THROUGHPUT FOR THE TRANSFER STATION

Moderator: The Merrimack Volunteer Moderators

THROUGHPUT FOR THE TRANSFER STATION

Postby Norman Phillips » Wed Feb 18, 2004 9:42 am

Last Wednesday Ed Chase, Director of DPW, supplied me with the following statistics on the trash that passed through the TS in January.
*****************************************
Total Tonnage: 526 tons (includes MSW and C&D)
Commercial : 147 tons " " "
=========
Residential: 379 tons (MSW)

Approximately 15,725 vehicles were recorded over the car counter

(379 tons)(2000 lbs./ton)
--------------------------------- = 48.2 lbs. per vehicle (ave.)
15725 vehicles
**********************************

( The unweighed "Residential" ( known locally as "self-hauled" :D ) of 379 is obtained by subtracting the weighed input of "Commercial" from the weighed output of "Total Tonnage". )
Buckley has said that he will also take his trash to Bow as soon as he gets a Commercial Driver's License. In the past he has picked up about 1000 tons in a year.

Multiplying the 379 by ( 50 / 5 ) ( to allow for the 5 Saturdays in Jan. 2004 ) predicts a total of 3790 tons of self-hauled trash.

The remaining commercial tonnage would be 52/5 X 147 = 1529 tons. subtracting 800 of Buckley's tonnage leaves 729 tons of commercial trash. C&D ( Construction and Demolition ) trash may increase in the summer time.

We are ending up with a prediction of 3790 + 729 or about 4500 tons of trash throughput in the calendar year 2004.
Sincerely, Norm Phillips
Norman Phillips
 
Posts: 5329
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 3:48 am
Location: 18 Edward Lane, Merrimack NH

Postby RBarnes » Wed Feb 18, 2004 11:55 am

This is truly sad. We are paying all this money for a facility that is hardly even servicing a third of the town. The receipts from the landfill, which accounted for just the haulers, were about three times that amount alone.

But this raises a couple questions...

What was the average car count per month for the landfill?

One member of the BOS I thought mentioned that we have a minimum amount we must meet for us to get the $90 a ton rate we are paying for hauling and tipping to get the waste out of the station and dumped at it's final location (keep in mind this does not include ANY operational costs which are a flat amount), what is the minimum tonnage and since it sounds very likely we will not meet it (since even the low estimates were about 12,000 tons) what will our per ton rate jump up to?

I’m interested in watching what the amount of traffic is for February since I’m sure most people didn’t get the sticker shock from the local haulers until beginning of Jan so it would have taken them a week or two to drop the service if they were going to switch to self hauling.
User avatar
RBarnes
 
Posts: 6852
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2003 1:21 pm
Location: Merrimack

Postby Mark Fitzgerald » Wed Feb 18, 2004 12:34 pm

The following statement is 100% factual:

It would have been cheaper to bury the $2,000,000 at the old landfill before they capped it off rather than spending it to build a TS.

If Chase's numbers are true, LESS than 1/3 of MMK is seeing any benefit from the facility while the other 2/3 are paying extortionate prices compared to what their costs of curbside would have been. The money is literally flying out of that town and at prices that border on criminal given the fact they would have been HALF as much with CS.

Where are Nancy Gagnon and Dennis King now? Someone oughta find them and ask for an explanation because by the end of 2004 this TS will be held up as the 2nd worst expenditure of public money in the history of MMK right behind the incinerator mess of ~30 years ago.
Mark Fitzgerald
 

Postby Mark Fitzgerald » Wed Feb 18, 2004 12:45 pm

I will even go so far as to state the there is absolutely NO doubt that the town of MMK is paying in total more than $1,000,000 MORE THAN IT NEEDS TO for waste services.

How can I say this? Easy. Last year the ad-hoc figures showed CS as being almost $400K less when everything was totaled, even excluding the dreaded "self-haul" costs. This $400K was based on what the local haulers told the committee they would be charging after closure. Well guess what? They're charging on average $2 MORE per week than they said they would, for an additional $600K. Its criminal, absolutely criminal.

Hey Dennis, you were right about the $1,000,000 savings, but you were wrong about which program would allow the already over-burdened taxpayers to realize these savings. Compared to the CS offer that was on the table, MMK is now going to urinate away an additional $1,000,000 so 1/3 of its residents can "choose" to load up the Buick and haul their own trash and/or excrement to a TS.
Mark Fitzgerald
 

Postby RBarnes » Wed Feb 18, 2004 12:49 pm

Mark Fitzgerald wrote:If Chase's numbers are true, LESS than 1/3 of MMK is seeing any benefit from the facility while the other 2/3 are paying extortionate prices compared to what their costs of curbside would have been. The money is literally flying out of that town and at prices that border on criminal given the fact they would have been HALF as much with CS.


Mark, I would seriously argue if the 1/3 (which based on these numbers makes me think its more like 1/4) are actually getting any benefits. While based on these most recent numbers we may end up paying less (but not by much) then we would with town wide curbside, we make up for that by paying with our time. Living on Lawrence Rd less then a mile from the station it still takes me about a half hour to get in unload trash and recyclables and get home. Since the station is at the very northeast corner of town most people would have to spend more then a half hour alone just getting to and from the site.

