Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Salt Alternatives topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Jericho Selectboard weighs trial of calcium magnesium acetate to cut salt damage and environmental harm
Summary
A resident scientist urged the Selectboard to pilot calcium magnesium acetate (CMA) as a less‑corrosive alternative to road salt, proposing a 10% pilot; the board asked staff to research supply, storage and costs before deciding whether to adopt CMA more broadly.
Resident and environmental scientist Lance Polya urged the Jericho Selectboard on June 18 to try calcium magnesium acetate (CMA) as an alternative to traditional road salt, saying CMA reduces corrosion and environmental harm despite a higher purchase price.
"The main alternative to salt is calcium magnesium acetate (CMA)," Lance said, and he told the board CMA is granular and "requires no specialized equipment, so there would be no additional cost for the road crew to dispense it." He said the upfront purchase price is higher—about $600 per ton for CMA versus about $100 per ton for traditional salt—but argued the hidden costs of salt (infrastructure repair, vehicle and property corrosion, ecological damage) make CMA less expensive over time. Lance cited an Adirondack Research estimate described in his remarks that places hidden costs for salt at roughly $2,500 per ton.
Jacob Johnson and other board members pressed on logistics. Jacob said the town's existing salt shed holds a maximum of about 200 tons and is "too small as it is," and that the old garage currently stores equipment and lacks suitable protection for CMA because CMA must be kept in moisture‑proof conditions. Lance said CMA can be stored in moisture‑proof containers, including 55‑gallon drums, but Jacob raised the risk of condensation in metal drums as temperatures cycle.
Board members discussed a mixed approach. Chris Brown said having both a conventional salt and an alternative available "makes sense" so the crew can choose by road conditions; Amy Kapitan asked for supply‑chain details and storage options. Lance asked the Selectboard to try a small pilot—he suggested using 10% of the amount budgeted for salt in the upcoming fiscal year—and to adopt salt‑reduction practices. Paula Hollstein offered to help staff research and suggested Megan Davis could contact other towns; Lance offered to help gather information about how other towns store CMA.
The board directed Jacob and Paula to research suppliers and quantities, identify feasible short‑term storage for a pilot quantity, estimate costs (including any equipment or disposal implications), and report back to the Selectboard. No formal policy change or procurement was approved at the meeting.
How this matters: the town faces a tradeoff between higher per‑ton purchase costs for CMA and potential long‑term savings if CMA reduces corrosion to bridges, roads, vehicles and utilities and lessens salt's ecological impacts. The board's next step is to receive staff findings on availability, storage and costs before any pilot or purchase.
