UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN SYSTEM SOLID … pizza containers Food wrappers Coffee creamers, stirrers...

Composting Feasibility and Implementation Analysis

for the University of Wisconsin-Whitewater

May 2010

Student Investigator: Alyssa Peschke

Faculty Supervisor: Dr. Eric Compas

University of Wisconsin-Whitewater

UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN SYSTEM SOLID WASTE RESEARCH PROGRAM Undergraduate Project Report

Composting Feasibility Study May 2010

2

Composting Feasibility and Implementation Analysis

for the University of Wisconsin-Whitewater

Alyssa Peschke, Student Researcher

Dr. Eric Compas, Faculty Researcher

University of Wisconsin—Whitewater


3

Introduction

Campuses are a vital site of future innovations, including researching and

developing sustainable plans and practices. An important advancement many

universities have been making is changing to more sustainable food waste disposal

and utilizing the waste‘s nutrients through composting.

Waste collection and removal is an increasing concern for campuses across

the country with social pressure to work toward more sustainable practices.

Capturing the nutrients and value in food waste can continue long-standing

cultivation to soil and surrounding nature. In a university setting, this can offer an

educational benefit for university students, faculty, and visitors in an increasingly

environmentally and sustainability-focused world. Furthermore, capturing the

nutrients and value in food waste can also create potential for cost savings or

avoidance through reducing fertilizer purchases and paying tipping fees for waste

removal and transportation (Bertagnolli).

Within the eight largest University of Wisconsin (UW) System universities, six

are currently composting their food waste. These universities are (listed from largest

to smallest student population) UW-Madison, UW-Milwaukee, UW-Eau Claire, UW-La

Crosse, UW-Stevens Point, and UW-Stout (―Fact‖). The second largest UW-System

university, UW-Oshkosh, has been formulating a plan to purchase a digester to

compost waste from the university and within the city of Oshkosh (Norby). Now is the

appropriate time for University of Wisconsin-Whitewater, the system‘s fifth largest

university, to analyze its own food waste removal and assess composting options.

UW-Whitewater has taken multiple steps and commitments toward becoming

a more sustainable campus. In 1997, UW-Whitewater‘s Chancellor signed The

American College and University Presidents‘ Climate Commitment pledging to work

toward becoming climate neutral (―Signatory‖). For the last two years, the campus

has participated in RecycleMania, a ten-week recycling competition (―RecycleMania‖).

With a growing campus, plans to decrease waste for UW-Whitewater students are

able to expand and produce an escalating impact through time. The university has

created a ―Sustainability Council,‖ co-chaired by Dr. Eric Compas and Greg Swanson,

to review various sustainability issues on campus (Compas). Chartwells has recently

switched away from having any polystyrene (‗Styrofoam‘) cups and went ―tray-less,‖

decreasing the necessary amounts of water and costs associated with washing and

maintaining trays in the University Center ―student union‖ (UC) and dining halls on

campus. Chartwells also gave each student living on campus a reusable BPA-free

bottle to be used in place of disposable cups to decrease waste as well (Wick).

Through involvement in sustainable efforts, the goal of responsible waste removal

has emerged as a priority of the campus.

The purpose of this report is to 1) assess current practices, 2) survey campus

alternatives, and 3) give a recommendation of the best alternative. This report offers

an outline of analyzing food waste starting by describing the current food waste

disposal practices and analyzing specific criteria. The analyses will also propose

basic steps for implementing each alternative, referencing needed agreements,

resources, labor, and planning. Concluding the report is an analysis section,

contrasting each alternative‘s strengths and shortcomings while discussing possible

variations. Additionally, this report offers contacts for local resources.


4

The criteria used to analyze each option are the following (in no particular order):

Initial costs

Regulations: including Department of Natural Resources (DNR)

regulations and safety requirements

Ongoing costs

Feasibility through Wisconsin winters

Potential for educational benefits

Degree to which each option could be expanded

Applicability to the UW-Whitewater campus

Pre-consumer / Post-consumer Waste

This study will primarily focus on the trail of pre-consumer food waste. Pre-

consumer food waste entails kitchen preparatory waste. This typically will include

food waste such as peels, rinds, potato skins, crusts, or trimmings. Outside the scope

of this study, termed post-consumer food waste, is food which has been served or

left by a customer. Post-consumer food waste includes all material after food

preparation, whether the food had been served or not, including items in a buffet line.

