CA-7 19-2020 Resolution to Approve a Services Agreement with Emterra Environmental USA Corp. for MRF Operations and Recyclables Processing (5-Year term; $2,161,250.00 estimated for Year 1, with One Potential 5-Year Extension)
My organization, The Climate Mobilization, recommends that Council reject this contract and instead strongly consider the Recycle Ann Arbor proposal to reopen the MRF. SE Michigan and the state as a whole need more MRF capacity, and this $6 million asset is now sitting idle. The emissions cost of shipping multiple truckloads of material to Lansing and back each day over a ten-year period is large, and there is a multiplier effect from other communities that currently have no local MRF to sort their recyclables and must either ship long distance or landfill their recyclables. Reviving our MRF should boost area recycling efforts and diversion rates, and indirectly reduce emissions further. While RAA is proposing to keep all recyclable sales revenue below the $45/pound price point, that is more than offset by the $104/pound service fee, well below Emterra's $142. An RAA contract would thus be the cheaper option at any price point. At current prices it would save the city $424,000 a year.
My organization, The Climate Mobilization, recommends that Council reject this contract and instead strongly consider the Recycle Ann Arbor proposal to reopen the MRF. SE Michigan and the state as a whole need more MRF capacity, and this $6 million asset is now sitting idle. The emissions cost of shipping multiple truckloads of material to Lansing and back each day over a ten-year period is large, and there is a multiplier effect from other communities that currently have no local MRF to sort their recyclables and must either ship long distance or landfill their recyclables. Reviving our MRF should boost area recycling efforts and diversion rates, and indirectly reduce emissions further. While RAA is proposing to keep all recyclable sales revenue below the $45/pound price point, that is more than offset by the $104/pound service fee, well below Emterra's $142. An RAA contract would thus be the cheaper option at any price point. At current prices it would save the city $424,000 a year.
My organization, The Climate Mobilization, recommends that Council reject this contract and instead strongly consider the Recycle Ann Arbor proposal to reopen the MRF. SE Michigan and the state as a whole need more MRF capacity, and this $6 million asset is now sitting idle. The emissions cost of shipping multiple truckloads of material to Lansing and back each day over a ten-year period is large, and there is a multiplier effect from other communities that currently have no local MRF to sort their recyclables and must either ship long distance or landfill their recyclables. Reviving our MRF should boost area recycling efforts and diversion rates, and indirectly reduce emissions further. While RAA is proposing to keep all recyclable sales revenue below the $45/pound price point, that is more than offset by the $104/pound service fee, well below Emterra's $142. An RAA contract would thus be the cheaper option at any price point. At current prices it would save the city $424,000 a year.
My organization, The Climate Mobilization, recommends that Council reject this contract and instead strongly consider the Recycle Ann Arbor proposal to reopen the MRF. SE Michigan and the state as a whole need more MRF capacity, and this $6 million asset is now sitting idle. The emissions cost of shipping multiple truckloads of material to Lansing and back each day over a ten-year period is large, and there is a multiplier effect from other communities that currently have no local MRF to sort their recyclables and must either ship long distance or landfill their recyclables. Reviving our MRF should boost area recycling efforts and diversion rates, and indirectly reduce emissions further. While RAA is proposing to keep all recyclable sales revenue below the $45/pound price point, that is more than offset by the $104/pound service fee, well below Emterra's $142. An RAA contract would thus be the cheaper option at any price point. At current prices it would save the city $424,000 a year.