Upload
others
View
3
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Florida International University – Miami, FL
confidential report | assessment performed February 2011
May 2011
Waste Management Sustainability Services | Waste Minimiza tion Pract ice
Sustainability Solutions Opportunity Assessment™ Report
The Sustainability Solutions Opportunity Assessment™ and this report are products of Waste Management Sustainability Services. Waste Management
Sustainability Services provides a full range of sustainability services that help organizations identify and implement sustainable business practices to
create efficiencies, reduce costs, and enhance brands. Waste Management Sustainability Services is a Waste Management company. Visit us on the web
at www.wmgreensquad.com or contact us by telephone at 888-382-8823.
Florida International Universit y | Susta inab i l i ty So lut ions Oppor tuni ty Assessment
2
This report has been prepared for the specific purpose(s) contained herein. The conclusions,
observations, options, and recommendations contained in this report represent the opinions of Waste
Management Sustainability Services. To the extent that statements and information provided by the
client, its representatives, or partners have been used in the preparation of this report, Waste Management
Sustainability Services has relied upon the same to be accurate, and for which no assurances are intended
and no representations or warranties are made. Waste Management Sustainability Services makes no
certification and gives no assurances except as explicitly set forth in this report. This report and the
information contained herein, is produced for the expressed use of the company or organization named
on the cover. Waste Management Sustainability Services specifically prohibits redistribution of this
report and the material contained herein in whole or part without expressed written permission of Waste
Management Sustainability Services.
© 2011 Waste Management Sustainability Services All Rights Reserved.
Florida International University | Susta inab i l i ty So lut ions Oppor tuni ty Assessment
CONTENTS
Executive Summary......................................................................................................................................... 1
Purpose and Scope of Work ........................................................................................................................ 1
Assessment Methodology ........................................................................................................................... 1
Waste Characterization Study ..................................................................................................................... 1
Methodology ............................................................................................................................................ 2
Results ...................................................................................................................................................... 3
Waste Characterization............................................................................................................................. 5
Improvement Options Analysis ................................................................................................................ 7
Roadmap for Implementation ................................................................................................................... 8
Timeline ................................................................................................................................................... 8
Executive Summary Conclusion ................................................................................................................... 10
Main Report Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 11
Purpose and Scope of Work .......................................................................................................................11
Assessment Information ................................................................................................................................ 12
Facility Information ...................................................................................................................................12
Assessment Description .............................................................................................................................12
Assessment Methodology ..........................................................................................................................12
Waste Characterization Study ....................................................................................................................... 12
Methodology ..............................................................................................................................................13
Results .......................................................................................................................................................15
Sort Observations and Caveats ............................................................................................................... 16
Waste Characterization ..............................................................................................................................17
Campus-Specific Results ...........................................................................................................................19
Additional Campus Observations ..............................................................................................................20
Recycling at Graham Center .................................................................................................................. 20
Types of Collection Containers .............................................................................................................. 21
Conveyance of Recycling containers ..................................................................................................... 21
Plastic Film at Graham Center ............................................................................................................... 21
Improvement Options Analysis ..................................................................................................................... 21
Opportunity 1 – Revise Recycling Service Plan..................................................................................... 23
Opportunity 2 – Reduce Plastic Film in Waste Containers .................................................................... 23
Opportunity 3 – Recycle Single-Stream Material at Graham and Wolfe Centers .................................. 23
Opportunity 4 – Recycle Plastic Film from Graham Center and Wolfe Centers .................................... 24
Opportunity 5 – Encourage Reuse of Food Service Containers ............................................................. 25
Opportunity 6 – Harmonize Waste and Recycling Containers ............................................................... 25
Opportunity 7 – Involve Graphic Design Department ........................................................................... 25
Florida International Universit y | Susta inab i l i ty So lut ions Oppor tuni ty Assessment
4
Opportunity 8 – Deploy Clear Signage .................................................................................................. 26
Opportunity 9 – Effectively Communicate Green Announcements ....................................................... 27
Opportunity 10 – Install Electric Hand Dryers ....................................................................................... 27
Opportunity 11 – Implement Lamp, Ballast, Electronics and Cartridge Recycling ............................... 28
Opportunity 12 – Implement Sharps Handling Program ........................................................................ 28
Opportunity 13 – Strategically Deploy Solar Compactors ..................................................................... 29
Opportunity 14 – Business Intelligence Tool ......................................................................................... 29
Roadmap for Implementation ........................................................................................................................ 30
Timeline .....................................................................................................................................................30
Near-Term Implementation Steps .......................................................................................................... 30
Long-Term Implementation Steps .......................................................................................................... 32
Conclusion ..................................................................................................................................................... 32
Appendix A ...................................................................................................................................................... i
Appendix B.................................................................................................................................................... iii
Appendix C..................................................................................................................................................... vi
Appendix D .................................................................................................................................................... ix
| Sustainab il i ty So lut ions Opportunity Assessment
Waste Management Sustainability Services 1
Waste Management
Sustainability Services
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF WORK
Florida International University (FIU) first opened its doors in 1972 and today provides
undergraduate and graduate programs to nearly 45,000 students. Academic programs are
provided at two main campuses and three smaller academic centers.
As part of FIU’s Vision, Mission and Values statement, FIU “is committed to the core
value of Responsibility – as stewards of the environment and citizens across the world.”
As evidence of this core value, FIU is a member of the American College and University
Presidents Climate Commitment, Association for Advancement of Sustainability in
Higher Education and American Council on Renewable Energy.
Given this intrinsic value and FIU’s long history of research and education related to
sustainability and the environment, FIU is interested in conducting a comprehensive
assessment of operations relating to waste and resource consumption. The goal is to
identify and implement measures that increase efficiency and provide cost benefits for
FIU, while also supporting its efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Waste Management Sustainability Services (WMSS) was retained by FIU to conduct a
comprehensive assessment of operations related to waste and recycling on FIU campuses.
The objectives of the engagement include:
Create a baseline for waste, recycling and organics rates
Understand FIU’s resource consumption pattern
Improve FIU’s waste management program
Seek operational efficiencies
ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY
In order to accomplish the project objectives, WMSS engaged in the following activities:
Received comprehensive campus tour to give representative view of waste
generation locations, waste and recycling containers and locations, conveyance
routes, and disposition locations
Interviewed key campus stakeholders in Custodial Services and the Office of
University Sustainability
Conducted comprehensive waste characterization study
Reviewed annual waste and recycling generation and service data
WASTE CHARACTERIZATION STUDY
In order to explore opportunities to improve the management of waste and recycling
materials generated on campus, it is necessary to first obtain a thorough understanding of
what is presently in the waste and recycling material streams. Following is a summary of
the methodology and results of the comprehensive waste characterization study
conducted as part of this engagement.
FIU | Sustainabi l i ty Solut ions Opportunity Assessment
2 Waste Management Sustainability Services 2
Waste Management
Sustainability Services
M E T H O D O L O G Y
WMSS staff met with stakeholders from Custodial Services and the Office of University
Sustainability to determine the timeframe and quantity of materials that would be
characterized in this exercise. Stakeholders determined that waste samples could be
taken from the Modesto A. Maidique Campus (MMC), Biscayne Bay Campus (BBC) and
the Engineering Center (EC) that in aggregate would be representative of all waste and
recycling streams at FIU. Additionally, “generator” categories were selected in an effort
to sample waste from a variety of building and activity types. Generator categories
selected were: Athletics, E&G, Auxiliary, Housing, and Library.
Based on these generator categories and the desire to obtain samples that in aggregate
would represent the overall waste and recycling materials generated at FIU, the following
sampling plan was utilized for the waste characterization study.
Table 1 - Waste Sampling Plan
Generator MMC EC BBC Total
Housing 8 NA 1 9
E&G Areas 8 5 2 10
Auxiliary Areas 9 NA 2 16
Library 2 NA 1 3
Athletics 2 NA 0 2
Total 29 5 6 40
Table 2 - Recycling Sampling Plan
Generator MMC EC BBC Total
Housing 1 NA 1 2
E&G Areas 1 1 1 2
Auxiliary Areas 1 NA 1 3
Library 1 NA 1 2
Athletics 1 NA 0 1
Total 5 1 4 10
After determining the generator categories and sampling plans, WMSS and the project
team created categories of materials into which the waste and recycling samples would be
sorted. Thirty-seven material categories were used for the study, and were distributed
between:
Paper
Plastics
Metal
Glass
Organics
Household Hazardous Waste (HHW)
Other Wastes
| Sustainab il i ty So lut ions Opportunity Assessment
Waste Management Sustainability Services 3
Waste Management
Sustainability Services
A more comprehensive description of the categories and sub-categories is provided in
Appendix A.
Waste samples were retrieved from each generator’s FEL containers and transported to a
sorting area behind the Campus Support Complex at MMC, or in front of the Grounds
building at BBC. Samples retrieved from the EC were transported via pick-up truck to
the sorting area on the MMC campus.
Recycling samples were retrieved by loading 96-gallon containers filled with single-
stream materials onto the pick-up truck and leaving empty containers in their place. The
recycling containers were delivered to the same sorting areas located on the MMC and
BBC campuses.
A team of sorters conducted sorting activities on the following dates:
MMC and EC: February 14 – 17, 2011
BBC: February 18, 2011
R E S U L T S
Following is a summary of the samples in the study:
Table 3 - Summary of Waste Characterization Samples
Material Stream Number of
Samples
Number of
Generators
Average
Weight
Minimum
Weight
Maximum
Weight
Total Weight
Sorted
Waste 40 5 139 lbs 62 lbs 284 lbs 5,550 lbs
Recycling 10 5 197 lbs 56 lbs 412 lbs 1,966 lbs
Total 50 150 lbs 7,516 lbs
The following chart summarizes the composition data for the waste and recycling streams
according to the seven primary material categories.
32.9%
28.6%
2.0%
3.9%
28.1%
0.2%
4.3%
78.1%
8.1%
1.2%
5.5%
4.7%
0.3%
2.1%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%
Paper
Plastic
Metal
Glass
Organics
HHW
Other Waste
Waste Recycling
FIU | Sustainabi l i ty Solut ions Opportunity Assessment
4 Waste Management Sustainability Services 4
Waste Management
Sustainability Services
The following tables provide the mean composition for each primary group, and the
lower and upper bounds when using a 90% confidence interval.
