Tag: Dalby

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.

Recycling Part 2

♻️
A simpler idea that could be implemented almost immediately is to place tin can recycling containers in the locations mentioned in the other post.

We are currently getting about £20 per tonne for metal recycling at WCAS — which is frankly daylight robbery. As you’ll see compared to the list below, if we’re generating 8 tonnes of recyclable tin in 6 to 8 months at each of our mini recycling centers, we could raise around £2,100 and maybe more. (based on a 50/50 split of pop cans and food cans)
That would allow us to:
– Fund a Children’s Day in Foxdale 🎈
– Make a cash contribution to Glen Maye’s Summer Fête for the adults 🎉

💰 Recycling Values in the UK
The value of recycled materials in the UK varies widely by type, but prices can range from £50 to over £1,000 per tonne depending on the material.
Estimated UK Recycling Values (per tonne)
(See attachment: Screenshot)
Sources: letsrecycle.com price index, Recycle UK Limited

📈 Factors Affecting Value
– Material purity – Clean, sorted materials fetch higher prices
– Market demand – Prices fluctuate with global commodity markets
– Processing costs – Heavier or contaminated materials may cost more to recycle than they’re worth
– Government incentives – PRNs (Packaging Recovery Notes) can influence value for businesses

✨ By starting with tin cans, we create a quick win: visible progress, community engagement, and funds that directly support local events.

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.