My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Council - 11/25/1980
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Council
>
1980
>
Agenda - Council - 11/25/1980
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/15/2025 2:08:01 PM
Creation date
2/28/2006 11:35:58 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Council
Document Date
11/25/1980
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
309
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
- 10 - <br /> <br />0 <br /> <br />OFFICE PAPER REDUCTION <br />Office paper reduction, establishing policies that shrink office <br />paper consumption, can be implemented by the public and private <br />sectors to reduce solid waste. These policies could include <br />increased use of microfiche and magnetic media (computer discs and <br />tapes), and reducing use of carbon paper, computer printout paper, <br />letter paper, machine copy and business forms. <br /> It is estimated by the MPCA that office paper reduction could <br /> reduce paper consumption by 4.5 percent annually (MPCA, 1979). <br /> But, since only 52 to 53 percent of all consumer office paper is <br /> discarded, the potential reduction of solid waste amounts to only <br /> 0.7 percent of the solid waste stream. <br /> <br />PRODUCT CHARGE <br />Today's prices for products generally do not reflect the costs <br />imposed on society for disposal of solid waste. The goal of prod- <br />uct charges is to incorporate those costs into the cost of the <br />product. The charge could take three forms: a unit charge, a <br />weight charge or a combination of both. The unit charge has the <br />least administrative burden, while the combination would have the <br />greatest reduction impact, product charges have appeal in that <br />they use the market to encourage solid waste reduction, and <br />provide funds to defray the solid waste management costs imposed <br />by products. <br />Three studies commissioned by EPA indicate that general conserva- <br />tion through the use of product charges could reduce waste by two <br />to three percent (Bingham, 1974; Miedema, 1976; Miedema, in prep- <br />aration). For purposes of this report, a maximum waste reduction <br />potential of 2.6 percent was assumed. <br /> Product charges could potentially solve financial problems encoun- <br /> tered by local government for solid waste collection and disposal <br /> and at the same time provide a revenue source for other recovery <br /> programs. However, it is doubtful whether a product charge could <br /> be applied on a state level because of potential conflict with <br /> interstate commerce. Federal legislation would provide for more <br /> efficient and consistent implemntation of product charges. <br /> <br />WASTE CHARGE <br />A waste charge is a fee levied on each ton or cubic yard of waste <br />being disposed. The fee would be collected at landfills or pro- <br />cessing facilities as a part of the disposal fee. Although there <br />is little literature available about the impacts of waste charges, <br />it is expected that such a charge would be less effective than a <br />national product charge in curbing waste. It is estimated that a <br />waste charge would reduce waste by less than two percent. Hence, <br />a waste charge may be more effective as a funding mechanism rather <br />than as a waste reduction technique. <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.