Table 4 - Mean Composition for Waste
Group Mean 90% Confidence Interval
Lower Bound Upper Bound
Paper 32.9% 29.1% 36.7%
Plastic 28.6% 26.3% 31.0%
Metal 2.0% 1.8% 2.4%
Glass 3.9% 3.0% 4.9%
Organics 28.1% 23.6% 32.8%
HHW 0.2% 0.1% 0.3%
Other Waste 4.3% 3.3% 5.4%
Table 5 - Mean Composition for Recycling
Group Mean 90% Confidence Interval
Lower Bound Upper Bound
Paper 78.1% 73.9% 82.0%
Plastic 8.1% 6.7% 9.6%
Metal 1.2% 0.9% 1.4%
Glass 5.5% 4.2% 6.9%
Organics 4.7% 3.5% 6.1%
HHW 0.3% 0.2% 0.4%
Other Waste 2.1% 1.6% 2.7%
Appendix B provides a more detailed review of the means, lower and upper bounds for
each primary and sub-category.
| Sustainab il i ty So lut ions Opportunity Assessment
Waste Management Sustainability Services 5
Waste Management
Sustainability Services
W A S T E C H A R A C T E R I ZA T I O N
The following chart shows the percentage of paper, plastic, metal and glass present in the
existing waste stream, by generator.
There is a substantial amount of recyclable paper in FIU’s waste stream. The following
chart shows what percent of the paper waste stream is recyclable.
A significant portion of the non-recyclable paper is paper-towel waste from restrooms.
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%
Athletics
Auxiliara Areas
E&G Areas
Housing
Library
Paper Plastic Metal Glass
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
Athletics
Auxiliara Areas
E&G Areas
Housing
Library
Percent of Paper that is Recyclable
FIU | Sustainabi l i ty Solut ions Opportunity Assessment
6 Waste Management Sustainability Services 6
Waste Management
Sustainability Services
The following chart shows the percent of the plastic, metal and glass materials found in
the recycling stream.
Non-recyclable fiber, plastic film and food waste make up the largest percentage of FIU’s
waste stream and are shown in the following chart. These materials cannot currently be
managed through the existing single-stream recycling program.
There are strategies that can help reduce the generation and increase the diversion of
these materials. These strategies are discussed further in the section Improvement
Options Analysis.
0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0%
Athletics
Auxiliara Areas
E&G Areas
Housing
Library
Non-Recyclable Paper Plastic Film Food Waste
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Athletics
Auxiliara Areas
E&G Areas
Housing
Library
Glass Metal Plastic
| Sustainab il i ty So lut ions Opportunity Assessment
Waste Management Sustainability Services 7
Waste Management
Sustainability Services
I M P R O V E M E N T O P T I O N S A N A L Y S I S
The following section discusses options that provide an increase in diversion,
sustainability or overall recycling awareness throughout the campus. These options will
ultimately result in a reduction in material hauled for disposal at the landfill, while also
promoting the overall sustainability efforts. Each option should be carefully reviewed for
operational, financial, social and strategic fit.
Table 6 - Options Summary Table
Option
# Option Name Benefit/Rationale
Ease of
Implementation
Capital
Required
1 Revise Recycling
Service Plan
Reduce operational costs of managing single-
stream recycling program
Easy None
2 Reduce Plastic Film
in Waste Containers
Reduce custodial costs, reduce waste volume
in final disposition containers
Easy None
3 Recycle Single-Stream Material at
Graham and Wolfe
Centers
Reduce volume in waste compactor, increase recycling diversion rate.
Easy $
4 Recycle Plastic Film from Graham
Center
Reduce volume in waste compactor, increase diversion rate, earn potential rebate based on
generation
Medium $
5 Encourage reuse of
food service containers
Explore options for reusable food service
containers
Medium $
6 Harmonize Waste
and Recycling
Containers
Paired, matching, and right-sized containers all
contribute to increased awareness and
improved participation in the recycling program.
Easy $$
7 Involve Graphic
Design Department
Using students to help create media displays
and visuals for the program will gather
momentum, and give a more personalized feel.
Medium None
8 Deploy Clear
Signage
Placing consistent, concise and visible signage
can have significant impact on the success of a
recycling and diversion program.
Easy $
9 Effectively Communicate
Green
Announcements
Utilizing various communication forms on campus with consistent and informative
messages will help increase participation,
diversion and recycling rates
Easy $
10 Install Electric Hand Dryers
Elimination of paper towels will reduce cost due to purchase, servicing, and hauling of
waste.
Medium $$
11 Lamp, Ballast, Electronics, and
Cartridge Recycling
Properly dispose of and track regulated / hazardous waste and consumer goods through
mail-back programs.
Easy $
12 Collect Medical
Waste
Provide proper disposal containers in strategic
locations for medical and sharps materials
Easy $
13 Deploy Solar Waste and Recycling
Compactors
Reduce the amount of hauls across campus by installing smaller solar powered compactors
Easy $$
14 Business
Intelligence Tool
Provides continuous online tracking of waste
and recycling quantities generated on campus, provides capability to track water and energy
consumption, provides carbon footprint
calculations and summaries
Medium $
FIU | Sustainabi l i ty Solut ions Opportunity Assessment
8 Waste Management Sustainability Services 8
Waste Management
Sustainability Services
Further details and support for each of these recommendations is provided in the main
report.
R O A D M A P F O R I M P L E M E N T A T I O N
A fully-optimized solid waste management plan requires many components to be
working in synchronicity with each other. Some of these components include:
Programs for different material streams
o Waste
o Recycling
o Universal waste (CFLs, batteries, pesticides, etc.)
Equipment
o Proper containers at strategic points of generation
o Equipment for efficient conveyance to place of final disposition
o Containers for final disposition
FEL containers
96-gallon carts
Compactors
Education
o Students and faculty
o Onsite vendors
o Building Services staff
Promotion
o Proper signage
o Campus-wide communications
o On-line postings, reminders
All of these issues need to be addressed in a logical and sequential process in order to
achieve maximum efficiency and the greatest likelihood of success.
T I M E L I N E
Following are various steps for FIU to implement in the near- and long-term planning
horizons as it strives for more efficient and sustainable solid waste management
practices. The timing and specifics of these steps should be approached with some
flexibility as modifications to these steps will likely be necessary due to service capacity
adjustments, seasonal variations due to scholastic calendars, and challenges related to
behavioral change.
NEAR-TERM IMPLEMENTATION STEPS
1. Assemble cross-functional project team. This team should have
representatives from various stakeholder groups such as sustainability team,
faculty, staff, students, vendors, and service providers, and share the common
goal of increasing efficiency and diversion of recycling on the main campus of
FIU. This team may already partially exist in the form of the sustainability
| Sustainab il i ty So lut ions Opportunity Assessment
Waste Management Sustainability Services 9
Waste Management
Sustainability Services
team, and can be supplemented as necessary with additional skill sets and
perspectives, and areas of responsibility.
2. Develop educational materials. Successful solid waste management programs
leave little to wonder when in comes to what goes in which containers. Waste
Management has promotional posters and signage that can be utilized, or that
can serve as a starting point if FIU wishes to develop materials specific to their
campus and cultural distinctiveness. These should be placed into circulation as
soon as they are available.
3. Deploy paired containers. FIU staff should develop a plan for the acquisition
and deployment of waste and recycling containers that provide a consistent
message across campus. Having a unified appearance will increase diversion,
and decrease confusing regarding what materials can be placed in which
containers.
There are two primary types of containers which need to be evaluated:
a. Classrooms and offices: purchase containers that have dual
compartments and can be clearly marked regarding what material goes
into each compartment. Signage should be clear, bold, and easy to
understand, and provide pictures or drawings of acceptable materials.
b. Common areas (walkways, gymnasium, cafes, study areas, etc.):
purchase containers that also have dual compartments, but have larger
capacities than the classroom containers and are weather / rodent proof.
These should be placed into service as soon as soon as possible, and pictures of
these containers should be included in any mass campus communications and
promotions. This initiative will likely need to be implemented over a period of
time as capital resources are available.
Note: It is critical that the campus embrace the following concept: No container
for waste should be without a recycling container adjacent to it, and if it is
attached – all the better. Studies have shown that any deviation from this set-up
has significant consequences to the diversion rate. Convenience will ultimately
rule the behavior – when a solo trash can is closest, it will receive trash and
recycling. Likewise, when a solo recycling container is closest, it will also
receive both trash and recycling. So always pair waste and recycling
containers. This should become a campus policy.
4. Transition to route-based recycling collection by service provider. This
initiative can be accomplished quickly, once a collection rate has been
determined with the recycling service provider. It does not require any
additional carts or labor to implement, as it should actually reduce the labor and
capital costs of the school’s recycling collection.
5. Explore placement of high speed hand dryers in restrooms. FIU should
explore the benefits of replacing existing paper towel machines in restrooms
with high speed hand dryers. FIU may wish to install a few of these in strategic
locations as part of a pilot program to help determine the overall benefit and
necessity of a campus-wide replacement initiative. Several steps of the hand
dryer installation process can be conducted at the same time. After selecting
FIU | Sustainabi l i ty Solut ions Opportunity Assessment
10 Waste Management Sustainability Services 10
Waste Management
Sustainability Services
initial installation locations and quantities, pricing can also be negotiated for the
bulk purchase of dryers through a local sales representative. The sales
representative can also be a great resource for information about various rebate
programs for which FIU may be eligible. Next, a bid can be sent out to local
contractors for the installation of the dryers and the required electrical
connection. Ideally, the entire time frame for procurement and installation is no
more than 90 days. After the new units have been installed for 30-60 days, FIU
can evaluate their benefits and draft a replacement schedule for other high-
volume restrooms.
6. Begin tracking generation and recycling data. FIU should track how much
waste and recycling materials are being generated. This data can be used to
assist with carbon footprint calculations, and other broader sustainability reports.
This should be an ongoing task, and Waste Management’s Business Intelligence
tool can assist with that effort.
LONG-TERM IMPLEMENTATION STEPS
The near-term implementation steps focus on increasing the diversion of recyclable
material into recycling containers. The mid-term implementation steps focus on
adjusting operational procedures to facilitate increased efficiencies and diversion.
1. Work with on-site vendors to minimize waste generation operations. FIU
should work closely with onsite vendors such as Aramark and other food and
beverage vendors, to analyze waste generating operations and explore
modifications that will result in a) generating less materials, and b) divert more
materials into recycling programs.
2. Explore options to reduce organic waste via on-site composting, off-site
composting, or installation of liquid waste extractors. Organic waste is currently
being generated in dormitories, cafeterias and short-order establishments,
study/common areas, and classrooms. Each of these generating locations
requires a different strategy to minimize the amount of organics being generated,
and increasing the likelihood of the generated material being diverted for
beneficial reuse.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CONCLUSION
Implementation of recommended options and best practices will provide FIU with the
needed tools to implement cost savings programs and enhance sustainability
performance. Waste Management appreciates the opportunity to help an institution such
as FIU pave their way toward success in their waste management and sustainability goals.