But I guess it comes down to how you define a benefit.
User avatar
RBarnes
 
Posts: 6852
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2003 1:21 pm
Location: Merrimack

Postby Wayne » Wed Feb 18, 2004 12:55 pm

I believe a while back the numbers being kicked around for operational costs of the TS were about $500K, and this was pretty much independent of the volume of the trash passing through. Is it believed that this is still accurate? From Norms numbers, it appears there will be about $400K more for tipping fees for the self-hauled trash, while income from tipping fees from commercial haulers will be negligible

Aside from the $2 million we spent to construct the TS, am I correct in calculating that about $900,000 will likely be charged to our taxes then? Recently, Dennis King posted that this TS is looking better and better all the time! Dennis, can you please post on the forum how this is a good thing for the town of Merrimack? On top of the costs I privately pay for CS, please tell me how my paying my share of these extra $900K in taxes (for something I don't even use) is a good thing???

Hey, is it too late for PAYT?
Wayne
 
Posts: 2866
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 8:47 am
Location: Merrimack

Postby RBarnes » Wed Feb 18, 2004 1:00 pm

Mark Fitzgerald wrote:I will even go so far as to state the there is absolutely NO doubt that the town of MMK is paying in total more than $1,000,000 MORE THAN IT NEEDS TO for waste services.


$372 for Houle
$361.40 Less Mess
$325 for Buckley
$302 for Waste Management

Based on those prices and considering the average home would have paid about $198 per year with town wide curbside (1.8 million divided by 9070 homes) I would agree that we are definitely spending well past that.

Mark Fitzgerald wrote:How can I say this? Easy. Last year the ad-hoc figures showed CS as being almost $400K less when everything was totaled, even excluding the dreaded "self-haul" costs. This $400K was based on what the local haulers told the committee they would be charging after closure. Well guess what? They're charging on average $2 MORE per week than they said they would, for an additional $600K.


Don't forget that on top of that we are going to be collecting ZERO revenue from the hauling business which all accounts from Dennis et al who tried to show any form of savings in the station had to use the hauler revenue to do so.
User avatar
RBarnes
 
Posts: 6852
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2003 1:21 pm
Location: Merrimack

Postby Mark Fitzgerald » Wed Feb 18, 2004 1:27 pm

Rick,

I've learned that they also counted the residential vehicles and based on those numbers it would appear roughly 1/3 of the households are self-hauling. This is the same % as before and is in line with the last 3 year's data, so I'm willing to believe it.

As far as revenues go, be prepared to hear an argument that if you lowered the tipping fees you'd see more commercial volume and realize more "revenues". Be careful though, its a fool's proposition. The fixed costs don't change with volume and the variable costs may not either depending on how the transfer and tipping fee contracts are written. If this is true, then attracting more commercial waste by lowering the tipping fee will be a net COST. At the moment, the BEST thing MMK's TS has going for it is the fact fact no commercial haulers are using it. You have total per ton costs of between $125 and $130, yet your tipping fee is only $110 so you LOSE money on every ton of commercial that comes in.

The bottom line is that MMK can't do it for less than say $115/ton even if every ton of waste in town went through the facility. The private TS's in the area range from $83 to $90, so the MMK TS is not viable without taxpayer subsidies. When 2/3 aren't using it and are already paying for a service that goes directly out of town, it is nothing short of criminal to suggest the taxpayers subsidize the market and pay even MORE through a combination of taxation and private fees just so the facility can stay afloat.
Last edited by Mark Fitzgerald on Wed Feb 18, 2004 3:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Mark Fitzgerald
 

Postby RBarnes » Wed Feb 18, 2004 1:29 pm

Wayne Johnson wrote:Aside from the $2 million we spent to construct the TS, am I correct in calculating that about $900,000 will likely be charged to our taxes then? Recently, Dennis King posted that this TS is looking better and better all the time! Dennis, can you please post on the forum how this is a good thing for the town of Merrimack? On top of the costs I privately pay for CS, please tell me how my paying my share of these extra $900K in taxes (for something I don't even use) is a good thing???


I would guess it to come in at more then $900,000 but even saying it is only that much I would agree, how can anyone argue that paying close to 1 million a year for something less then a third of the town are even using is a good thing?

Wayne Johnson wrote:Hey, is it too late for PAYT?


Wayne, after giving much thought to the whole PAYT deal I have to conclude it will not work in Merrimack. Don't get me wrong, it's the only fair option we have but I don't see it working.

Consider this... I haul my own trash. I do so because I would rather not spend $300+ a year. If I have to start paying as a throw I will have no reason to lug my own trash down the road to the station, I'll just pay the money and have WM pick it up for me. I'm sure there are a number of other self-haulers who would also stop self-hauling if they had to pay either way. The "benefit" of self-hauling would be gone. So now we would have an even larger percent of the town not using the facility.

