Berkeley Moves The Ball Forward For Salvage and Reuse

From left: Urban Ore staff – Elias Soto, Max Wechsler and Jose Luis Soto. Photo by now forgotten City staff person circa 2011.

By Max Wechsler, Operations Manager, Urban Ore Inc., 6/9/20
On June 2, the Berkeley City Council adopted a resolution authorizing the City Manager to extend its contract with Urban Ore for another 3 years!

Importantly, the new contract reinstates the company’s salvage service fee for every ton rescued from the transfer station to be sold for reuse or recycling. The resolution was written by Berkeley’s Department of Public Works and was passed on the consent calendar. It states that, “the new contract will allow the City to continue reduction of landfilling reusable materials and support the City’s Zero Waste Goal to reduce materials to be landfilled”.

Some history: Urban Ore has been salvaging in Berkeley since 1980. In the year 2000, for two main reasons, the City began paying the business for its salvage service. First, the enforcement of AB939 was about to take effect, and the City was incentivized to meet the state’s diversion requirements. Second, Urban Ore was in the middle of a big move to its current location. Councilwoman Linda Maio led Council to label Urban Ore a “Berkeley treasure” and support it both financially and administratively to help it through the move. Various measures were taken, including the invention of the salvage service fee, which is largely credited to Tania Levy, who was working for the Solid Waste Division – now the Zero Waste Division – of the Department of Public Works.

The invention was elegant indeed, recognizing that reuse and recycling aren’t free; these services involve significant labor and capital costs. The City of Berkeley owns and operates its own transfer station. If the City pays X dollars to send one ton of material to the landfill, doesn’t it make sense to pay X dollars to keep the same material out of the landfill? With that in mind, the City began payments in 2000, first at $30 per ton, and then $40 per ton – always slightly less than the landfill disposal fee. This continued until the Great Recession created a budget crisis for the City, and the salvage service fee was removed from the 2012 contract renewal.

Now, eight years later, the salvage service fee has been reinstated, and for the first time ever, the City is paying Urban Ore the exact amount per ton, $47.74, as it is to Waste Management, Inc. for landfill disposal. This is good news not only for Urban Ore, but conceptually, it is a game changer because it recognizes that Zero Waste services deserve at least the same amount of compensation as do Waste services because Zero Waste services create a variety of economic, environmental, and social benefits that wasting does not. Actually, one can quite reasonably make the argument that a Zero Waste service should be paid more than the alternative, but this is a good start! Here is the summary of the benefits that we create, taken from my public comment to City Council:

Economically, the City’s landfill tipping fees decrease proportionally to our salvage service payments, so the direct cost is a wash to the City. However, Urban Ore’s goods and services create interesting economic multiplier effects that landfilling does not. We provide inexpensive, quality goods to our customers, thus saving the local community money and increasing the profit margins for other small businesses. For example, contractors buy lumber and vintage door hardware from us at the lowest prices available—a shameless plug, but true! We also pay out about $100,000 to customers annually, in both cash and store credit, in exchange for dropping off high quality items for us to re-sell. This process recirculates money and goods through the local economy. Little is exported. Furthermore, as a for-profit business, in 2018 we paid $240K in sales tax, $116K in property tax, and $456K in employer’s taxes. In a “normal” non-virus situation, we employ 42 staff, which translates to 31 FTE.

Environmentally, it’s a big win that helps the City reach its Zero Waste goals. In addition to the resources that we salvage at the transfer station, we deal with thousands more tons of materials that are dropped off on our site annually. We also have a crew doing pick-ups from residences and businesses throughout the Bay Area. Our salvaging staff are trained to identify hazardous materials at the transfer station and communicate with City staff to ensure responsible handling.

Last but not least, there are intangible but very real social and community benefits which I have come to appreciate increasingly over the last four years. Urban Ore serves as a stage for a vibrant community of artists, teachers, builders, collectors, environmentalists, hipsters, do-it-yourselfers—you name it! Our customers are from every socioeconomic background and are as diverse as you will find. The 2018 New York Times article “Berkeley on a Budget” ends like this:

‘But the place that captured the Berkeley spirit as much as any place I went was Urban Ore; part salvage yard, part thrift store, it’s one of the most incredible places I’ve visited for recycled and upcycled goods. From clothing to electronics, an entire section of loose doors (yes, doors) and a yard full of toilets and sinks, you can easily spend a few hours there. It’s eclectic, a little chaotic and inimitable — just like Berkeley itself.”

In summary, the question for City Council was: with two equal cost options, how do we want to allocate the enterprise fund? Do we want to allocate it to Urban Ore, which generates all of the aforementioned benefits? Or, do we want to allocate it to the largest owner of landfills in the world, which involves a handful of people and some heavy equipment burying the same materials in a landfill at the headwaters of an upland creek that drains into the San Francisco Bay?

Urban Ore would like to thank the Berkeley City Council, the Berkeley Zero Waste Commission, and the Berkeley Department of Public Works, particularly Phil Harrington, Greg Apa and Heidi Obermeit. On the resolution, the list of WHEREAS’s really knocks the ball out of the park, including, “WHEREAS, Urban Ore’s proven safety record, environmental commitment, and quality customer service have made them a vital zero waste partner; and… WHEREAS, the Urban Ore salvage program is a Strategic Plan Priority Project that advances our goal to be a global leader in addressing climate change, advancing environmental justice, and protecting the environment”.

We look forward to continuing our pioneering and renowned private-public partnership for generations to come.