The willingness of FIU personnel to assist in our evaluation provided Waste Management
with invaluable information and an efficient discovery process. We look forward to
working with FIU in continued support of its sustainability goals.
| Sustainab il i ty So lut ions Opportunity Assessment
Waste Management Sustainability Services 11
Waste Management
Sustainability Services
MAIN REPORT INTRODUCTION
PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF WORK
Florida International University (FIU) first opened its doors in 1972 and today provides
undergraduate and graduate programs to nearly 45,000 students. Academic programs are
provided at two main campuses and three smaller academic centers. The campuses are
described as follows:
Modesto A. Maidique Campus (MMC) – FIU’s main 342 acre main campus
with academic buildings, residence halls, athletic facilities, and an eight-story
library
Biscayne Bay Campus (BBC) – FIU’s second largest campus, occupying 200
acres and includes academic facilities, residence halls, aquatic center, and
conference center
Engineering Center (EC) – FIU’s 40-acre research facility, most of which is
located inside a 500,000 square foot academic building
FIU Broward in Pembroke Pines – specializes in providing educational
opportunities for adult students
Downtown Center – located in downtown Miami, this campus offers graduate-
level business courses for professionals
As part of FIU’s Vision, Mission and Values statement, FIU “is committed to the core
value of Responsibility – as stewards of the environment and citizens across the world.”
As evidence of this core value, FIU is a member of the American College and University
Presidents Climate Commitment, Association for Advancement of Sustainability in
Higher Education and American Council on Renewable Energy.
In 2009, FIU adopted the Climate Action Plan and is committed to reducing carbon
emissions. FIU has an 18-member Sustainability Committee and has established an
Office of University Sustainability.
Given this intrinsic value and FIU’s long history of research and education related to
sustainability and the environment, FIU is interested in conducting a comprehensive
assessment of operations relating to waste and resource consumption. The goal is to
identify and implement measures that increase efficiency and provide cost benefits for
FIU, while also supporting its efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Waste Management Sustainability Services (WMSS) was retained by FIU to conduct a
comprehensive assessment of operations related to waste and recycling on FIU campuses.
The objectives of the engagement include:
Create a baseline for waste and recycling and organics rates
Understand FIU’s resource consumption pattern
Improve FIU’s waste management program
Seek operational efficiencies
FIU | Sustainabi l i ty Solut ions Opportunity Assessment
12 Waste Management Sustainability Services 12
Waste Management
Sustainability Services
ASSESSMENT INFORMATION
FACILITY INFORMATION
FIU opted to explore the waste and recycling materials at its MMC and BBC campuses,
as well as the Engineering Center. The following table summarizes these facilities.
Table 7- Facility Summary
Item Comment
Facility Name Modesto Maidique
Campus
Biscayne Bay Campus Engineering Center
Description Main Campus Secondary Campus Engineering and
Research
Address 11200 SW 8th Street
Miami, FL 33199
3000 NE 151st Street
North Miami, FL 33181
10555 W Flagler St
Miami, FL 33175
Contact Name Joost Nuninga
Contact
Number
(305) 348-4630
ASSESSMENT DESCRIPTION
Table 8 - Assessment Overview
Item Comment
Sustainability Consultants Raymond Randall
Time Frame February 14-18, 2011
Completed on May 2011
Assessment Level Basic Material Characterization Detailed Material Characterization
Basic Options Analysis Detailed Option Analysis
Carbon Analysis Material process mapping Implementation Feasibility Analysis Action Plan
ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY
In order to accomplish the project objectives, WMSS engaged in the following activities:
Received comprehensive campus tour to give representative view of waste
generation locations, waste and recycling containers and locations, conveyance
routes, and disposition locations
Interviewed key campus stakeholders in Custodial Services and the Office of
University Sustainability
Conducted comprehensive waste characterization study
Reviewed annual waste and recycling generation and service data
WASTE CHARACTERIZATION STUDY
In order to explore opportunities to improve the management of waste and recycling
materials generated on campus, it is necessary to first obtain a thorough understanding of
what is presently in the waste and recycling material streams. Following is a summary of
the methodology and results of the comprehensive waste characterization study
conducted as part of this engagement.
| Sustainab il i ty So lut ions Opportunity Assessment
Waste Management Sustainability Services 13
Waste Management
Sustainability Services
METHODOLOGY
WMSS staff met with stakeholders from Custodial Services and the Office of University
Sustainability to determine the timeframe and quantity of materials that would be
characterized in this exercise. Stakeholders believed waste samples could be taken from
MMC, BBC and the EC that in aggregate would be representative of the waste and
recycling streams at FIU. Additionally, “generator” categories were selected in an effort
to sample waste from a variety of building and activity types. Generator categories were
selected and defined as follows:
Table 9 - Generator Descriptions
Generator Description
Housing Dormitories; excluding Greek houses
E&G Areas Classroom, administrative and office buildings
Auxiliary Areas Graham Center, Market Place, Wolfe Center, parking garages
Library Green Library and BBC Library
Athletics Athletic facilities, both competitive and recreational
Based on these generator categories and the desire to obtain samples that in aggregate
would represent the overall waste and recycling materials generated at FIU, the following
sampling plan was utilized for the waste characterization study.
Table 10 - Waste Sampling Plan
Generator MMC EC BBC Total
Housing 8 NA 1 9
E&G Areas 8 5 2 10
Auxiliary Areas 9 NA 2 16
Library 2 NA 1 3
Athletics 2 NA 0 2
Total 29 5 6 40
Table 11 - Recycling Sampling Plan
Generator MMC EC BBC Total
Housing 1 NA 1 2
E&G Areas 1 1 1 2
Auxiliary Areas 1 NA 1 3
Library 1 NA 1 2
Athletics 1 NA 0 1
Total 5 1 4 10
After determining the generator categories and sampling plans, WMSS and the project
team created categories of materials into which the waste and recycling samples would be
sorted. A summary of these categories is shown below, and a more comprehensive
description is provided in Appendix A.
FIU | Sustainabi l i ty Solut ions Opportunity Assessment
14 Waste Management Sustainability Services 14
Waste Management
Sustainability Services
Table 12 - Waste Characterization Material Categories
Primary Category Sub-Categories
Paper Newspaper
Uncoated Cardboard
Office
Other Recyclable
Aseptic Containers
Non-recyclable / Other
Plastics #1 Containers
#2 Containers (natural and pigmented)
#3-#7 Containers
EPS – Packaging
EPS – Food Containers
Film
Single-use plastics
Other Rigid / Mixed Plastics
Metal Aluminum / Non-Ferrous Cans
Tin / Steele / Ferrous Cans
Other Non-Ferrous Metals
Other Ferrous Metals
Glass Containers – All colors
Other Glass
Organics Food Waste
Yard Waste
Other Organics
HHW Batteries
Paints / Solvents
Compact Fluorescent Light Bulbs
Sharps
Toner Cartridges
Other Hazardous Waste
Other Waste Appliances
Clothing / Shoes / Textiles
E-Waste
HVAC / Other Filters
C&D
Bulky Wastes
Fines / Dirt
Other Inorganics
Waste samples were retrieved from each generator by manually retrieving materials from
FEL containers and transporting the samples to a sorting area behind the Campus Support
Complex at MMC, or in front of the Grounds building at BBC. Samples retrieved from
the EC were transported via pick-up truck to the sorting area on the MMC campus.
Recycling samples were retrieved by loading 96-gallon containers filled with single-
stream materials onto the pick-up truck and leaving empty containers in their place. The
recycling containers were delivered to the same sorting areas located on the MMC and
BBC campuses.
An experienced Field Manager and a team of four temporary sorters conducted sorting
activities on the following dates:
MMC and EC: February 14 – 17, 2011
BBC: February 18, 2011
The primary tasks completed by the sorting crew were:
1. Identifying the sample generator and matching it to the sample plan;
| Sustainab il i ty So lut ions Opportunity Assessment
Waste Management Sustainability Services 15
Waste Management
Sustainability Services
2. Physically sorting 100% of each sample into the Material Categories previously
identified;
3. Recording the weight of each material sub-category at the completion of each
sample;
4. Removing the sorted and weighed sample from the sorting area, and
5. Cleaning the sorting area to prepare for the next sample.
RESULTS
The targeted number of samples from each generator and campus was obtained and
sorted successfully. Following is a summary of the samples in the study:
Table 13 - Summary of Waste Characterization Samples
Material Stream Number of
Samples
Number of
Generators
Average
Weight
Minimum
Weight
Maximum
Weight
Total Weight
Sorted
Waste 40 5 139 lbs 62 lbs 284 lbs 5,550 lbs
Recycling 10 5 197 lbs 56 lbs 412 lbs 1,966 lbs
Total 50 150 lbs 7,516 lbs
The following chart summarizes the composition data for the waste and recycling streams
according to the seven primary material categories.
The following tables provide the mean composition for each primary group, and the
lower and upper bounds when using a 90% confidence interval.
32.9%
28.6%
2.0%
3.9%
28.1%
0.2%
4.3%
78.1%
8.1%
1.2%
5.5%
4.7%
0.3%
2.1%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%
Paper
Plastic
Metal
Glass
Organics
HHW
Other Waste
Waste Recycling
FIU | Sustainabi l i ty Solut ions Opportunity Assessment
16 Waste Management Sustainability Services 16
Waste Management
Sustainability Services
Table 14 - Mean Composition for Waste
Group Mean 90% Confidence Interval
Lower Bound Upper Bound
Paper 32.9% 29.1% 36.7%
Plastic 28.6% 26.3% 31.0%
Metal 2.0% 1.8% 2.4%
Glass 3.9% 3.0% 4.9%
Organics 28.1% 23.6% 32.8%
HHW 0.2% 0.1% 0.3%
Other Waste 4.3% 3.3% 5.4%
Table 15 - Mean Composition for Recycling
Group Mean 90% Confidence Interval
Lower Bound Upper Bound
Paper 78.1% 73.9% 82.0%
Plastic 8.1% 6.7% 9.6%
Metal 1.2% 0.9% 1.4%
Glass 5.5% 4.2% 6.9%
Organics 4.7% 3.5% 6.1%
HHW 0.3% 0.2% 0.4%
Other Waste 2.1% 1.6% 2.7%
Appendix C provides a more detailed review of the means, lower and upper bounds for
each primary and sub-category.
S O R T O B S E R V A T I O N S A N D C A V E A T S
The following observations from the visual and physical exercise are presented as
anecdotal information as observed during the sort. These observations should be
interpreted in light of the data and used to develop opportunities for improvement. Some
of the observations are easily explainable, but they none-the-less have an impact on the
school’s waste and recycling stream and modifications to the program may be necessary.
