|
composting service costs are paid for through garbage rates. In that case, a rate increase may be
<br /> needed to keep the solid waste provider whole. However, a rate increase in this situation does not
<br /> necessarily imply an increase in total bills(system cost) to customers. As we've seen in the energy
<br /> field, electricity efficiency(e.g., compact fluorescent light bulbs) paid for through the rate per
<br /> kilowatt hour can be more than offset by the need to purchase fewer kilowatt hours. See the
<br /> November 10th staff report for an example of how solid waste rates could rise significantly
<br /> without increasing total bills to customers. Also note that a reduction in rate revenue does not
<br /> necessarily mean a reduction in total revenue to the service provider if revenue from selling
<br /> recyclables is large enough.
<br /> • Changes in rates could increase costs for some businesses or multi-family accounts even if the
<br /> average account experiences lower costs.
<br /> DISCUSSION
<br /> We have not heard any concerns about the ordinance since the first reading on December 14th. Given the
<br /> outreach and media coverage to date, we believe the ordinance is generally acceptable to the residents and
<br /> businesses of Alameda County.
<br /> Nonetheless, some member agencies are considering opting out due to unique local circumstances.
<br /> A key question for any such agency is: "How do you intend to capture the value lost to your community
<br /> when the community landfills valuable materials for which markets exist?" Figures 1 and 2 show by
<br /> member agency the estimated market value of recyclable and compostable materials landfilled. The tons
<br /> behind the figures are from 2008, when our last full waste characterization study was done. The market
<br /> prices are from the summer of 2011. Commodity prices have fallen some since the summer(perhaps 15%
<br /> on average), as the global economy'cools,'but the long-term trend in commodity prices has been strongly
<br /> upward. Figure 1 is the total value thrown away; Figure 2 is the value of covered materials addressed by
<br /> this ordinance.
<br /> Figure 1: Estimated Value of All Commodities
<br /> Landfilled in 2008
<br /> Newark,$3,533,872 Oakland,$24,227,493
<br /> eg Piedmont,$375,688
<br /> vr
<br /> Livermore,$9,648,440 +a��,�
<br /> `,x Pleasanton,$9,974,476
<br /> '-4x
<br /> $11,283,955 - San Leandro,$8099,317
<br /> Union City,$4,460,155
<br /> Fremont,515,255,819 ..
<br /> Unincorporated,$663,936
<br /> Oro Loma S.D,$3,395,638
<br /> h}j
<br /> ' \.CVSD.$2,844.960 3
<br /> Emeryville,$1,446,354_/ 1 Albany,$556,226 49
<br /> Dublin,$3,488,951 Alameda,$3,877,152
<br />
|