Ongoing Calgarians throwing things into the wrong bins thread

[Shazam]

Look, my empty boxes from Amazon go into the green bin and then good things happen. Who am I to doubt the wisdom of the City of Calgary?

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by GGG

I'll have to dig out the info

But in general we have unlimited space for landfills. It won't use up a meaningful amount of space in the world. All that changes is the cost to build landfills and the transportation costs associate with landfills that are farther away.

Currently there isn't a market for the goods we are recycling so if you go to the Calgary landfill there are stock piles of sorted glass and plastics that have no value and aren't being repurposed. We just have too much of it.

With paper the most CO2 efficient option is methane recovery landfills where we burn the methane from the anarobic decomposition of the waste. That becomes a fairly rewable source of energy as long as you are replanting forests. And we just have too much it to be used effectively as a paper replacement

Aluminum cans and all metals are really cheap to recycle and make a lot of sense to do it.

Basically people's desire to recycle outstrips demand for recycled product and the halo affect of recycling encourages people to forget about the other more important ways to reduce impact. Reuse and Reduce.

EDIT: found what I think I had read previously: There are some issues with the study but it covers some of the concerns with recycling. One problem is tha lack of wholistic research around recycling. Most focuses on very discreet chunks of the problem
https://www.google.ca/amp/s/gizmodo....1738223096/amp

So if we are creating too much of it, wouldn’t the price decline so significantly to encourage packagers to reuse these forms of packaging materials like cardboard? Why couldn’t the government also just incentivize the reuse of these materials rather than implement recycling and then let it pile up everywhere? Example, manufacturing that reuses crap from recycling gets corporate taxation relief or subsidies in some manner.

Why would there still be logging and deforestation but then “too much” cardboard lying around? It really doesn’t make much sense to me and something the government could try to encourage in a more efficient / green way?

Seems like the recycling efforts are only half the problem really. A bunch of glass jars lying around that aren’t being reused? Makes no sense, because people still buy and use crap in glass jars. One would think that economics would drive costs down on reused glass jars for manufacturers who need glass jars for their product.

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

So if we are creating too much of it, wouldn’t the price decline so significantly to encourage packagers to reuse these forms of packaging materials like cardboard? Why couldn’t the government also just incentivize the reuse of these materials rather than implement recycling and then let it pile up everywhere? Example, manufacturing that reuses crap from recycling gets corporate taxation relief or subsidies in some manner.

Why would there still be logging and deforestation but then “too much” cardboard lying around? It really doesn’t make much sense to me and something the government could try to encourage in a more efficient / green way?

Seems like the recycling efforts are only half the problem really. A bunch of glass jars lying around that aren’t being reused? Makes no sense, because people still buy and use crap in glass jars. One would think that economics would drive costs down on reused glass jars for manufacturers who need glass jars for their product.

You can't make new glass out of mixed recycled glass. One person throws out a different type of glass in to the stream and it will wreck a whole batch of new glass, and possibly the machine used to make the glass. Beverage containers that are sorted by type are used as cullet for new glass (or fibreglass) but curbside recycling glass is generally used as filler (in asphalt, tile, etc). Basically it's sorted and then disposed of in low to no value applications.

[GGG]

I think because outside of metals recycling is expensive and of poor quality and new is so cheap. Even once you charge for externalities like CO2 recycling is tough to make work economically as compared to raw material.

[Shazam]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

So if we are creating too much of it, wouldn’t the price decline so significantly to encourage packagers to reuse these forms of packaging materials like cardboard? Why couldn’t the government also just incentivize the reuse of these materials rather than implement recycling and then let it pile up everywhere? Example, manufacturing that reuses crap from recycling gets corporate taxation relief or subsidies in some manner.

Why would there still be logging and deforestation but then “too much” cardboard lying around? It really doesn’t make much sense to me and something the government could try to encourage in a more efficient / green way?

Seems like the recycling efforts are only half the problem really. A bunch of glass jars lying around that aren’t being reused? Makes no sense, because people still buy and use crap in glass jars. One would think that economics would drive costs down on reused glass jars for manufacturers who need glass jars for their product.

Every time paper is recycled its quality diminishes. Thus your Kleenex box is made from 100% recycled paper but the tissue inside is not.

