[GreenYes Archives] -
[Thread Index] -
[Date Index]
[Date Prev] - [Date Next] - [Thread Prev] - [Thread Next]
[GreenYes] PAYT in New York City
- Subject: [GreenYes] PAYT in New York City
- From: Steve Hammer <shammer@wastesaver.com>
- Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 08:43:17 -0700 (PST)
Here's the text of an op-ed piece that ran in today's
New York Daily News on pay-as-you-throw in New
York City.
TO REDUCE TRASH, PAY AS WE TOSS
By STEVE HAMMER
Mayor Bloomberg's new garbage plan for the city
has received mixed reviews. Community
advocates and environmentalists are rightfully
pleased the mayor wants to move waste around
in a less polluting manner, using our waterways
rather than our surface streets and highways.
The bad news is the plan does little to reduce the
$1 billion the city spends on waste services each
year. The plan reacts to the garbage problem
instead of addressing the cause.
Typical New Yorkers have no idea the trash
services they receive are valued at $322 per year
per household, or that each 20-gallon trash bag
they throw out drains $2.52 from city coffers.
Municipal waste services are a hidden cost, paid
for out of local property taxes.
Trash services in households in other cities,
including San Jose, Calif.; Austin, Tex., and
Buffalo, are metered like other utilities and billed
directly. The more trash they throw away, the more
they pay, giving them an incentive to trim their
waste line.
Studies of cities using these Pay-As-You-Throw
programs have found that waste typically declines
by 17% after PAYT is implemented. In New York,
reductions of this magnitude could save the city
more than $100 million a year.
The program is also a potent revenue source.
Most communities set the fees so they pay 100%
of their municipal waste system budget. Other
communities, such as Los Angeles, use a
modified system, letting property taxes pay for the
collection of two trash cans each week. Anything
over that threshold costs the household an
additional fee.
Critics (including some at the city's Sanitation
Department) are quick to point out that the
program would be tough to implement. It's hard to
meter waste when tenants use a communal trash
room in their apartment building's basement.
The easiest alternative - billing landlords for the
trash on the curb and letting them split the cost
among tenants - is difficult under rent-control and
rent-stabilization rules. Illegal dumping is also a
concern, as people may try to avoid payment by
throwing trash in a vacant lot.
Such problems are not insurmountable, however.
Rent-control rules can be rewritten. Research
elsewhere has found that illegal dumping tends
to be more of a perceived threat than a true
problem. Rates can be structured to ensure that
the program doesn't unfairly penalize low-income
households.
I'm optimistic the mayor will embrace the program
because he made his fortune helping investors
access data that allowed them to make better
purchasing decisions.
PAYT operates the same way. Households
wouldn't necessarily spend less, but they would
have an incentive to buy products that reduce their
trash, such as items with less packaging.
In a city the size of New York, such little changes
can quickly add up. The process of evaluating
PAYT's role in New York's long-term waste
management system should therefore
commence immediately. The longer the delay, the
deeper the budget gap, and the further we remain
from a truly comprehensive solution that
addresses the front and back ends of our waste
problem.
******************************************
To post to the greenyes list,
email to: greenyes@grrn.org
subscription, faq and netiquette info for
this list are available here:
http://greenyes.grrn.org/
Please be sure to read the faq and netiquette
pages before posting.
******************************************
[GreenYes Archives] -
[Date Index] -
[Thread Index]
[Date Prev] - [Date Next] - [Thread Prev] - [Thread Next]