Advertisement

MAILBAG - June 7, 2007

Recycling program

raises questions

I read with much interest your editorial (“Don’t resist recycling bins,” May 10) plus letters from readers regarding the new trash program (Mailbag, May 17). I especially found the statistics presented by Roger Hodges interesting (“New recycling service is garbage,” Mailbag, May 10). I thought maybe you would refute them since the numbers seem to show Huntington Beach has been ahead before starting this new program. If the state-mandated diversion rate is 50% and Huntington Beach is at 67% (second highest in Orange County), then why do we need a new system?

Who paid for the expensive renovations to Rainbow Disposal’s facilities to begin with?

As I recall, we were all told the costs would prevent us from having to ever separate our trash like other cities. Our fees were raised to justify the costs.

You now say Rainbow is paying for the new trucks, cans, etc. Thus, do we now expect to have our fees increased again — and yet have to do the work Rainbow had been doing?

Advertisement

Proponents of the new plan say the trucks will be cleaner running and use less fuel — another state mandate.

But having to pick up three trash cans every week means three separate trucks roaming our neighborhoods in one day — doesn’t this mean more fuel (not to mention noise and pollution, even if it is cleaner)?

Also, doesn’t having to wash out bottles and cans before putting them in recycling bins mean using more of another scarce resource?

I would appreciate answers from the editor or other proponents to my specific questions and not another glossing over of the issues.

PAT FEINER

Huntington Beach

Poseidon’s history

shows its true colors

In 1994, three former GE Capital executives founded Poseidon Resources in Stamford, Conn., in order to develop, invest in and manage water-supply projects.

In July 1999, Poseidon was chosen to build a desalination plant for Tampa Bay Water of Florida.

In December of 2001, Poseidon’s main contractor failed to post a required construction bond for the project. On May 15, 2002, Tampa Bay Water decided it was in its benefit to buy Poseidon’s interest.

The plant was fully designed, had all permits and was 30% complete.

That fateful decision left Tampa Bay Water with responsibility for a plant with substantial design and equipment flaws that eventually cost them more than $30 million in addition to the original construction agreement.

Poseidon concentrated its efforts in California, where it made contractual agreements with coastal power plants to use their cooling systems as a source of sea water for desalination. The company marketed its water plan to cities, which were struggling to keep up with the ever-increasing financial demands of government by shifting capital costs to themselves.

Only the fine print explained that it would be the user of that water that would pay the four to five times increased cost of desalinated water.

Poseidon officials kept many of the details of their plan to themselves. The Coastal Commission is still waiting for critical information it needs to protect our ocean and coast.

On the other hand, Poseidon showered its snake-oil, razzle-dazzle on public officials at seashore hotels and flattered them by placing their pictures on the Poseidon website.

When a 90-year-old resident of Huntington Beach, who has spent much of her life working to protect birds and fish, working to preserve clean air and water, and voicing opposition to Poseidon’s plans for the beach and ocean presented herself at one of Poseidon’s hotel galas, she was told she was not welcome.

Beware of traveling salesmen who have a deal for you — especially if they are peddling water.

JOHN F. SCOTT

Huntington Beach

Advertisement