Post-consumer waste may be mixed with other materials or have sauces or spreads,

making it not compostable.1

Overall, pre-consumer waste is a much more straightforward first step to

composting. Post-consumer waste separation can add increased difficulty, being

especially problematic through summer months during camps and conferences

where many visitors are on campus for three days or fewer (Wick). Focusing on pre-

consumer waste for this study enables focusing on the procedures of composting

and staff needed to transport materials and monitor the compost first without the

additional complications added when food is not separated correctly. Teaching

student Chartwells workers to properly separate food waste, as discussed through

this study, can ease the transition to future customer separation of waste from

establishing a knowledgeable base of students who are aware of correct separation

when the university decides to expand. Consequently, focusing on pre-consumer

waste will allow for the most initial progress; however, it is valuable to keep

expansion plans in mind and incorporate collecting post-consumer waste in future

planning.

Composting has a variety of distinct advantages as well as a few distinct

disadvantages that need to be noted.

Advantages of correctly composted materials:

- Can act as a pH buffer for both alkaline and acidic soils

- Returns valuable nutrients to the soil when used as a fertilizer or mulch

- Saves money otherwise spent on fertilizers

- Acts as a sponge, helping the soil absorb more water

- Improves soil structure, loosening up heavy clay soils for plant roots

- Can help break down and minimize the effects of toxic chemicals remaining in the

soil from past chemical applications

1 The University Center currently only collects post-consumer waste for breakfast and Drumlin dining

hall does not have a turn-style to collect dishes to easily collect post-consumer waste, further

complicating the collection of post-consumer waste. See footnote 9 for additional information.


5

- Compost has lots of beneficial microorganisms that help reduce plant disease

- Compost stays in the soil and releases plant nutrients slowly over time

- Finished compost has no risk of burning plants, as can happen with synthetic

fertilizers (―About‖)

Appropriate compost materials: Non-compostable materials: 2

It is also important to note that while composting can be very beneficial for

the environment, if a compost pile is not maintained and turned regularly, compost

piles can become anaerobic (a result from not having enough oxygen gas), releasing

methane gas, a gas 22 times stronger than carbon dioxide, damaging our

atmosphere (―Environmental‖). Compost piles can also have excess runoff, lechate,

released into soil and surrounding areas, potentially creating negative odors, etc.

Potential Solutions

From research on other campus‘ practices and on-campus interviews, the following

top solutions were analyzed for improving food disposal at UW-Whitewater:

1A) Windrow composting on the UW-Whitewater campus

1B) Windrow composting at the City of Whitewater composting site

2) Promoting additional use of garbage disposals

3) Using an in-vessel compost system

3A) Using a dehydrator

3B) Using an Earth Tub

Of these, we are recommending option 1A: windrow composting at the

university as our most feasible option for food waste handling at the University of

Wisconsin-Whitewater.

Methodology Through the course of this study, information was primarily gathered from

several semi-structured interviews and multiple site visits with local waste

management systems, city composting sites, and representatives of prospective

organizations (See Table 1). This project has utilized models of other colleges in the

2 Many non-compostable materials are not decomposable due to excess grease or a wax

coating. If workers responsible for composting choose, meat scraps, bones, and dairy products may

be added in small proportions. To minimize potential vermin through collecting meat and dairy items,

a suggestion is to collect these materials initially only on days waste is picked up.

Milk, soy milk, or ice cream

cartons

Used pizza containers

Food wrappers

Coffee creamers, stirrers

Plastic bags, plastic wrap

Polystyrene (‗Styrofoam‘)

Recyclables (plastic, glass)

Dishes, silverware

Fruits, vegetables: peels, prep

waste

Coffee grounds, tea bags

Breads, cereals, grains

Noodles, pasta

Salads with limited dressing or

cheese

Paper napkins, paper towel: if un-

used


6

University of Wisconsin-System, specifically UW-Madison‘s composting system.

Literature reviews have also been used to collect information on current practices at

other similarly-sized campuses. Institutional Review Board approval was acquired to

conduct this study.