[WilsonFourTwo]

Originally Posted by Wormius

Do trucks exist that can handle the blue and green bin waste at the same time? It seems like consolidating some of the pick up would help costs if that could be done.

Yes. We used to call them Garbage Trucks.

[Inferno099]

Interesting story in the Herald how black bin garbage could increase by 44% even though we already get less pick-up since the green bin began.

In winter we definitely see the decrease in use of the compost bin compared to Apr-Oct when our family does yard work. During Apr-oct we fill compost bin regularly each week. Of course yard waste ends up being the filler.

Garbage is down significantly too.

Blue bin is definitely most used in our family and most families from the full or overflowing blue bins weekly.

The idea of some councillors to offset black bin price increases with reducing property tax is somewhat laughable as that promise to decrease will be made up the following tax year most likely.

The other idea I read of giving choice of multiple size bins although interesting likely reduces the economy’s of scale and price to the city / taxpayer increases.

Billing from Enmax issues are already reported in the news not sure we all need other changes they might not be able to handle.

My 2 cents

[bizaro86]

So basically they prefer regressive taxation? Black bin garbage is a flat rate charge, whereas property tax is based on value.

[Shazam]

Both are regressive.

Property tax is the most regressive tax in Canada.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Shazam

Both are regressive.

Property tax is the most regressive tax in Canada.

You need to define regressive here.

Property tax is a tax on wealth which is progressive in how it's usually defined when talking about taxation options.

Property tax definately has some negative economic consequences especially amoung businesses but that isnt usually discussed as regressive vs progressive.

[FurnaceFace]

...

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by Shazam

Both are regressive.

Property tax is the most regressive tax in Canada.

Not as regressive as the garbage tax. And since you can't opt out, I think it is basically a tax. If we replaced all our property taxes with a flat "garbage fee" would that be more or less progressive?

[Shazam]

Originally Posted by GGG

You need to define regressive here.

Property tax is a tax on wealth which is progressive in how it's usually defined when talking about taxation options.

Property tax definately has some negative economic consequences especially amoung businesses but that isnt usually discussed as regressive vs progressive.

I use the economic terms. Not sure what you're on about.

Progressive taxation - increasing tax rates as income/value increases.

Regressive taxation - flat tax rate regardless of income/value.

[Shazam]

Originally Posted by bizaro86

Not as regressive as the garbage tax. And since you can't opt out, I think it is basically a tax. If we replaced all our property taxes with a flat "garbage fee" would that be more or less progressive?

Nope. Property tax is much more regressive. Garbage fees are paid for for certain groups. No one escapes property tax in this city.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Shazam

I use the economic terms. Not sure what you're on about.

Progressive taxation - increasing tax rates as income/value increases.

Regressive taxation - flat tax rate regardless of income/value.

Those were the definitions I was hoping to use.

With them property tax is not regressive, it is a tax on income. Whether you rent the property to yourself or someone else tha value of the tax is tied directly to the maximum potential income of the property.

Though I do see the regressive argument that as people spend more on property taxes increases and that in certain cases middle income will spend a greater portion of their income on property and therefore incur a higher cost.

[Ducay]

Save money by making Green bin pickup bi-weekly from November to April.

[BigNumbers]

Can I put my amazon boxes in the green bin or was that a joke?

[Wormius]

It also seems kind of inefficient to be driving green bin waste from all corners of the city to the far SE to the Shepard facility, which of course has to be driven back somewhere to actually be used. Does each truck drive all the way back there, or is there some smaller drop off points where one or two bigger trucks go to. I'd be interested in how the logistics of the whole operation work. Is the system that's set up the best it could be?

[Shazam]

Originally Posted by GGG

Those were the definitions I was hoping to use.

With them property tax is not regressive, it is a tax on income. Whether you rent the property to yourself or someone else tha value of the tax is tied directly to the maximum potential income of the property.

Though I do see the regressive argument that as people spend more on property taxes increases and that in certain cases middle income will spend a greater portion of their income on property and therefore incur a higher cost.

Property tax is tied to the value of the property, not its income potential.

You seem to not understand income versus gains.

[Lubicon]

Originally Posted by Wormius

Do trucks exist that can handle the blue and green bin waste at the same time? It seems like consolidating some of the pick up would help costs if that could be done.

That would assume the trucks both go to the same location which I am not sure is the case. Is the composting facility at the same place as the recycling facility?