin it.

Yes, Eric Smith, shine the light.

Sincerely,

Tracy Austin

For more information: www.nevadansagainstgarbage
Join us on Facebook at: http://bit.ly/dwMQCk
Show your support, sign and share: http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/stoplandfill/
Follow DesertPlaya for updates and news on the landfill on Twitter at: http://twitter.com/DesertPlaya
See blog on www.friendsofblackrock.org
Join our e-mail list by sending your request to: landfilldata@att.net

Posted by Guest on Apr. 07, 2010 @ 3:41 pm

Re the comment above that the decision on the Jungo Road Landfill results in throwing away $660Million in revenue and new jobs, Alberti is also quoted as saying “The Nevada Department of Economic Development (actually Nevada Commission, NCED) identified projections that, if extrapolated over the life of the project, would generate $323 million in economic activity in the region and $237 million in local and state taxes,” he added. “The project would also generate an additional $100 million in local host fees for Humboldt County.” (http://bit.ly/bUpucn)

The NCED notes their involvement in the numbers Alberti quotes was minimal.(http://bit.ly/cm4YkA). “Recology sent us numbers, we put it into our software and sent the results back. That was pretty much the extent of our involvement,” said Anderson (Dir,BusDev). That's a very different level of involvement than 'identifying projections'. No 3rd party reviewed the numbers Recology provided.

It's interesting Alberti is quoted as saying Jungo was 'speculative' (http://bit.ly/bA0DtL) when talking San Franciscans (that don’t send their trash out of state) into giving Recology their contract. 'Speculative' certainly IS an accurate word for the $660MIL and further re-enforces concerns on the revenue credibility. And while Alberti is being accurate, it's interesting to see phrases from him that indicate an actual figure of $660 million is being thrown away without putting the 'speculative' word in front of it. All one has to do to re-enforce that 'speculative' is the correct word is to look at the Recology/Lincoln county financial outcome.

Guess it just depends on the audience as to which way you spin it.

Yes, Eric Smith, shine the light.

Sincerely,

Tracy Austin

For more information: www.nevadansagainstgarbage
Join us on Facebook at: http://bit.ly/dwMQCk
Show your support, sign and share: http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/stoplandfill/
Follow DesertPlaya for updates and news on the landfill on Twitter at: http://twitter.com/DesertPlaya
See blog on www.friendsofblackrock.org
Join our e-mail list by sending your request to: landfilldata@att.net

Posted by Guest on Apr. 07, 2010 @ 3:45 pm

Recology has not acted in good faith with this small northern Nevada community. They have not been open about the nature of the waste that will be transported here and have had the audacity to produce and distribute propaganda "promising" that there will be no hazardous waste dumped at this Class I Landfill. Their own proposal states that asbestos, sewage sludge, shredded tires and POST-recycled household waste,(pharmaceuticals, diapers, etc, etc, etc) will be the gift they send us in exchange for what? I don't believe for one moment that the numbers they drummed up have any validity. If they used the same formula to estimate the revenue and taxes that local mining projects have brought in over the last 40 years this little towns streets would be paved in gold.

Our health and the futures of our children is not for sale!

Sincerely,
Carra Otto

Posted by Guest on Apr. 08, 2010 @ 4:34 pm

Recology's proposed landfill project near Winnemucca was a loser all the way around. For starters, the proposed site is a playa. Possible flooding! Hello! And the good people of Winnemucca don't want it. California can keep its own garbage. A good place would be the old Kaiser Steel open pit iron mine in the Mojave Desert about 50 miles east of Palm Springs.

Posted by Guest on May. 07, 2010 @ 7:56 pm

There is an alternative solution to hauling San Francisco garbage to Nevada. Our group has a pollution-free, carbon neutral proven technology that can convert organic MSW into useful petroleum products--minus the sulphur in fossil petroleum products. We also offer up to 50% co-financing for an equity position.
Somebody really should talk with us.

Didacus Ramos
GESI--Green Earth Solutions Inc
didacus@gesi-solutions.com

Posted by Guest Didacus Ramos on Jan. 04, 2011 @ 9:23 pm

Are these guys an Affiliate of Waste Management? Good Ol California Political Bullcrap! Especially when it comes to controlling our waste system. I live in a corrupted county government in California. They signed a contract with the company and then then the coounty did mandatory trash pickup even out in the rural communities. They almost have all that money in the bank. It's pittiful because a few of us wonder if they have a quota of plastic trash containers. There are several containers at senior's houses. Actually. there was another company that was doing the waste system in San Fransico.

I had plans on moving out of this twisted state into Nevada but if the local/state government is going after the money instead of the residents of the state, then I better do some rethinking.

Plus, if people are going to use this forum to advertise their own business, they need to get a clue you are as bad as Recology!!!.

Posted by Penny on Feb. 08, 2011 @ 1:41 am

Related articles

  • Ultimate zero

    San Francisco promises that by 2020, no garbage will end up in a landfill. But is that really possible?

  • Recology can't have it both ways