1) Typical sample weights for a traditional waste characterization should range
from 200-300 lbs. For the FIU study, frequently 100% of the materials
generated were taken for the sample, but the sample still weighed less than 200
lbs. This caused the average sample weight to be below the targeted minimum
weight of 200 lbs. The effect of lighter loads is to widen the upper and lower
bounds of the confidence intervals surrounding the mean, presented in the data.
For purposes of FIU’s waste characterization, the data is still sufficient for
evaluating waste and recycling program opportunities.
| Sustainab il i ty So lut ions Opportunity Assessment
Waste Management Sustainability Services 17
Waste Management
Sustainability Services
2) The overall composition of the waste seen during this sort was more
homogeneous than refuse typically generated for a city or county as a whole.
Some examples of items typically seen, but absent during this sort, include
diapers, home repair/remodeling wastes, and hazardous wastes relating to home
and vehicle maintenance. Additionally, plastics came mostly from food and
beverage generators and plastic film garbage bags (i.e., there was a lack of
discarded plastic toys, shower curtains, hoses, etc.)
3) The number of samples containing bags full of only used paper towels (i.e.
discards from restrooms) was significant.
4) Many loads contained plastic film garbage bags filled only with smaller garbage
bags containing waste (i.e. increasing the number of bags discarded).
5) The material sub-catergory “single-use plastics” included mostly eating utensils.
Straws and drink lids were included in the material category “other rigid
plastics”.
6) Sorting occurred during the week of Valentine’s Day. The sorting crew
witnessed several samples containing cookies and candies (both categorized as
food waste) and flowers (categorized as yard waste). These percentage
compositions of food waste and yard waste may be slightly over-estimated when
compared to a more typical week.
7) Materials included in the electronic or e-waste category included items with
electrical plugs or components of typical e-waste items (e.g., computer boards).
There were no TVs, computers, monitors, etc.
8) The results for many material categories show a Mean value of 0 percent. This
does not mean that the sorting crew did not find this material in the waste
samples. However, it may mean that the amount of that material was so small, it
makes up less than 1 percent of the overall waste. Similarly, if a lower or upper
boundary of the confidence interval reads 0 percent (as shown in Appendix C), it
may indicate that some of this material is likely, however during the sorting
event, only an insignificant amount was identified.
WASTE CHARACTERIZATION
FIU’s best opportunity to increase the amount of recyclable material diverted is to
increase the amount of material being diverted into FIU’s existing single-stream
recycling program. The following chart shows the percentage of single-stream recyclable
material present in the existing waste stream for each generator.
FIU | Sustainabi l i ty Solut ions Opportunity Assessment
18 Waste Management Sustainability Services 18
Waste Management
Sustainability Services
There is a substantial amount of recyclable paper in FIU’s waste stream. The following
chart shows what percent of the paper waste stream is recyclable.
A significant portion of the non-recyclable paper is paper-towel waste from restrooms.
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%
Athletics
Auxiliara Areas
E&G Areas
Housing
Library
Paper Plastic Metal Glass
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%
Athletics
Auxiliara Areas
E&G Areas
Housing
Library
Percent of Paper that is Recyclable
| Sustainab il i ty So lut ions Opportunity Assessment
Waste Management Sustainability Services 19
Waste Management
Sustainability Services
The following chart shows the percent of the plastic, metal and glass materials that is
recyclable in the single-stream program.
The biggest components of FIU’s existing waste stream that are not manageable through
the single-stream recycling program are shown in the following chart.
There are strategies that can help reduce the generation of these three materials, and
increase the diversion of the rest of the material. These are discussed further in the
section Improvement Options Analysis.
CAMPUS-SPECIFIC RESULTS
While the aggregate results are useful for purposes of assessing the overall institutional
waste and recycling activities, a review of the data from each specific campus is also
useful in developing and implementing campus-specific educational and operational
0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0%
Athletics
Auxiliara Areas
E&G Areas
Housing
Library
Non-Recyclable Paper Plastic Film Food Waste
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Athletics
Auxiliara Areas
E&G Areas
Housing
Library
Glass Metal Plastic
FIU | Sustainabi l i ty Solut ions Opportunity Assessment
20 Waste Management Sustainability Services 20
Waste Management
Sustainability Services
initiatives. Following are summaries of the waste and recycling data obtained at each of
the three campuses included in the study.
The following tables summarize these results by primary material category. Appendix D
provides detailed results for all 37 sub-categories for waste and recycling for all the
campuses.
Table 16 – Campus-Specific Waste Composition Results
Group MMC EC BBC Institution Average
Paper 31.4% 36.0% 27.8% 32.9%
Plastic 27.2% 30.6% 27.0% 28.6%
Metal 2.1% 2.7% 1.7% 2.0%
Glass 4.0% 3.9% 2.4% 3.9%
Organics 30.8% 23.0% 37.1% 28.1%
HHW 0.2% 0.1% 0.0% 0.2%
Other Waste 4.3% 3.8% 3.9% 4.3%
Table 17 – Campus-Specific Recycling Composition Results
Group MMC EC BBC Institution Average
Paper 80.6% 96.8% 98.8% 78.1%
Plastic 7.5% 0.0% 0.8% 8.1%
Metal 0.8% 2.3% 0.0% 1.2%
Glass 2.3% 0.0% 0.4% 5.5%
Organics 6.0% 0.9% 0.0% 4.7%
HHW 0.5% 0.0% 0.0% 0.3%
Other Waste 2.4% 0.0% 0.0% 2.1%
Given the number of samples analyzed at each campus, a composition of 0.0% in these
tables does not indicate that there is no material present in the waste stream. It merely
indicates that a de minimus amount of that material was found in the samples utilized
during this study. A study utilizing a greater quantity of samples would likely result in a
more measurable and determinable quantity of material in each category, but was beyond
the scope of this project.
ADDITIONAL CAMPUS OBSERVATIONS
During the course of the campus tours and the waste characterization studies, the
following observations were made that provide insights into practices that can be
improved.
R E C Y C L I N G A T G R A H A M C E N T E R
The waste compactor at the Graham Center (GC) is easily accessible at the loading
docks. The existing cardboard recycling Front End Load (FEL) container is located
approximately 70 additional steps from the waste compactor, requires navigating down a
| Sustainab il i ty So lut ions Opportunity Assessment
Waste Management Sustainability Services 21
Waste Management
Sustainability Services
long ramp, and is unsheltered from any inclement weather. Consequently, it is
significantly less convenient to place the recyclable cardboard into the recycling
container. Visual observations of the waste compactor showed significant quantities of
recyclable cardboard were present. Additionally, there were significant quantities of
recyclable containers in the compactor.
Even though the waste compactor at the BBC receives waste from a variety of buildings
including the Wolfe Center, there is little indication that recycling practices at the Wolfe
Center are any better, and similar improvements could be made there as well.
T Y P E S O F C O L L E C T I O N C O N T A I N E R S
The types of initial collection containers varied widely in terms of color, size, shape and
signage. This inconsistency typically creates confusion amongst the primary users, and
decreases diversion into recycling containers; and
increases contamination in recycling containers.
C O N V E Y A N C E O F R E C Y C L I N G C O N T A I N E R S
Current operational protocol calls for FIU to stage 96-gallon single-stream recycling carts
outside of all buildings, adjacent or near the building’s waste FEL container. When a cart
is full, it is turned to face the wall instead of opening towards the user. A crew from
Custodial Services then drives around campus in a box truck, and exchanges the full carts
for empty carts. The full carts are congregated at the Campus Support Complex where
they are periodically emptied by a Waste Management recycling vehicle. This practice
requires a) the capital and O&M costs of the box truck; b) the costs for leasing or
purchasing two to three times the amount of carts necessary for FIU’s carrying capacity;
and c) the labor and benefits costs associated with the crew. Given these costs, the total
costs of managing the recycling program on campus is likely higher than necessary.
P L A S T I C F I L M A T GR A H A M C E N T E R
While waste was being set-aside for the waste characterization study, a significant
quantity of plastic film was segregated into a push cart. While this type of material is not
acceptable in a traditional single-stream recycling program, it is recyclable and has a
strong market value. Additionally, the building staff at the Graham Center have now
indicated their ability to segregate it, so it should not be difficult to capture this material
for recycling.
As with cardboard recycling, there is little indication to believe that the Wolfe Center is
managing their plastic film any differently, and there is likely a comparable opportunity
on the BBC campus.
IMPROVEMENT OPTIONS ANALYSIS
The following sections discuss options that provide an increase in diversion,
sustainability or overall recycling awareness throughout the campus. These options will
ultimately result in a reduction in material hauled for disposal at the landfill, while also
FIU | Sustainabi l i ty Solut ions Opportunity Assessment
22 Waste Management Sustainability Services 22
Waste Management
Sustainability Services
promoting the overall sustainability efforts. Each option should be carefully reviewed for
operational, financial, social and strategic fit.
Table 18 - Options Summary Table
Option
# Option Name Benefit/Rationale
Ease of
Implementation Capital
Required
1 Revise Recycling Service Plan
Reduce operational costs of managing single-stream recycling program
Easy None
2 Reduce Plastic Film
in Waste Containers
Reduce custodial costs, reduce waste volume
in final disposition containers
Easy None
3 Recycle Single-
Stream Material at Graham and Wolfe
Centers
Reduce volume in waste compactor, increase
recycling diversion rate.
Easy $
4 Recycle Plastic
Film from Graham Center
Reduce volume in waste compactor, increase
diversion rate, earn potential rebate based on generation
Medium $
5 Encourage reuse of
food service
containers
Explore options for reusable food service
containers
Medium $
6 Harmonize Waste and Recycling
Containers
Paired, matching, and right-sized containers all contribute to increased awareness and
improved participation in the recycling
program.
Easy $$
7 Involve Graphic Design Department
Using students to help create media displays and visuals for the program will gather
momentum, and give a more personalized feel.
Medium None
8 Deploy Clear Signage
Placing consistent, concise and visible signage can have significant impact on the success of a
recycling and diversion program.
Easy $
9 Effectively
Communicate Green
Announcements
Utilizing various communication forms on
campus with consistent and informative messages will help increase, participation,
diversion and recycling rates
Easy $
10 Install Electric
Hand Dryers
Elimination of paper towels will reduce cost
due to purchase, servicing, and hauling of waste.
Medium $$
11 Lamp, Ballast,
Electronics, and Cartridge Recycling
Properly dispose of and track regulated /
hazardous waste and consumer goods through mail-back programs.
