It is time to aban­don fail­ing bins sys­tem

The Oban Times - - Letters -

Sir, I read with in­ter­est your ar­ti­cle ‘Rub­bish row rum­bles on’ (The Oban Times, Jan­uary 5).

The so­lu­tion sug­gested for more and larger green bins fails to ad­dress the real prob­lem. Un­re­cy­cled ma­te­rial means, in all cases, food waste, used san­i­tary prod­ucts, used nap­pies and cat lit­ter, and, in some cases, used in­con­ti­nence pads and wound dress­ings. All plas­tic bins take on the am­bi­ent tem­per­a­ture and, in sum­mer, are fre­quently hot to the touch. This makes them per­fect in­cu­ba­tors for germs, and these will be be­side houses and play ar­eas.

In­creas­ing the size and num­ber of bins is, I be­lieve, a crim­i­nal aban­don­ing of a pub­lic health duty. At the very least, the ‘clean’ bins with washed plas­tic and card­board may be emp­tied ev­ery three weeks but the ‘dirty’ bins must be emp­tied fort­nightly. A much bet­ter idea would be aban­don­ing this sched­ule and re­vert­ing to the old weekly up­lift. Robert H Davidson, Breadal­bane Mews, Oban. Sir, Lo­cal coun­cils main­tain that cut­ting down on the num­ber of rub­bish bin up­lifts is not about sav­ing money but rather about en­cour­ag­ing re­cy­cling.

Hav­ing just re­turned from Auck­land, New Zealand, I was im­pressed by the sys­tem they use in that coun­try.

Both bins are lifted reg­u­larly (in this case weekly) but the gen­eral rub­bish bin is be­tween half and three quar­ters the size of the re­cy­cling bin.

This en­cour­ages every­one to try to re­cy­cle as much of their rub­bish as pos­si­ble. There is no com­plex­ity, no fuss and every­one is rea­son­ably happy be­ing in­volved in a man­age­able scheme. Alec Chase­more, Bruich­lad­dich, Is­lay.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from UK

© PressReader. All rights reserved.