City’s waste contract set for review

Does anyone have any idea regarding my question, which was,

 

So will the poor sods who look after their bins will be made to pay for a replacement bin if theirs are pinched or damaged by someone else ?

I doubt it as that wouldn't be very fair would it.

---------- Post added 17-01-2017 at 09:39 ----------

Typical of today's thinking ... rob the less well off and line the pockets of the well off !

How do you mean?

Why are they bringing in another bin, the blue bin already takes what they are saying the new brown bin will be used for.:confused:

Who in there right mind does a 30 year contract. So much in the worl world can change in just 18 month's. Wonder who got the back hander here then

Friends of the Earth have an interesting document warning about long contracts, which apparently are quite common (i.e. it's not just Sheffield). They tend to be linked to infrastructure:

https://www.foe.co.uk/sites/default/files/downloads/long_contracts.pdf

Long contracts for residual waste treatment facilities -of 20-30 years -are usually arranged because of the need to pay for large, expensive infrastructure. Thermal treatment plants,such as incinerators,usually need to be large (for economies of scale), and are very expensive to build.

 

This infrastructure may also be very inflexible -an incinerator needs to run continuously, with limited variation in quantity of waste per day. In contrast, other technologies such as some mechanical biological treatment (MBT) plants can be much more flexible.

 

Shorter contracts of 5-10 years give greater flexibility. They allow future adjustments in response to changes in waste volumes, composition, recycling rates and regulation.

For a while now Violia have been in the process of suing the Egyptian government for bringing in a minimum wage.

I've had the lids ripped off 2 black bins, had one nicked, had a blue bin wrecked and 2 blue boxes. No idea where we are going to store ANOTHER wheelie bin and we never fill ours with bottles or plastics in a month anyway whereas we DO make good use of the blue bin for paper and cardboard, all the packing we have to dispose of and junk mail.

Friends of the Earth have an interesting document warning about long contracts, which apparently are quite common (i.e. it's not just Sheffield). They tend to be linked to infrastructure:

 

https://www.foe.co.uk/sites/default/files/downloads/long_contracts.pdf

In Sheffield though the infrastructure was paid mainly by SCC. Because of the bad planning and management of upgrading the incinerator, SCC then gave it away after wasting over £20M to modernise it. Veolia eventually took it over, finishing the modernisation but produce an incinerator with too large a capacity for Sheffield. Because of that Veolia applied to have rubbish bought in from surrounding areas as burning under capacity is inefficient. Veolia are in it for the profit and not so much for the benefit of Sheffield.

In Sheffield though the infrastructure was paid mainly by SCC. Because of the bad planning and management of upgrading the incinerator, SCC then gave it away after wasting over £20M to modernise it. Veolia eventually took it over, finishing the modernisation but produce an incinerator with too large a capacity for Sheffield. Because of that Veolia applied to have rubbish bought in from surrounding areas as burning under capacity is inefficient. Veolia are in it for the profit and not so much for the benefit of Sheffield.

Veolia didn't finish the modernisation of the old incinerator, they built a completely new one. Despite SCC spending upwards of £40m to modernise the old incinerator it wasn't fit for purpose & couldn't meet current emissions legislation.

Any profit made by Veolia from bringing in waste from surrounding areas has to be shared with SCC under the terms of the contract.

At the end of the current contract the ownership of the incinerator is supposed to be handed back to SCC. I'm don't know how this will be affected if the contract is terminated early.

Any profit made by Veolia from bringing in waste from surrounding areas has to be shared with SCC under the terms of the contract.

Yes that's because SCC had to approve the importing of waste from other areas and without SCC doing that Veolia would have problems with running the incinerator at under capacity. IIRC the areas that the waste imported comes from also gets some cashback.

At the end of the current contract the ownership of the incinerator is supposed to be handed back to SCC. I'm don't know how this will be affected if the contract is terminated early.

I don't think that was ever on the cards as all SCC had to do then to regain control was to not give Veolia another contract a few years ago. That was never an original condition of ownership and those conditions cannot suddenly have arisen. Veolia legally own it so is unlikely to give it away especially as its so profitable, as is the electricity they generate.

I don't think that was ever on the cards as all SCC had to do then to regain control was to not give Veolia another contract a few years ago. That was never an original condition of ownership and those conditions cannot suddenly have arisen. Veolia legally own it so is unlikely to give it away especially as its so profitable, as is the electricity they generate.I wonder why no one on the council didn't see that before giving it away

Yes that's because SCC had to approve the importing of waste from other areas and without SCC doing that Veolia would have problems with running the incinerator at under capacity. IIRC the areas that the waste imported comes from also gets some cashback.

Whaaaaat ?!

I am aware that the incinerator takes in waste from other areas, including L**ds, but I was not aware them dirty buggers got cashback for sending their garbage dahn the M1

I really, really hope you are wrong on this one.

I already have a dim enough view of that bloody energy recovery facility incinerator; green energy it certainly ain't