Easy $
12 Collect Medical
Waste
Provide proper disposal containers in strategic
locations for medical and sharps materials
Easy $
13 Deploy Solar Waste
and Recycling Compactors
Reduce the amount of hauls across campus by
installing smaller solar powered compactors
Easy $$
14 Business
Intelligence Tool
Provides continuous online tracking of waste
and recycling quantities generated on campus,
provides capability to track water and energy consumption, provides carbon footprint
calculations and summaries
Medium $
| Sustainab il i ty So lut ions Opportunity Assessment
Waste Management Sustainability Services 23
Waste Management
Sustainability Services
O P P O R T U N I T Y 1 – R E V I S E R E C Y C L I N G S E R V I C E P L A N
Description – FIU currently conveys all recycling materials in 96-gallon carts to the
Campus Support Complex via a box truck and crew. The process of conveying this
material to the Campus Support Complex is costly and time consuming, and can be
eliminated. During the week of the on-site assessment, WMSS staff counted 207 full
recycling carts, 75 empty carts, and 33 broken recycling carts, all staged at the Campus
Support Complex. This count does not include the containers staged at each building on
campus, or those on the box truck being conveyed during the time of the count. Avoided
costs would include box truck O&M, conveyance labor and benefits, and cart rental or
leasing costs.
Feasibility – Since nearly all 96-gallon recycling carts are located adjacent to, or at least
near, front-end loading commercial waste containers serviced by large commercial
collection vehicles, it is also possible for a similarly sized recycling collection truck to
service the containers at each building.
Implementation – FIU staff will need to work collaboratively with its current waste and
recycling service provider to determine the net cost impacts of transitioning to a
“curbside” single-stream recycling collection program. Once the costs are determined,
staff will be able to cease conveying carts across campus and reallocate conveyance staff
for other duties.
O P P O R T U N I T Y 2 – R E D U C E P L A S T I C F I L M I N W A S T E
C O N T A I N E R S
Description – Plastic liners in trash and recycling containers should not be changed on a
daily basis (or multiple times per day in some instances). Rather, they should only be
changed and replaced when wet or organic material is present in the container.
Feasibility – This opportunity decreases the amount of time associated with servicing
each collection container, and also reduces the number of plastic liners needed to be
purchased.. This should ultimately result in the large plastic bags being filled primarily
with loose waste, instead of significant quantities of smaller plastic bags.
Implementation – Implementation of this opportunity requires educating janitorial staff
regarding the new practice, and defining guidelines for when new liners should be
utilized.
O P P O R T U N I T Y 3 – R E C Y C L E S I N G L E - S T R E A M M A T E R I A L
A T G R A H A M A N D W O L F E C E N T E R S
Description – Based on observations and waste characterization data, there is a
substantial amount of recyclable material being disposed in the waste compactors near
the Graham and Wolfe Centers. Although there are recycling containers in the nearby
vicinity (a cardboard FEL container and a few recycling carts), they are not being utilized
to the fullest extent.
FIU | Sustainabi l i ty Solut ions Opportunity Assessment
24 Waste Management Sustainability Services 24
Waste Management
Sustainability Services
Feasibility – This opportunity is extremely feasible to implement since there is existing
capacity and operational support to service the containers.
Implementation – The near-term goal is to increase the use of the recycling containers
already present behind these facilities. There are two critical components to successfully
capitalizing on this opportunity. First, all employees at these two buildings need to be
educated about what can go in the recycling containers and where they are located.
Second, the recycling containers behind the buildings need to be made more convenient
for the staff collecting and disposing recycling materials. For example, the waste
compactor at the Graham Center is located within a few feet of the service door. Yet the
cardboard recycling container requires an additional 70 paces to be walked by the staff,
and is located in an area not protected from the rain – both of which decrease the
likelihood that the container will be used as intended. WMSS staff noticed that the
loading dock adjacent to the walking ramp is not used very frequently, and may be a
preferable location for a recycling container since it is just a few further paces from the
waste compactor.
Given the presence of multiple retail facilities and classrooms in the complex, the mid-
term goal should be to convert the existing waste compactor to a recycling compactor,
and replace the cardboard FEL container with a traditional FEL container that it used for
wet or organic waste, largely from the food-service and common areas in the buildings.
The long-term goal should be to also divert the organic material from the waste stream.
It can be used by environmental and science classes or clubs, or be sent to commercial
compost facilities as that market develops.
O P P O R T U N I T Y 4 – R E C Y C L E P L A S T I C F I L M F R O M
G R A H A M C E N T E R A N D W O L F E C E N T E R S
Description – Capture and recycling plastic film received at the Graham and Wolfe
Centers.
Feasibility – Retail stores and commercial food establishments frequently receive plastic
film with their shipments. Both typically receive it wrapped around pallets of incoming
supplies, and retail stores with clothing items also receive merchandise individually
wrapped in plastic film, similar to garment bags used by dry-cleaners. While not
acceptable in most single-stream recycling programs, this material is easy to capture, and
typically has a strong market value.
Implementation – A collection container needs to be located adjacent to the other
recycling containers behind the Graham and Wolfe Centers. Retail vendors in these
buildings need to be educated about the ability to recycle this material, and how it will be
done at these facilities. It is also possible to either bale this material if FIU has access to
a baler, or to densify the film with a portable densifier that can be leased or purchased.
| Sustainab il i ty So lut ions Opportunity Assessment
Waste Management Sustainability Services 25
Waste Management
Sustainability Services
O P P O R T U N I T Y 5 – E N C O U R A G E R E U S E O F F O O D S E R V I C E
C O N T A I N E R S
Description – A significant portion of the waste stream at buildings which had food
service facilities was single-use plastic containers. Options now exists which provide
alternatives to using disposable plastic containers.
Feasibility – This opportunity requires a collaborative approach with the food service
vendors.
Implementation – Three primary options exist for this opportunity. First, FIU can begin
incorporating language into lease operating agreements that prohibit the use of single-use
plastics, especially products made from Styrofoam, and incentivize the use of paper or
compostable products. Second, FIU can work with the vendors to develop a discount if
patrons bring their own food or beverage container. Third, FIU can utilize the services of
a container reuse program such as Eco-Takeouts, which allows students to exchange a
used container for a new container.
O P P O R T U N I T Y 6 – H A R M O N I ZE W A S T E A N D R E C Y C L I N G
C O N T A I N E R S
Description – When paired with the individualized small trash containers, this option
will significantly improve the convenience of recycling, and force people to consciously
decide whether or not to recycle. Having consistent containers at break areas or at
common areas in the facility with specific lids and signage for recycling tend to help
increase diversion. Specific containers exist with lids and marking for single-stream
components such as cans, bottles, and paper, or other containers specifically for residual
trash.
Feasibility – When evaluating if this option will increase recycling diversion, this option
exists on the premise that if forced to walk to any type of waste bin, when given the
option they will choose to recycle.
Implementation – Having consistent containers
throughout the campus is a large part of this option. The
campus could continue the use of the larger toter system
or adopt smaller consolidated centers. One container
specifically for commingled cans, bottles, and paper,
and another container for residuals, will be necessary.
Proper signage at the container location along with
additional training will reinforce and help improve
capture efficiency.
O P P O R T U N I T Y 7 – I N V O L V E
G R A P H I C D E S I G N D E P A R T M E N T
Description – FIU has a unique opportunity to gather
momentum for the improved “greening” efforts around
FIU | Sustainabi l i ty Solut ions Opportunity Assessment
26 Waste Management Sustainability Services 26
Waste Management
Sustainability Services
Trash Only Poster
Example
campus. By utilizing the Advertising and Mass Communications students to help create
displays, digital messaging, designs for recycling containers and other media for the
program, they can have professional-grade designs that also capture priceless student
input. It has long been known that stakeholders are much more involved and take more
pride in an idea if they feel like they have input from the outset. Allowing these students
to cater the look and feel of the program to their desires will not only help gain
momentum, but also give it a more personal touch students can be proud of.
Implementation – Examples of signage that are available from WM are pictured at the
side, and can be provided by Waste Management.
From our experience, it is important to have a few main features in the design:
Clearly labeled what is acceptable
Bi-lingual
Pictures of accepted items
As easy to read / comprehend as possible
Clear, consistent signage across all forms of media
“Happy Facts”
O P P O R T U N I T Y 8 – D E P L O Y C L E A R
S I G N A G E
Description – A total of eight strategies are listed below
regarding the use of signage throughout the campus
including the office / administration areas, classrooms, break
rooms, dorms, and all other applicable areas. Having clear
signage can make a big difference in the use of a recycling
system. Ideally, signs in public areas should indicate where
recyclables are to be separated and discarded. They should
incorporate graphics that enhance the effectiveness of clearly
written directions. Effective use of signage can increase
recycling and diversion rates.
Table 19 - Signage Strategies
ID Strategy Benefit Rationale
8-1. Provide and maintain clearly
labeled bins and informational signage in convenient locations
wherever recycling is present or
desired
All spaces will be
designed to promote recycling.
With this strategy, all signage will
assist in the mission to improve and expand FIU’s sustainability initiatives
8-2. Keep signage consistent throughout the premises
In many situations, consistency is key to making a desired action eventually
become second-nature
8-3. Color-code all signage Again, in many situations the simple
use of color-coding can drive actions to become second nature.
8-4. Have images and words to help
people
Simple images and clear wording can
help employees to decipher where to
properly dispose of waste
| Sustainab il i ty So lut ions Opportunity Assessment
Waste Management Sustainability Services 27
Waste Management
Sustainability Services
ID Strategy Benefit Rationale
8-5. Use laminated table signage in
kitchen and break room areas
Serves as a useful
tool for reinforcing the recycling
message to
employees
Ongoing education of employees and
cleaning staff is essential to maintain a successful recycling program
8-6. Banners Provides stakeholders with a
clear message
Eye-catching banners can help make any message noticeable when placed
strategically in a satellite location
8-7. Provide bilingual signage on balers,
compactors and bays for trash, donation and recycling containers
All public spaces
will be designed to promote recycling.
In order to gain full participation by
all employees, janitorial staff, visitors, etc. any/all signage will need to be
written in the necessary languages
8-8. Paint or stick green footprints on
floor leading from accumulation areas to appropriate recycling
centers
All public spaces
will be designed to promote recycling.
This is a fun and informational way to
encourage and guide proper recycling habits
O P P O R T U N I T Y 9 – E F F E C T I V E L Y C O M M U N I C A T E G R E E N
A N N O U N C E M E N T S
FIU can effectively convey its commitment to recycling to students, staff and visitors
through a variety of media forms.
Table 20 - Green Announcement Strategies
ID Strategy Benefit Rationale
9-1. Public Service Announcement
on all flat panel displays
Keeps students and employees
updated and engaged
Since the flat panels are in
visible areas they should be used for such purposes as
daily announcements and
previous achievements.
