RE: [Winona] tire burning plant?

[Anne Morse]

[Winona Online Democracy]

To put some more “facts” on the table…………   As the person responsible for ensuring that the tires collected during Winona County’s spring and fall collections are in fact recycled (and not burned), I’ve learned a little bit about tires over the years.   To be blunt, calling the Preston tire burning plant “recycling” is plain wrong.  The technology is burning, plain and simple.  We don’t let those who burn garbage call their program recycling, and the burning of tires shouldn’t be allowed to be termed recycling either.  It used to be the case that there was nothing to do with tires but burn them, but that is no longer the case.    The tires collected through Winona County’s collections are actually ”recycled” by a Minnesota company called First State Tire.  The folks at First State process roughly half of all the waste tires that are produced in Minnesota each year by shredding them, and then using the “shreds” for engineering applications and in the production of some products.  First State says they could recycle twice the amount of tires they’re currently getting – which means all the waste tires produced in this state!    Regarding the claim in an earlier posting that having this tire plant reduces the health risk of encephalitis, there’s no basis in fact for that assertion.  It is the tires that sit out in the fields and roadways that provide the ideal habitat for the mosquitoes, and having a tire burner in the region will not impact those tires.  People could handle them properly today if they cared enough to do so.  Don’t think for a minute that the operators of the proposed burner would accept tires for free – people will have to pay to dispose of tires there, just as they have to pay to dispose of tires anywhere today (except during the county’s spring and fall collections, of course!).    If jobs are a concern, it’s also likely that more jobs are created per ton of tires by processing them, as First State Tire does, than by burning them. So, as someone officially responsible for promoting recycling, I’d have to say I see no burning need for this burner.   Anne Morse   Winona County Recycling Coordinator       -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Tom Severson Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 3:20 PM To: 'Phil Carlson'; 'Online Democracy' Subject: RE: [Winona] tire burning plant?   We also were not paying MPCA to watch out for us then.    Why have public servants if we have no level of trust for them?     I believe MPCA has reviewed the emissions.  Many people seem to be without facts and are trying to kill the project that accomplishes recycling at a basic level.     When MPCA and the other people who promote recycling say it is needed what more do we do?   Tom Severson  -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of Phil Carlson Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 1:50 PM To: Online Democracy Subject: RE: [Winona] tire burning plant? Like Duane, I too am puzzled by some of Paul Double's recent statements re: the tire burning plant and regulations.  If I read between his lines, he seems to be saying that we have all the regulations we need now, so don't worry your pretty little heads, or pretend to be smarter than the legislature, courts and regulators, just get out of the way and let this business do what it needs to do.  Couldn't the same have been said before DDT was banned, or before thalidomide was withdrawn, or before seatbelts were required, or before any number of careful studies were done and regulations written, revised, revised again, and revised yet again as new information came to light?  We are constant evolving to try and create the kind of environment we want.   I am particularly mystified by Paul's point #2 - don't try to tell businesspeople about their markets or customers.  I'm not sure that is the point of many of the comments on the tire burning plant.  The point is we will indeed regulate businesses (into the ground if need be) if their product or practice is proven to be toxic, noxious, careless, dangerous or otherwise injurious.  There was a great market for DDT, but we decided it wasn't worth the risk.  All we have to do is turn the clock back 100 years and see where American industry was and what its health and safety record was.  Surely Paul is not advocating that we return to that environment.   Phil Carlson, Mpls     --- Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.859 / Virus Database: 585 - Release Date: 2/14/2005 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.859 / Virus Database: 585 - Release Date: 2/14/2005

_______________________________________________
This message was posted to Winona Online Democracy
All messages must be signed by the senders actual name.
No commercial solicitations are allowed on this list.
To manage your subscription or view the message archives, please visit
http://mapnp.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/winona
Any problems or suggestions can be directed to 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
If you want help on how to contact elected officials, go to the Contact page at
 http://www.winonaonlinedemocracy.org