This would leave us with one of town options...
A) Put the cost back on the taxes
B) Just keep raising the PAYT costs so people using it actually pay their share of the total costs.

Since as we collect less and less waste at the site the per ton cost (which would need to include the operational costs) would continue to climb it wouldn't take long for it to become just as expensive to self-haul as it would to hire someone.

Based on the budget numbers Norm posted in a different thread we would pay about $125 per ton if we collected 18,000 tons... at 12,000 tons the cost jumps to $140 a ton. And if we are talking about collecting about 4,500 tons the cost per ton would be well over $200. When you factor in the cost of gas and other outside expenses of self-hauling there would be ZERO savings.
User avatar
RBarnes
 
Posts: 6852
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2003 1:21 pm
Location: Merrimack

Postby RBarnes » Wed Feb 18, 2004 1:35 pm

Mark Fitzgerald wrote:As far as revenues go, be prepared to hear an argument that if you lowered the tipping fees you'd see more commercial volume and realize more "revenues". Be careful though, its a fool's proposition. The fixed costs don't change with volume and the variable costs may not either depending on how the transfer and tipping fee contracts are written.


I'm well aware of that already... plus Dick Hinch has stated publicly that the $90 per ton we pay to just haul and dump the trash will be going up each year.

Mark Fitzgerald wrote:The private TS's in the area range from $83 to $90, so the MMK TS is not viable without taxpayer subsidies.


From rumors I've heard some of the haulers are paying as low $70 a ton at commercial facilities. We would have to soak $20 a ton PLUS operational costs associated with the additional waste for us to make it worth their while to dump here.

It's too bad people didn't understand this before the vote. And sadly based on the proposed warrant article some of the condo owners were pushing for people still don't fully understand the full deal.
User avatar
RBarnes
 
Posts: 6852
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2003 1:21 pm
Location: Merrimack

Postby Wayne » Wed Feb 18, 2004 1:58 pm

RBarnes wrote:Since as we collect less and less waste at the site the per ton cost (which would need to include the operational costs) would continue to climb it wouldn't take long for it to become just as expensive to self-haul as it would to hire someone.

Isn't that what you, Mark, Norm, and others have been saying all along? That the real cost for self-hauling is no cheaper than curbside? Well I believe those that want to self haul SHOULD pay the real cost. Since they'll probably stop self hauling at that point, then we don't need the TS and we don't need to pay those operational costs.
Wayne
 
Posts: 2866
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 8:47 am
Location: Merrimack

Postby Mark Fitzgerald » Wed Feb 18, 2004 2:05 pm

Someone simply needs to tell the condo owners that their total cost won't be impacted a penny if their tipping fees are lowered. Their tax bill will simply increase by an equal amount and maybe even more if the lower fees are applied for everyone (which I believe would be the finding of the town attorney). They (the condos) generate a lot less per household than your average single-family house.

You may also want to tell them there's no gaurantee their vendor would end up using the facility anyway. The private TS's in the area aren't about to simply give up on this market because MMK lowered its fees. They'd lower theirs just as quickly and the bet here is that the haulers would follow, just as they've done thus far.

They're far better off leaving the market to find its own level rather than taking additional tax money out of their left pocket so they don't have to take it out of their right pocket.
Mark Fitzgerald
 

Postby Mark Fitzgerald » Wed Feb 18, 2004 2:08 pm

Wait a minute..................

Did someone just say MMK pays $90/ton just for hauling and tipping fees????? This is about $25 more per ton than the bids the ad-hoc received last year.

If this is true, I take back everything I said before regarding the total per ton cost of the TS. Rather than $125 to $130, it MUST be in the $150 to $160 range.

Does it get any funnier than this???
Mark Fitzgerald
 

Postby RBarnes » Wed Feb 18, 2004 2:14 pm

Mark Fitzgerald wrote:Did someone just say MMK pays $90/ton just for hauling and tipping fees????? This is about $25 more per ton than the bids the ad-hoc received last year.


Yes, according to the handouts from Ed Chase we pay about $89 and change. I rounded it up to an even $90.
User avatar
RBarnes
 
Posts: 6852
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2003 1:21 pm
Location: Merrimack

Postby Norman Phillips » Wed Feb 18, 2004 3:32 pm

This subject is getting more and more ironic. :P :P :P :P :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

One of the proposals studied in detail by the Ad Hoc SW Committee under Dick Hinch in the summer of 2002 was a plan whereby the town would be divided up, with curbside for all residents, and the local haulers could bid on taking responsibility for a section of contiguous houses.

Merrimack would even bargain for a good tipping fee for their disposal of waste since this plan did not include a Merrimack TS.

Among other reasons was that they did not want to go out of town. And at least one said he could not get bonding.

None of them considered participating. BUT WHAT ARE THEY DOING NOW?

And who is paying for the costly method that they use, skipping around from one house to another 10 houses away? :?: :?: :?: :?:
Sincerely, Norm Phillips
Norman Phillips
 
Posts: 5329
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 3:48 am
Location: 18 Edward Lane, Merrimack NH

Next

Return to Solid Waste, Landfill & Recycling

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

cron