9-2. Pay Check Inserts Each and every employee is
guaranteed to receive an insert
in paychecks during selected
intervals
9-3. FIU E-Updates All employees and students are guaranteed to receive these
messages. They can be sent
through emails or displayed on Blackboard login page.
9-4. Send an e-mail or design a PSA
to thank all employees for their
efforts during training sessions and for good performance. This
should also include progress
and “happy facts”.
This will foster a satisfying
environment where employees
and students will feel appreciated and acknowledged
This is an easy way to show
appreciation to all employees
and staff for their hard work and support on a daily basis
O P P O R T U N I T Y 1 0 – I N S T A L L E L E C T R I C H A N D D R Y E R S
Description - During the waste audit, WMSS noted that a significant amount of non-
recyclable waste was paper towels from the restrooms. By replacing paper towel
dispensers with electric hand dryers, this material will avoid being sent to the landfill.
Additionally, the costs associated with the conveyance of the waste, purchasing the paper
towels, and custodial efforts will also be eliminated.
Feasibility – A potential cost avoidance is the disposal cost associated with the waste
generated. According to FIU staff, FIU purchases approximately 6,200 cases of paper
towels annually at an annual cost of $166,594. When other avoided costs are factored in
FIU | Sustainabi l i ty Solut ions Opportunity Assessment
28 Waste Management Sustainability Services 28
Waste Management
Sustainability Services
such as labor costs to service the units, and the tipping fee associated with the disposal
costs, the total savings can be substantial. Many other factors will also have to be
considered, such as the number of dryers necessary, their installation costs, decreased
janitorial labor, and the potential for reliability issues from electrical dryers.
Implementation – Older styles of hand dryers utilized heating elements as the primary
method for drying hands. New hand dryers utilize high speed “air blades” as the primary
method for drying hands and typically utilize significantly less energy than earlier styles.
FIU should research a few different models of these units and install a few in the highest
trafficked restrooms as part of a pilot program. Based on results of the pilot program,
FIU can develop a retrofitting schedule for the remaining high-volume restrooms.
O P P O R T U N I T Y 1 1 – I M P L E M E N T L A M P ,
B A L L A S T , E L E C T R O N I C S A N D C A R T R I D G E
R E C Y C L I N G
FIU can implement universal waste recycling for items including
fluorescent bulbs, batteries and e-wastes using programs such as
Battery Tracker™, Lamp Tracker®, Ballast Tracker™, and
eScrapTracker™ (e-waste). These programs involve ordering
mailable containers online at www.wmlamptracker.com, filling
the containers, and shipment by FedEx or UPS for return to a
processing facility. Most providers of this service will track
shipments and provide recycling certificates.
Additionally, printer cartridges can be recycled through Lamp Tracker®’s Recycle-2-
Save™ program. Users can recycle inkjet and laser cartridges, and receive a discount on
their next purchase of printer cartridges through Amazon.com’s PrintClub™.
Use of the LampTracker® programs will help FIU measure its diversion of these material
streams, and can provide an incentive for participation, or intra-campus competitions,
through the various tracking programs and recycling certificates.
O P P O R T U N I T Y 1 2 – I M P L E M E N T S H A R P S H A N D L I N G
P R O G R A M
During the course of the waste characterization study, numerous hypodermic needles
were found, many of which had no protective cap covering the needle. (These were
found at a variety of housing and classroom buildings, with the exception of HLS I & II.)
These sharps pose a significant health and safety risk for students, staff and visitors to
FIU, and especially the janitorial staff conveying waste across campus.
There are two keys to mitigating this risk. First, properly educate faculty, staff and
students on the health risks associated with the improper disposal of sharps. This can be
accomplished using a variety of on-campus e-media and social media outlets, as well as
personal communication from Resident Advisors in the dormitories. Second, proper
disposition receptacles need to be installed in strategic areas, and those locations need to
be communicated to the faculty, students and staff.
| Sustainab il i ty So lut ions Opportunity Assessment
Waste Management Sustainability Services 29
Waste Management
Sustainability Services
O P P O R T U N I T Y 1 3 – S T R A T E G I C A L L Y D E P L O Y S O L A R
C O M P A C T O R S
Another way to reduce the frequency of hauls by the staff across campus is to
strategically locate smaller solar powered waste compactors. These traditional trashcan-
sized containers have numerous benefits:
Reduces the amount of service by the staff (typically reduces collection to 20%
to 25% of the prior frequency)
Notifies collection staff via SMS text when container needs to be serviced
Can be paired with a recycling container to improve diversion
Container can be “sponsored” by local business(es) and receive advertising
space, thereby offsetting the cost of ownership
Promotes sustainability efforts by being eco-friendly and carbon neutral. They
are also customizable to match other campus beautification efforts.
O P P O R T U N I T Y 1 4 – B U S I N E S S I N T E L L I G E N C E T O O L
FIU can improve waste and recycling tracking by incorporating a business intelligence
tool into their operations. Tracking and reporting allows organizations to benchmark best
practices, identify areas for improvement and communicate and report important metrics
and results both internally and externally.
A program such as WMSS’ Business Intelligence Tool helps organizations understand
and monitor their impacts not only related to waste, but to energy, water, and greenhouse
gases. The Business Intelligence Tool can provide immediate access to information via
an interactive dashboard which gives accurate information necessary for timely and
critical decision-making. This sustainability dashboard and reporting strategy can enable
FIU to look at metrics in customized impact areas and can publish reports for internal
monitoring or external promotion.
FIU | Sustainabi l i ty Solut ions Opportunity Assessment
30 Waste Management Sustainability Services 30
Waste Management
Sustainability Services
ROADMAP FOR IMPLEMENTATION
A fully-optimized solid waste management plan requires many components to be
working in synchronicity with each other. Some of these components include:
Programs for different material streams
o Waste
o Recycling
o Universal waste (CFLs, batteries, pesticides, etc.)
Equipment
o Proper containers at strategic points of generation
o Equipment for efficient conveyance to place of final disposition
o Containers for final disposition
FEL containers
96-gallon carts
Compactors
Education
o Students and faculty
o Onsite vendors
o Building Services staff
Promotion
o Proper signage
o Campus-wide communications
o On-line postings, reminders
All of these issues need to be addressed in a logical and sequential process in order to
achieve maximum efficiency and the greatest likelihood of success.
TIMELINE
Following are various steps for FIU to implement in the near- and long-term planning
horizons as it strives for more efficient and sustainable solid waste management
practices. The timing and specifics of these steps should be approached with some
flexibility as modifications to these steps will likely be necessary due to service capacity
adjustments, seasonal variations due to scholastic calendars, and challenges related to
behavioral change.
N E A R - T E R M I M P L E M E N T A T I O N S T E P S
1. Assemble cross-functional project team. This team should have
representatives from various stakeholder groups such as sustainability team,
faculty, staff, students, vendors, and service providers, and share the common
goal of increasing efficiency and diversion of recycling on the main campus of
FIU. This team may already partially exist in the form of the sustainability
team, and can be supplemented as necessary with additional skill sets and
perspectives, and areas of responsibility.
| Sustainab il i ty So lut ions Opportunity Assessment
Waste Management Sustainability Services 31
Waste Management
Sustainability Services
2. Develop educational materials. Successful solid waste management programs
leave little to wonder when in comes to what goes in which containers. Waste
Management has promotional posters and signage that can be utilized, or that
can serve as a starting point if FIU wishes to develop materials specific to their
campus and cultural distinctives. These should be placed into circulation as
soon as they are available.
3. Deploy paired containers. FIU staff should develop a plan for the acquisition
and deployment of waste and recycling containers that provide a consistent
message across campus. Having a unified appearance will increase diversion,
and decrease confusing regarding what materials can be placed in which
containers.
There are two primary types of containers which need to evaluated:
a. Classrooms: purchase containers that have dual compartments and can
be clearly marked regarding what material goes into each compartment.
Signage should be clear, bold, and easy to understand, and provide
pictures or drawings of acceptable materials.
b. Common areas (walkways, gymnasium, cafes, study areas, etc.):
purchase containers that also have dual compartments, but have larger
capacities than the classroom containers and are weather / rodent proof.
These should be placed into service as soon as soon as possible, and pictures of
these containers should be included in any mass campus communications and
promotions. This initiative will likely need to be implemented over a period of
time as capital resources are available.
Note: It is critical that the campus embrace the following concept: No container
for waste should be without a recycling container adjacent to it, and if it is
attached – all the better. Studies have shown that any deviation from this set-up
has significant consequences to the diversion rate. Convenience will ultimately
rule the behavior – when a solo trash can is closest, it will receive trash and
recycling. Likewise, when a solo recycling container is closest, it will also
receive both trash and recycling. So always pair waste and recycling
containers. This should become a campus policy.
4. Transition to route-based recycling collection by service provider. This
initiative can be accomplished quickly, once a collection rate has been
determined with the recycling service provider. It does not require any
additional carts or labor to implement, as it should actually reduce the labor and
capital costs of the school’s recycling collection.
5. Explore placement of high speed hand dryers in restrooms. FIU should
explore the benefits of replacing existing paper towel machines in restrooms
with high speed hand dryers. FIU may wish to install a few of these in strategic
locations as part of a pilot program to help determine the overall benefit and
necessity of a campus-wide replacement initiative. Several steps of the hand
dryer installation process can be conducted at the same time. After selecting
initial installation locations and quantities, pricing can also be negotiated for the
bulk purchase of dryers through a local sales representative. The sales
representative can also be a great resource for information about various rebate
FIU | Sustainabi l i ty Solut ions Opportunity Assessment
32 Waste Management Sustainability Services 32
Waste Management
Sustainability Services
programs for which FIU may be eligible. Next, a bid can be sent out to local
contractors for the installation of the dryers and the required electrical
connection. Ideally, the entire time frame for procurement and installation is no
more than 90 days. After the new units have been installed for 30-60 days, FIU
can evaluate their benefits and draft a replacement schedule for other high-
volume restrooms.
6. Begin tracking generation and recycling data. FIU should track how much
waste and recycling materials are being generated. This data can be used to
assist with carbon footprint calculations, and other broader sustainability reports.
This should be an ongoing task, and Waste Management’s Business Intelligence
tool can assist with that effort.
L O N G - T E R M I M P L E M E N T A T I O N S T E P S
The near-term implementation steps focus on increasing the diversion of recyclable
material into recycling containers. The long-term implementation steps focus on driving
organizational change pursuing adjusting operational procedures to facilitate increased
efficiencies and diversion.
1. Work with on-site vendors to minimize waste generation operations. FIU
should work closely with onsite vendors such as Aramark and other food and
beverage vendors, to analyze waste generating operations and explore
modifications that will result in a) generating less materials, and b) diverting
more materials into recycling programs.