# # #

Plastics Free CA Ballot Initiative

ACT NOW! HELP US ENSURE A CLEAN AND HEALTHY FUTURE FOR ALL CALIFORNIANS

Plastics Free CA is a ballot initiative—an effort organized by the people of California to impact change through an upcoming election. Signature gathering was on a great roll, but due to the current circumstances, the campaign managers as estimating they are about 40-50,000 signatures short. They are accepting signatures through June 19. If you have access to a printer or printing shop, here’s how you can help make sure that Californians have a chance to vote to stop plastic pollution:

Step 1: Review the initiative

Step 2: Print, sign, and send! Please read the instructions carefully

Step 3: Spread the word! Share this site and use the hashtag #PlasticsFreeCA on social media

Petition drive paid for by Clean Coasts, Clean Water, Clean Streets: Environmentalists, Recyclers, and Farmers Against Plastic Pollution. Committee major funding from Recology, Corn Refiners Association and New Approach PAC.

Bay Area Shelter-In-Place Orders Amended To Include Recycling and Composting

BAY AREA SHELTER-IN-PLACE ORDERS AMENDED TO INCLUDE RECYCLING AND COMPOSTING

Doug Brooms, ZWAC Co-Chair, 5/14/20

In the revised S-I-P Order, issued on April 29 by Alameda County and Contra Costa County, and likely others, the definition of “Essential Infrastructure” has been amended as follows:

  • Essential Infrastructure means airports, utilities (including water, sewer, gas, and electrical), oil refining, roads and highways, public transportation, solid waste facilities (including collection, removal, disposal, recycling, and processing facilities)…
  • All recycling facilities may operate, including but not limited to those providing for recycling of beverage containers, scrap metal, used oil, construction and demolition debris, and any other materials that can be, or are required to be, recycled by the State of California.
  • Composting facilities may operate and composting activities may take place.

This was welcome news for recycling businesses. On the first day following the revised Order, Cash for Cans in East Oakland reopened for business, with over 100 pleased customers, after being closed for six weeks.

There is speculation that the change might have been precipitated by letters that had been emailed individually to each Public Health Department Director serving five of the participating Bay Area Counties. At a NCRA Zero Waste Advocacy Committee (ZWAC) meeting via Zoom teleconference on 4/14, attendees had commented on the impact of Covid-19 on waste collection services, mostly the curtailment or suspension of businesses handling recyclable materials.

To address concerns raised by members, ZWAC Co-Chair John Moore volunteered to draft a letter to send to County Public Health Directors. Paragraph #1 included several compelling arguments for the inclusion of recycling within the solid waste category of Essential Infrastructure. Paragraph #2 presented a strong case for allowing CRV buy back businesses to operate. Paragraph #3 had requested accommodation to allow grocery store customers to bring in their reusable bags.

The 4/29 Order had acceded to the first two counts, with composting appearing as an added bonus. It is not known if the Public Health Directors had heard from any other grassroots organizations or recycling businesses. There may be no way of knowing for sure whether the NCRA letters had been persuasive or pivotal, but there is gratification in suspecting that they were. Letters in fact can make a difference.

Help Resuscitate SB 246 Oil And Gas Tax

2020 Oil Stain – CA Dirty Crude 2017         2020 Oil and Gas Tax Sample Letter

Also see following article: California Oil Among World’s Dirtiest

By Doug Brooms, ZWAC Chair and Portia Sinnott, Editor
Despite being an oil and gas producing state for over a century, California is purported to be the only one out of 34 oil and gas extraction states without ever having a severance tax. Since the 1990s, there had been at least five successive oil and gas tax Bills that had been introduce in the California Legislature, but were derailed.

In 2019, SB 246 “Oil and Gas Severance Tax” by Senator Bob Weizkowski and Senator Ben Allen, would have imposed a 10 percent oil and gas severance tax levy on oil producers. The revenue derived would have gone into the state’s general fund.

SB 246 was introduced 2/11/19, but never advanced out of the Senate Governance and Finance Committee. The Bill was amended 1/6/20 and languished again in the committee chaired by Mike McGuire, but again did not advance before the 1/31/20 deadline for 2-year Bills.

The Bill had the support of no less than 18 organizations. The SB 246 Fact Sheet and the then SB 246 Sample Support Letter provided compelling justifications for the tax, but neither had mentioned anything regarding the additional benefits to Climate Change mitigation.

The 2020 Oil and Gas Tax Sample Letter, was crafted mostly by doing cut and paste from a number of online articles on Oil and Climate Change. The articles below were sent to a legislative assistant to Senator Wieckowski. The reply was that unfortunately the bill is effectively dead, and that Senator Wieckowski will not be reintroducing the bill nor actively soliciting other members to pick up the mantle.

The eight members of the Joint Legislative Committee on Climate Change Policies could likely be more receptive to the resurrection or revision of a likewise Bill, preferably for 2020, with a better chance of navigating through committees. Please use these documents to prepare a persuasive request to resuscitate SB 246 and them to your Senator and the members of the aforementioned committee.

REPORT: CALIFORNIA OIL AMONG WORLD’S DIRTIEST
Rampant Oil Production Undermines State’s Climate Leadership
Center for Biological Diversity, 11/2017
Three-quarters of California’s oil is as climate-damaging as Canadian tar sands crude, according to a Center for Biological Diversity report released today at the United Nations climate change conference in Bonn, Germany.

Oil Stain: How Dirty Crude Undercuts California’s Climate Progress found that eight of the state’s 10 largest-producing oil fields produce very dirty crude with greenhouse gas emissions comparable to tar sands oil. The report detailed how the state’s dirty oil problem is compounded by policies that incentivize crude production.

… Despite the climate and public-health harms of its oil extraction, California is currently the third-largest oil-producing state. Tax breaks, weak regulation and minimal oversight encourage aggressive oil development in the state. California regulators issued more than 3,300 drilling permits for oil and gas wells in 2015 alone. []