Cost fears for free e-waste proposal

Palmerston North may try accepting e-waste at no charge.

Green Party city councillor Brent Barrett has made the suggestion in the interests of keeping more e-waste out of the environment and diverting it from landfills.

But the majority of councillors at a finance and performance committee meeting wanted to know how much providing the free dropoff service would cost before buying into the idea.

At the moment, the council accepts a range of TVS, old computers, batteries and household appliances for variable charges at its Ferguson St recycling centre.

Water and waste services manager Robert van Bentum has proposed simplifying the charging system, and dropping some charges considerably.

Under his proposal the cost of dropping off old TVS would go down from $25-$40 to $20, and microwaves and vacuum cleaners would drop from $12 to $5.

Van Bentum said televisions were one of the most common items found in instances of flytipping, and lower charges could help discourage illegal dumping.

‘‘If people have a conscience, we might be getting closer to a level where they are prepared to pay.’’

He did not advise going further with cost cuts in case the centre was inundated with mountains of materials to dispose of.

Barrett proposed a six-month trial of no charges for dropping off TVS and computer appliances, consumer electronics, fluorescent light bulbs and batteries.

Cr Leonie Hapeta said she could not support the plan without knowing the costs, or understanding the potential for the recycling centre to become ‘‘a dumping ground’’.

Cr Jim Jefferies said he imagined a lot of people probably had TVS and other gear sitting in garages and backyards waiting for an opportunity to get rid of it.

Committee chairwoman Susan Baty said she could only support a trial if she knew the likely costs for the council and ratepayers first.

‘‘I’m concerned we could be suddenly inundated with hundreds or thousands of TVS, and then we would have storage problems as well.’’

It would have been better if the proposal had been made in time for consideration as part of the review of the council’s long-term plan, and weighed up against other priorities, she said.

Cr Vaughan Dennison said lowering charges was responsible, but getting rid of them would not be. One of the unintended consequences could be that the council would open the way for people from neighbouring districts dropping off e-waste.

Barrett said it was reasonable for councillors to be concerned about costs, but that had to be balanced against the environmental cost.

‘‘There is a free way to get rid of this staff, and that’s fly-tipping, and we need to consider the pollution in the environment that we are endorsing through having charges.’’

The committee’s recommendation was to hold off on a trial until it had a report on likely costs, which it hoped to receive in April.