Re: [Winona] tire burning plant?

[Kathy Seifert]

[Winona Online Democracy]

I'm wondering if it wouldn't be helpful to identify categories of facts we'd like regarding each method of dealing with the tires so that we compare "apples to apples." I think the idea of evaluating which is the best "bang" for our subsidy "bucks" is a great idea!   Some examples of data to evaluate that I see from Paul's questions are things like:   1) The dollar amount of subsidy per ton (or other appropriate amount) of tires "processed" 2) The amount or potential amount of "product" and "bi-products" produced per unit 3) The cost to process the tires 4) The potential income from the sale of products 5) The costs of dealing with any bi-products or waste 6) The current handling fees (or range of fees) for tires and what the systems are in place to transport the tires to each vendor 7) A side by side description of what's involved in each method of handling used tires   What are others thinking would be the kinds of things we'd want to know?   Kathy Seifert   ----- Original Message ----- From: Anne Morse To: 'Paul Double' ; 'Online Democracy' Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2005 12:32 PM Subject: RE: [Winona] tire burning plant? [Winona Online Democracy] Hi Paul!   I like the questions you pose a great deal � they will get us to a more substantive comparison of the relative value of one private business over another.  Subsidies add a significant layer of complexity to the equation, and they should be considered.  Here are my responses:   1)      With the exception of a request for a Job Z (?) designation, which I�ve read about in the papers, I know little about the proposed Heartland burner and the government subsidies the proposers are counting on.  I would hope that others who know more will weigh in with their information??   2)      I will be happy to approach First State and discuss with them what subsidies they have received, and/or continue to receive, as well the other questions you raised.   3)      As for the broader questions about recycling that you pose, I�ll comment on them as our discussion continues, as they too warrant consideration.    I�m also willing to aggregate the financial information people might have on Heartland, along with the information I receive from First State, and then post it as a summary on WOD, if this would be helpful.   So thanks for helping take this discussion to a new level, Paul.  Interestingly, I�m not sure there has been any substantial public consideration of the overall benefit to the public of these two different disposal options.  I believe the MPCA only has jurisdiction to consider the environmental impacts.  Perhaps we can break new ground here on Winona Online.    Cheers, Anne Morse         -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Double Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2005 8:59 AM To: Online Democracy Subject: FW: [Winona] tire burning plant?   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   --- 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

_______________________________________________
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