2. Explore options to reduce organic waste via on-site composting, off-site
composting, or installation of liquid waste extractors. Organic waste is currently
being generated in dormitories, cafeterias and short-order establishments,
study/common areas, and classrooms. Each of these generating locations
requires a different strategy to minimize the amount of organics being generated,
and increasing the likelihood of the generated material being diverted for
beneficial reuse.
Given the educational opportunities at FIU, it is possible that students and
faculty from various science and environmental programs would find the
material useful for studies, experiments and projects.
CONCLUSION
Implementation of recommended options and best practices will provide FIU with the
needed tools to implement cost savings programs and enhance sustainability
performance. Waste Management appreciates the opportunity to help a institution such as
FIU pave their way toward success in their waste management and sustainability goals.
The willingness of FIU personnel to assist in our evaluation provided Waste Management
with invaluable information and an efficient discovery process. We look forward to
working with FIU in continued support of its sustainability goals.
| Sustainab il i ty So lut ions Opportunity Assessment
Waste Management Sustainability Services i
Waste Management
Sustainability Services
APPENDIX A
The following material category definitions were used to determine which collection bin
should receive each piece of material sorted.
Table 21 - Characterization Material Definitions
Florida International University
Comprehensive Waste Assessment
Material Category Definitions
Group # Material Definition
Pap
er
1 Newspaper Printed ground wood newsprint loose, tied or shredded (including advertising "slicks")
2 Uncoated Cardboard (OCC) Unwaxed/uncoated corrugated containers and boxes with a wavy core
3 Office Printed or unprinted paper typically generated in an office environment including white, colored, coated and uncoated papers, manila and pastel colored file folders, envelopes (with or without windows), continuous-feed sulfite/sulfate computer printouts and forms of all types
4 Other Recyclable Magazines, catalogs, paperboard, chipboard, brown paper bags, telephone books, and other printed material not included in the grades identified above
5 Aseptic Containers Gable-top cartons, juice boxes, and other similar beverage containers
6 Non-recyclable/Other Polycoated frozen food and ice cream containers/packaging, single-serve food products, paper with other materials attached (juice/nut cans, Ajax/cleanser cans, etc.), contaminated paper, napkins, tissues, paper towels, fast food wrappers, waxed cardboard, and all other papers not previously identified
Pla
stic
7 #1 containers Bottles and containers coded #1 PET such as soda and water bottles, any size
8 #2 containers (natural and pigmented)
Bottles and containers coded #2 HDPE for items such as milk, water, juice, oil, vinegar, detergent, shampoo
9 #3-#7 containers Bottles and containers coded #3 through #7
10 EPS - packaging Includes packaging made of expanded polystyrene; excludes Styrofoam plates, cups, bowls takeout clamshells and platters
11 EPS - food containers Styrofoam plates, cups, bowls takeout clamshells and platters
12 Film Film packaging contains multiple layers of film or other materials that have been fused together, including shipping/pallet wrap, plastics bags, grocery bags, garbage bags
13 Single-use plastics Plastic spoons, fork, knives, plates, cups, bowls, and platters of various resins
14 Other Rigid/mixed Plastics All plastic that does not fit into one of the categories listed above, including items that are made of mixed materials (paper, metal) but primarily plastic
Met
al
15 Aluminum / Non-ferrous Cans Aluminum beverage and food cans, and bi-metal cans made mostly of aluminum
16 Tin / Steel / Ferrous Cans Tinned steel food containers, and bi-metal cans made mostly of tin/steel
17 Other Non-Ferrous Metals Non-aluminum metals not derived from iron, to which a magnet will not adhere, such as aluminum foil, catering trays, copper wiring/tubing, brass fixtures
18 Other Ferrous Metals Ferrous and alloyed ferrous scrap metals to which a magnet adheres and which are not significantly contaminated with other metals or materials
Gla
ss
19 Containers Clear, brown and green glass bottles and containers
20 Other Glass Glass from windows, mirrors, light bulbs (except fluorescent tubes, glassware
FIU | Sustainabi l i ty Solut ions Opportunity Assessment
2 Waste Management Sustainability Services i i
Waste Management
Sustainability Services
Org
anic
s
21 Food Waste Food wastes and scraps (including bone, rinds), coffee grinds, tea bags, both pre- and post-consumer material
22 Yard Waste Grass clippings, leaves, shrub and brush prunings, and other landscaping / gardening wastes
23 Other Organics Wax, bar soap, cigarette butts, briquettes ,vacuum cleaner bags and contents; fireplace, burn barrel and fire pit ash, and other organic materials not classified elsewhere
HH
W
24 Batteries Household batteries, rechargeable, non-rechargeable and button
25 Paints / solvents Latex and oil-based paints, varnishes, glues and paint strippers and other similar products
26 CFL Compact fluorescent light bulbs
27 Sharps Hypodermic needles and any "red bag" material
28 Toner cartridges Used in household and industrial printers, scanners, and facsimile machines
29 Other Hazardous Lead acid batteries, explosives, asbestos, caustic acids and bases whose primary purpose is to clean surfaces, unclog drains or perform other actions, photography chemicals, pool chemicals, and other hazardous materials not previously defined in other categories
Oth
er W
ast
e
30 Appliances Electric appliances of any size, such as toasters, microwaves, power tools, air conditioners
31 clothing/shoes/textiles Any clothing or shoes, or materials that could be used to make clothing or shoes
32 E-waste Electronic devices such as computers, cell phones, digital cameras, televisions, cordless phones, PDAs, and their electronic peripherals such as charges
33 HVAC/Other Filters Filters from air handling / conditioning units, large or small
34 C&D Construction and demolition debris that includes concrete, carpet, drywall, insulation, roofing and siding materials
35 Bulky Wastes Large waste items such as furniture and mattresses - should not be included as part of the minimum sample weight
36 Fines / dirt Fine, dirt, and indistinguishable material less than 1/2" square
37 Other Inorganics Other inorganic materials not classified elsewhere
| Sustainab il i ty So lut ions Opportunity Assessment
Waste Management Sustainability Services i i i
Waste Management
Sustainability Services
APPENDIX B
Following is a summary of where each waste and recycling sample was obtained.
Table 22 - Characterization Sample Summary
Sample
#
Date Campus
Building
Classification Origination
Material Stream
1
Monday Feb 14,
2011
MMC Auxiliary PG5 Market Station Waste
2
Monday
Feb 14, 2011
MMC Auxiliary Graham Center Waste
3
Monday
Feb 14,
2011
MMC Auxiliary Graham Center Waste
4
Monday Feb 14,
2011
MMC Auxiliary PG5 Market Station Waste
5
Monday
Feb 14, 2011
MMC Auxiliary PG5 Market Station,
Graham Center Recycling
6
Monday
Feb 14,
2011
MMC Housing Panther Hall Recycling
7
Monday Feb 14,
2011
MMC E&G Primera Casa Waste
8
Monday
Feb 14, 2011
MMC E&G Viertes Haus Waste
9
Monday
Feb 14,
2011
MMC Library Green Library Waste
10
Tuesday Feb 15,
2011
MMC Athletics US Century Bank
Arena Recycling
11
Tuesday
Feb 15, 2011
MMC Athletics FIU Community
Stadium Waste
12
Tuesday
Feb 15,
2011
MMC Housing Lakeview South,
Panther Hall Waste
13
Tuesday Feb 15,
2011
MMC Housing University Towers Waste
14
Tuesday
Feb 15, 2011
MMC E&G
Eng. & Computer Science, Cejas
School of
Architecture
Recycling
15
Tuesday Feb 15,
2011
MMC E&G Cejas School of
Architecture Waste
16
Tuesday
Feb 15, 2011
MMC Library Green Library Recycling
FIU | Sustainabi l i ty Solut ions Opportunity Assessment
4 Waste Management Sustainability Services iv
Waste Management
Sustainability Services
Sample
#
Date Campus
Building
Classification Origination
Material Stream
17
Tuesday Feb 15,
2011
MMC E&G College of Business
Complex Waste
18
Tuesday
Feb 15, 2011
MMC E&G
Ziff Education
Building, Ryder Business
Waste
19
Tuesday
Feb 15,
2011
EC NA Engineering Center Waste
20
Tuesday Feb 15,
2011
EC NA Engineering Center Waste
21
Tuesday
Feb 15, 2011
MMC Housing University Towers
and Lakeview N & S Waste
22
Tuesday
Feb 15,
2011
MMC Housing University Towers
and Lakeview N & S Waste
23
Wednesday Feb 16,
2011
MMC Auxiliary Graham Center, PG5,
PG Red Waste
24
Wednesday
Feb 16, 2011
MMC Auxiliary Graham Center, PG5,
PG Red Waste
25
Wednesday
Feb 16,
2011
MMC Auxiliary PG Red, PG Gold Waste
26
Wednesday
Feb 16,
2011
MMC Athletics
Stadium, Arena,
Baseball field, tennis
courts
Waste
27
Wednesday
Feb 16, 2011
MMC E&G Primera Casa Waste
28
Wednesday
Feb 16,
2011
MMC E&G Deuxieme Maison Waste
29
Wednesday Feb 16,
2011
MMC E&G CBC, Diaz-Balart
Hall Waste
30
Wednesday Feb 16,
2011
EC NA Engineering Center Recycling
31
Wednesday
Feb 16, 2011
EC NA Engineering Center Waste
32
Wednesday
Feb 16,
2011
EC NA Engineering Center Waste
33
Wednesday Feb 16,
2011
EC NA Engineering Center Waste
34
Thursday
Feb 17, 2011
MMC Housing University Towers Waste
| Sustainab il i ty So lut ions Opportunity Assessment
Waste Management Sustainability Services v
Waste Management
Sustainability Services
Sample
#
Date Campus
Building
Classification Origination
Material Stream
35
Thursday Feb 17,
2011
MMC Housing University Towers Waste
36
Thursday
Feb 17, 2011
MMC Auxiliary PG5, Graham Center Waste
37
Thursday
Feb 17,
2011
MMC Library Green Library Waste
38
Thursday Feb 17,
2011
MMC Housing Lakeview South Waste
39
Thursday
Feb 17, 2011
MMC Housing
Panther Hall,
Lakeview N, Everglades
Waste
40
Thursday
Feb 17,
2011
MMC E&G ECS, Health & Life
Sciences I & II Waste
41 Friday Feb 18, 2011
BBC Auxiliary Wolfe Center Waste
42 Friday Feb
18, 2011 BBC Auxiliary Wolfe Center Waste
43 Friday Feb
18, 2011 BBC Housing Bay Vista Housing Waste
44 Friday Feb 18, 2011
BBC E&G Academic 2 Waste
45 Friday Feb
18, 2011 BBC Library Library Waste
46 Friday Feb
18, 2011 BBC E&G Academic 2 Waste
47 Friday Feb 18, 2011
BBC Library Library Recycling
48 Friday Feb
18, 2011 BBC Auxiliary Wolfe Center Recycling
49 Friday Feb
18, 2011 BBC E&G Academic 1 Recycling
50 Friday Feb 18, 2011
BBC Housing Bay Vista Housing Recycling
FIU | Sustainabi l i ty Solut ions Opportunity Assessment
6 Waste Management Sustainability Services vi
Waste Management
Sustainability Services
APPENDIX C
Following is the detailed statistical analysis of FIU’s waste and recycling materials currently
generated and captured through FIU’s existing programs.
