Let me get my picture of this in focus.
Some investors wish to put “their money”
into a business that----
Should be located near the metro area
because they have more cars thus more tires.
First State Tire has solved the entire recycled tire problem and has capacity
to handle our entire state if not region.
That prompts these questions---
Is First State Tire getting subsidized to
the point that the cost to recycle is excessive in comparison to burning?
Is their government money available to
either that is the real driver of how the problem is dealt with?
Should all subsidies, if they are in place
or proposed, be eliminated so that the market will decide which is safe and
cost effective?
Who owns First State Tire and what is
their vested interest and political investment in the outcome?
Is their public information available on
their operation as an investment opportunity? If so, where do we get investment
information?
How much government payments are being
paid for First State to deal with our problem?
How much revenue if be paid to recycle
verses the revenue generated by the recycled shredded tire chips?
How much are we being charged per tire for
disposal and could that be reduced it there was competition in the market place
for our old tires?
Is not recycling simply the idea to create
a second or more life for a thing? Why then is converting tires into
energy not considered?
Does not almost every thing at some point become
un-recyclable or at a minimum not worth the cost to recycle?
Paul Double
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Anne Morse
Sent: Tuesday, March
01, 2005 7:48 PM
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
