RE: [GreenYes] Producer Responsibility & Consumer Costs

[Heide Feldman <hfeldman@mrwmd.org>]

I agree that this is a complex issue, but think that consumers of products
should be responsible for disposal costs.  There are already several models
for this, incl. the purchase of tires where we pay a disposal fee in
addition to the cost of the tire. Bottle bills do the same, when we pay a
deposit we are in a way paying for the recycling of the bottle.  If I buy a
computer, I should pay for its disposal as part of the overall cost of the
unit.  The person who doesn't own a computer should not have to pay for our
purchase. Of course, we could say the producers should be responsible, but
that simply means that they would add the cost to the product so the outcome
is the same.

As to landfills, many of them are owned by public agencies, not haulers. In
our case, the landfill fees (fairly low at $30/ton) still help to pay for
our recycling program (we divert about 35% from the site, including
demolition and construction debris) since recycling returns are still too
low to make the program self-supporting. 
Best regards,
Heidi Feldman
Public Education Coordinator
Monterey Regional Waste Management District
Tel.: 831/384-5313     FAX: 831/384-3567



-----Original Message-----
From: C E F G :-) [mailto:hither@mm.com]
Sent: Sunday, June 02, 2002 7:02 PM
To: pfranklin@container-recycling.org; RJayW2@aol.com
Cc: GRRN - GreenYes
Subject: RE: [GreenYes] Producer Responsibility & Consumer Costs



Pat, John and everyone...

----- Part of Original Message -----
"....consumers are taxpayers....Consumer/ taxpayers are currently paying
the cost of disposal/recycling/reuse -- through our garbage bills and
through the taxes we pay....
We simply need to realize that the consumer will be paying the costs of
disposal/recycling/reuse one way or another.  I'd like to know which way
is best and which way is cheapest...."
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

Consumer/taxpayer is basically everyone so let's drop the overuse of
these two words.  Best and cheapest are what concern me the most.
Producers will use any fees assessed to increase profits under the
disguise of helping the environment.
Waste haulers will also price gouge the consumer with exorbitant curbside
fees.  Do you remember the last time you called to have a mattress or
boxspring
disposed of?  Did they charge $30 or more?  Lastly we can not count on
the landfills as they tend to be owned by the haulers.

There need to be several different methods used to assure that products
are manufactured with environmental responsibility and several
reuse/disposal options available when the consumer wants to get rid of an
item.  The consuming public is not willing to pay $25-30 to discard a
5 year old computer monitor.  If that is the best($ costs) elected
leaders and
environmental staff members can come up with, then the vacant lots, rural
ditches and commercial dumpsters will continue to be used by consumers
unwilling to pay more.

I do not have the answers to this complex problem, but I know this--
"best and cheapest will not solve our environmental problems."

Regards, C. William


-----Original Message-----
From: C E F G :-) [mailto:hither@mm.com]
Sent: Sunday, June 02, 2002 7:02 PM
To: pfranklin@container-recycling.org; RJayW2@aol.com
Cc: GRRN - GreenYes
Subject: RE: [GreenYes] Producer Responsibility & Consumer Costs



Pat, John and everyone...

----- Part of Original Message -----
"....consumers are taxpayers....Consumer/ taxpayers are currently paying
the cost of disposal/recycling/reuse -- through our garbage bills and
through the taxes we pay....
We simply need to realize that the consumer will be paying the costs of
disposal/recycling/reuse one way or another.  I'd like to know which way
is best and which way is cheapest...."
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

Consumer/taxpayer is basically everyone so let's drop the overuse of
these two words.  Best and cheapest are what concern me the most.
Producers will use any fees assessed to increase profits under the
disguise of helping the environment.
Waste haulers will also price gouge the consumer with exorbitant curbside
fees.  Do you remember the last time you called to have a mattress or
boxspring
disposed of?  Did they charge $30 or more?  Lastly we can not count on
the landfills as they tend to be owned by the haulers.

There need to be several different methods used to assure that products
are manufactured with environmental responsibility and several
reuse/disposal options available when the consumer wants to get rid of an
item.  The consuming public is not willing to pay $25-30 to discard a
5 year old computer monitor.  If that is the best($ costs) elected
leaders and
environmental staff members can come up with, then the vacant lots, rural
ditches and commercial dumpsters will continue to be used by consumers
unwilling to pay more.

I do not have the answers to this complex problem, but I know this--
"best and cheapest will not solve our environmental problems."

Regards, C. William







******************************************
To post to the greenyes list,
email to: greenyes@grrn.org

Subscription information for
this list is available here:
http://www.grrn.org/general/greenyes.html
******************************************
******************************************
To post to the greenyes list,
email to: greenyes@grrn.org

Subscription information for
this list is available here:
http://www.grrn.org/general/greenyes.html
******************************************