Table 23 - Characterization Results - Waste
Group # Material Mean 90% Confidence Interval
Lower Bound Upper Bound P
ap
er
1 Newspaper 1.4% 1.0% 1.9%
2 Uncoated Cardboard (OCC) 3.6% 2.6% 4.8%
3 Office 6.4% 4.2% 9.1%
4 Other Recyclable 5.0% 3.8% 6.3%
5 Aseptic Containers 0.2% 0.1% 0.3%
6 Non-recyclable/Other 16.3% 14.1% 18.5%
Pla
stic
7 #1 containers 3.0% 2.6% 3.5%
8 #2 containers (natural and pigmented) 1.5% 1.1% 2.1%
9 #3-#7 containers 1.9% 1.5% 2.3%
10 EPS - packaging 0.3% 0.2% 0.5%
11 EPS - food containers 1.3% 1.0% 1.5%
12 Film 17.9% 15.8% 20.0%
13 Single-use plastics 1.0% 0.7% 1.4%
14 Other Rigid/mixed Plastics 1.7% 1.3% 2.3%
Meta
l
15 Aluminum / Non-ferrous Cans 0.6% 0.5% 0.7%
16 Tin / Steel / Ferrous Cans 0.6% 0.4% 0.9%
17 Other Non-Ferrous Metals 0.5% 0.3% 0.6%
18 Other Ferrous Metals 0.3% 0.2% 0.5%
Gla
ss
19 Containers 3.5% 2.6% 4.5%
20 Other Glass 0.4% 0.2% 0.6%
Org
an
ics 21 Food Waste 25.6% 21.2% 30.3%
22 Yard Waste 0.4% 0.2% 0.6%
23 Other Organics 2.1% 1.2% 3.1%
HH
W
24 Batteries 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
25 Paints / solvents 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
26 CFL 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
27 Sharps 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
28 Toner cartridges 0.0% 0.0% 0.1%
29 Other Hazardous 0.1% 0.1% 0.2%
Oth
er
Wa
ste
30 Appliances 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
31 clothing/shoes/textiles 1.9% 1.1% 2.8%
32 E-waste 0.2% 0.1% 0.4%
| Sustainab il i ty So lut ions Opportunity Assessment
Waste Management Sustainability Services vii
Waste Management
Sustainability Services
Group # Material Mean 90% Confidence Interval
Lower Bound Upper Bound
33 HVAC/Other Filters 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
34 C&D 0.2% 0.1% 0.4%
35 Bulky Wastes 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
36 Fines / dirt 1.9% 1.6% 2.3%
37 Other Inorganics 0.0% 0.0% 0.1%
FIU | Sustainabi l i ty Solut ions Opportunity Assessment
8 Waste Management Sustainability Services vii i
Waste Management
Sustainability Services
Table 24 - Characterization Results - Recycling
Group # Material Mean 90% Confidence Interval
Lower Bound Upper Bound
Pa
per
1 Newspaper 7.4% 2.1% 15.3%
2 Uncoated Cardboard (OCC) 4.4% 1.8% 7.9%
3 Office 37.3% 14.7% 63.4%
4 Other Recyclable 25.0% 9.9% 44.2%
5 Aseptic Containers 0.2% 0.0% 0.5%
6 Non-recyclable/Other 3.9% 1.1% 8.3%
Pla
stic
7 #1 containers 3.4% 1.0% 7.1%
8 #2 containers 1.3% 0.2% 3.3%
9 #3-#7 containers 0.4% 0.1% 1.0%
10 EPS - packaging 0.1% 0.0% 0.4%
11 EPS - food containers 0.1% 0.0% 0.3%
12 Film 1.8% 0.5% 4.0%
13 Single-use plastics 0.0% 0.0% 0.1%
14 Other Rigid/mixed Plastics 0.9% 0.2% 2.1%
Meta
l
15 Aluminum / Non-ferrous Cans 0.9% 0.2% 2.1%
16 Tin / Steel / Ferrous Cans 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
17 Other Non-Ferrous Metals 0.1% 0.0% 0.2%
18 Other Ferrous Metals 0.2% 0.0% 0.7%
Gla
ss
19 Containers 5.3% 1.1% 12.6%
20 Other Glass 0.2% 0.0% 0.5%
Org
an
ics 21 Food Waste 4.5% 0.6% 11.8%
22 Yard Waste 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
23 Other Organics 0.2% 0.0% 0.6%
HH
W
24 Batteries 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
25 Paints / solvents 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
26 CFL 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
27 Sharps 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
28 Toner cartridges 0.3% 0.0% 0.9%
29 Other Hazardous 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Oth
er W
ast
e
30 Appliances 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
31 clothing/shoes/textiles 0.4% 0.1% 1.2%
32 E-waste 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
33 HVAC/Other Filters 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
34 C&D 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
35 Bulky Wastes 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
36 Fines / dirt 1.6% 0.2% 4.7%
37 Other Inorganics 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
1 Newspaper 1.4% 1.0% 1.9%
| Sustainab il i ty So lut ions Opportunity Assessment
Waste Management Sustainability Services ix
Waste Management
Sustainability Services
APPENDIX D
Following are the detailed results of FIU’s waste and recycling materials currently generated
and captured through FIU’s existing programs on each of the three target campuses.
Table 25 - Characterization Results - Waste By Campus
Group # Material MMC EC BBC
Pa
per
1 Newspaper 1.2% 0.3% 3.0%
2 Uncoated Cardboard (OCC) 3.5% 6.7% 1.1%
3 Office 8.0% 3.7% 1.5%
4 Other Recyclable 4.7% 4.2% 4.0%
5 Aseptic Containers 0.2% 0.3% 0.2%
6 Non-recyclable/Other 13.8% 20.7% 18.0%
Pla
stic
7 #1 containers 2.8% 3.0% 3.4%
8 #2 containers (natural and pigmented) 1.5% 0.3% 1.4%
9 #3-#7 containers 1.9% 0.8% 1.0%
10 EPS - packaging 0.2% 0.6% 0.5%
11 EPS - food containers 1.0% 2.4% 1.2%
12 Film 16.9% 20.4% 16.8%
13 Single-use plastics 1.0% 1.1% 1.0%
14 Other Rigid/mixed Plastics 1.9% 2.0% 1.8%
Meta
l
15 Aluminum / Non-ferrous Cans 0.6% 1.0% 0.4%
16 Tin / Steel / Ferrous Cans 0.6% 0.9% 0.6%
17 Other Non-Ferrous Metals 0.4% 0.6% 0.7%
18 Other Ferrous Metals 0.5% 0.2% 0.0%
Gla
ss
19 Containers 3.6% 3.0% 2.4%
20 Other Glass 0.4% 0.8% 0.0%
Org
an
ics 21 Food Waste 28.5% 21.9% 31.6%
22 Yard Waste 0.6% 0.0% 0.0%
23 Other Organics 1.7% 1.1% 5.5%
HH
W
24 Batteries 0.0% 0.1% 0.0%
25 Paints / solvents 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
26 CFL 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
27 Sharps 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
28 Toner cartridges 0.1% 0.0% 0.0%
29 Other Hazardous 0.1% 0.0% 0.0%
Oth
er W
ast
e
30 Appliances 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
31 clothing/shoes/textiles 1.8% 1.4% 1.3%
32 E-waste 0.2% 0.2% 0.3%
33 HVAC/Other Filters 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
34 C&D 0.4% 0.0% 0.0%
FIU | Sustainabi l i ty Solut ions Opportunity Assessment
10 Waste Management Sustainability Services x
Waste Management
Sustainability Services
Group # Material MMC EC BBC
35 Bulky Wastes 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
36 Fines / dirt 1.8% 2.1% 2.1%
37 Other Inorganics 0.0% 0.1% 0.2%
Table 26 - Characterization Results - Recycling By Campus
Group # Material MMC EC BBC P
ap
er
1 Newspaper 2.7% 0.0% 13.0%
2 Uncoated Cardboard (OCC) 3.4% 3.1% 0.7%
3 Office 15.4% 75.4% 78.7%
4 Other Recyclable 54.3% 18.3% 6.4%
5 Aseptic Containers 0.1% 0.0% 0.0%
6 Non-recyclable/Other 4.7% 0.0% 0.2%
Pla
stic
7 #1 containers 3.2% 0.0% 0.5%
8 #2 containers (natural and pigmented) 0.9% 0.0% 0.1%
9 #3-#7 containers 0.5% 0.0% 0.0%
10 EPS - packaging 0.1% 0.0% 0.0%
11 EPS - food containers 0.2% 0.0% 0.0%
12 Film 2.1% 0.0% 0.2%
13 Single-use plastics 0.1% 0.0% 0.0%
14 Other Rigid/mixed Plastics 0.3% 0.0% 0.1%
Meta
l
15 Aluminum / Non-ferrous Cans 0.7% 0.0% 0.0%
16 Tin / Steel / Ferrous Cans 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
17 Other Non-Ferrous Metals 0.1% 0.0% 0.0%
18 Other Ferrous Metals 0.0% 2.3% 0.0%
Gla
ss
19 Containers 2.3% 0.0% 0.4%
20 Other Glass 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Org
an
ics 21 Food Waste 5.8% 0.0% 0.0%
22 Yard Waste 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
23 Other Organics 0.2% 0.9% 0.0%
HH
W
24 Batteries 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
25 Paints / solvents 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
26 CFL 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
27 Sharps 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
28 Toner cartridges 0.5% 0.0% 0.0%
29 Other Hazardous 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Oth
er
Wa
ste
30 Appliances 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
31 clothing/shoes/textiles 0.2% 0.0% 0.0%
32 E-waste 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
| Sustainab il i ty So lut ions Opportunity Assessment
Waste Management Sustainability Services xi
Waste Management
Sustainability Services
Group # Material MMC EC BBC
33 HVAC/Other Filters 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
34 C&D 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
35 Bulky Wastes 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
36 Fines / dirt 2.2% 0.0% 0.0%
37 Other Inorganics 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%