Category: Sustainability

AGM and Recycling options

May Meeting

The AGM has taken place and there has been a slight reshuffle. Make sure to read the minutes when they are released. The main discussion at the meeting focused on waste costs and future waste‑management planning.

To our surprise, more people privately make use of recycling than we first thought, and of course they pay for this convenience themselves. We need to keep pushing forward. As I’ve written many times before, there is real money in handling our own tin collection.

At present, WCAS was receiving 50 pence per tonne, which means we are being robbed quite literally.

The real push to keep costs down is to establish mini‑recycling centres at strategic points throughout the parish. Some people say, “We don’t own any land, how is this possible?” That can be solved. We have a working relationship with DOI, and they need more practical engagement from us in getting our roads up to date. A project of this scale is small enough to sit comfortably within our scope.

Once we have mini‑recycling centres, there has been one in Dalby for years, we will ultimately produce less rubbish as a parish. With waste collections moving to weight‑based charging, now is the perfect time to start planning.

However, you will need to make noise. While I’ve been pushing for this for ever and a day, I am only one vote. I would encourage you to write to your preferred Commissioner and show support for undertaking a trial (one site) aimed at reducing the cost of waste management. This would put us well ahead of the curve for lower rates and first‑class service.

Southern Amenity site tour running outstanding services

Sometimes the oddest things happen when you least expect them. Today I found myself giving an impromptu tour of the Southern Amenity Site.

I’ve been very vocal about the failings of the Western Civic Amenity Site. In my view, it hasn’t been run productively for quite some time. It seems to have operated with one overriding goal: not to spend any money. On that front, they succeeded. But if the aim was efficiency, they failed 10 times over.

Can a waste site make money? Can waste save you money? Can a subsidy be super-efficient? The short answer to all of these questions is yes.

That’s exactly what I saw at the Southern Amenity Site today. From recycling schemes to composting, from breaking down WEE to sending just a single skip to landfill, everything was geared toward value creation. Inert rubble is transformed into concrete bollards. Every item that can be recycled is put to use in generating revenue from old phones to reusing walking sticks. (Nobles can repurpose them)

We’ve long known that phones contain many metals, some of which are now skyrocketing in value across the world. The Southern site is tapping into that reality. Meanwhile, the West has a lot of work to do.

We should be excited. It is sheer nonsense to suggest that we cannot have outstanding services at a reasonable cost.

As I was shown around, I cobbled together some video clips to give a taste of how this is done in practice. The Southern Amenity Site demonstrates that excellence and efficiency are not mutually exclusive, they can go hand in hand.

Waste Management: A Strategic Imperative in Patrick

I’ve been reviewing the numbers—particularly the waste-related expenditure, which didn’t sit right. Based on unaudited accounts and last year’s ledger, waste costs actually represent 67.01% of our total expenditure. That’s a striking figure.

We did incur some open costs last year, which may have skewed the accounts slightly. But the core issue remains: nearly two-thirds of our spending is going toward waste management.

If we’re serious about running an efficient enterprise, we need to dedicate a similar proportion of our time and strategic focus to defining what waste management means for Patrick—and how we can be a happy, effective provider of that service.

There’s also talk of taking out loans to cover unexpected contingency costs. Before moving forward, we need to ask: are we comfortable saddling future generations with debt due to poor management decisions today?

Here’s a breakdown of the figures:

  • Refuse collection: £79,842
  • WCAS: £40,685
  • Total waste cost: £120,527
  • Total expenditure: £179,842
  • Waste cost as % of total: 67.01%

We also know they’re running 10% over budget. Given their reluctance to share monthly figures, it’s reasonable to discount that by 20% for planning purposes.

And let’s not forget: the increased refuse collection will take time to show in the system. In my view, it’s almost certainly going to be higher—especially with the site not fully operational.

Thanks for your attention to this. I hope it helps inform the next steps.

—Leo

Cut the rates by a third and plant daffodils and flowers in the spring

Hello,

As the title suggests, this is a two-part proposal: one concerning a potential rate reduction, and the other outlining a seasonal planting initiative.

This proposal is specifically intended for Patrick LA and will appear on the agenda for next month’s meeting. However, the ideas could be adapted and implemented in other areas, depending on the stage of your local waste collection program.

The first item will require some work on our part and this information is clearly to start the ball rolling, while the second is considerably more straightforward.

It has come to my attention that our distant cousins in Norway are currently handling waste more efficiently than we are. Instead of relying solely on individual  waste collection, they’ve implemented mini collection centers—typically one per cluster of households.

For example, you might have one centre each for Kirk Patrick, Glen Maye, Dalby, and Foxdale. Waste would be sorted into the following containers:

  • Grey: Non-degradable plastics and toxic waste
  • Blue: Cartons and paper waste
  • Yellow: Glass and metal
  • Brown: Degradable Bio Waste

This gives a better explanation of how the separation works https://www.ssn.no/en/housing/garbage-sorting-what-goes-where

As we’ve seen, there is noticeable demand in Dalby for improved recycling, especially following the recent presentation by residents at our meeting. Personally, I rarely fill my bin beyond one-fifth of its capacity. This suggests that a more targeted system—where subcontractors collect only full containers—could be both practical and cost-effective.

Of course, these systems can be electronically triggered to request collection only when attention is needed. While this may require slightly more effort from residents to bring their waste to a designated collection point, the overall effort is modest—and the reward is significant. We’d be able to pass on substantial savings, with waste removal limited to full containers only, and each container correctly processed according to its designated waste type.

Small Set up Picture,

Medium-sized setup: See attached picture below.


Large setup: Too large for us.

Any significant changes would require considerable engagement, possibly even a mini referendum. Of course, some people may be unhappy with this proposed setup.

To explore the topic of waste efficiency and collection in more depth, I recommend reading this article: How Data Is Improving Norwegian Waste Management. It offers valuable insights into how smart sensors and data-driven systems are helping municipalities optimize waste services, reduce unnecessary collections, and improve sustainability.

I don’t think it’s beyond the realm of reason to reduce waste costs by a third. More importantly, this would also future-proof our operations. I’d expect that we’d be able to avoid the large increases in waste management costs currently looming for many local authorities.

Of course, the reduced costs would lead to increased funds—enabling us to carry out some spring planting of bulbs and develop a flower bed or two.