Table 1 - Interviews

Contact Interviewed Organization Position

Bob Barry UW-Whitewater Director of Student Union

Steve Bertagnolli UW-Whitewater Buildings/Grounds Supervisor

Michael Keleman InSinkerator Disposals Environmental Engineer

Chuck Nass City of Whitewater Streets and Parks Superintendent

Eileen Norby University of Wisconsin System

Administration

Waste Minimization Manager

Tim Reel City of Whitewater

Wastewater Treatment Facility

Superintendent

Greg Swanson UW-Whitewater Facilities

Planning and Management

Director

Ann Wick Chartwells Dining Service Marketing Director

Thomas Wright UW-Madison W. Agricultural

Research Station

Superintendent

Status Quo Currently, Chartwells, the university dining service, disposes of 90-95% of the

university pre-consumer waste through garbage disposals. This includes waste from

the three primary dining locations on campus: the University Center (UC), Esker, and

Drumlin. At the UC‘s Ike Schaffer Commons for breakfast and at Esker for all meals,

the post-consumer waste is also discarded in garbage disposals. This totals 47.96

quarts of waste in wet weight per day, excluding university breaks or closings.3

Current waste removed through garbage disposals,

separated by area, is as follows (Wick):

University Center: 12.32 quarts per day

Esker Dining Hall: 14.58 quarts per day

Drumlin Market: + 11.06 quarts per day

Total for campus: 47.96 quarts per day

Using the wet waste as a basis of our anticipated total waste to be used for

composting and using RecycleMania‘s estimate that mixed food waste is equivalent

to 1.33 cubic yards per ton, the total collected food waste would be 14.51 tons of

mixed food waste (See Table 2).

Table 2 – Total Waste

47.96 x 325 = 15,587 x 0.25 = 3,897

3 In addition, the coffee shops, on average create 755 ounces of dry weight per weekday from coffee

grounds. This includes the Center of the Arts Café, Deloitte Cafe at Hyland Hall, and Food for Thought

at Andersen Library, but excludes hours the Beans coffee shop is open Saturdays and Sundays (Wick).

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

Quarts per day

Esker

Drumlin

UC


7

Quarts of

mixed food

waste per

day

Days UW-W

is open per

year

Quarts per

year

1

quart=0.25

gallons

Gallons per

year

3,897 / 201.974 = 19.29 x 1.33 = 14.51

Gallons per

year

1 cubic

yard=201.97

4

Cubic yards

of mixed

food waste

Cubic yards

per ton of

mixed food

waste

Tons of

mixed food

waste per

year

Current disposal waste from UW-Whitewater flows to the Whitewater

Wastewater Treatment Facility. From there, the course material is caught in multiple

screens of varying sizes. This material (screening and grit) is disposed of in a landfill.

The end solid product or ―biosolids‖ are treated and land applied on local agricultural

fields as it has nutrient value. The water is then filtered and disinfected (seasonally)

prior to discharge in the Whitewater Creek. The solid product is offered to farmers in

the community to use as fertilizer for their fields. When farmers chose to take

Whitewater‘s biosolids, it is land injected, termed knifing, using ‗chisels‘ to inject the

effluent underground into the farmer‘s fields.4

With the large amount of treated wastewater being recycled onto farm fields

or discharged into the Whitewater Creek after being appropriately treated the effects

can be very similar to composting. However, similarly to how when carrots are cooked

and drained, much of the nutrients are lost into the water, all of the nutrients may not

be fully maintained in garbage disposal sludge. The nutrients may go to a pond or be

lost through the pipes and tanks rather than fully staying in the material as with

compost (Reel).

Since a majority of UW-Whitewater‘s pre-consumer waste is disposed of

through garbage disposals, the potential for cost savings for UW-Whitewater is not as

sizeable as it may be in other campuses. Understanding these costs demonstrates

the future investment of utilizing composting or

garbage disposals for our campus‘ post-

consumer waste.

Options:

1) Windrow Composting The first option, windrow composting, will

be explained in general, analyzing the criteria

then further discussed in detail for two specific

options on campus compared to the local city

composting site.

4 In some areas, this process is billed for, but Whitewater‘s wastewater treatment plant offers this at

no cost. This is due to the negative stigma associated with wastewater and its associated odors (Reel).

Fig. 1 – City of Whitewater Composting Site


8

Windrow composting is a process where food scraps are collected to break

down into usable nutrient-filled compost which can be used for landscaping. It offers

many benefits to the soil and offers a potential cost savings.

The central task in food waste removal of correctly separating food material

has been set in motion and may be soon underway. The food service contract, active

for the next seven years, includes an agreement for Chartwells to work with the

university in improving waste management efforts. The Request for Proposals (RFP)

food service contract, becoming effective June 1, 2010, states that the new food

service contractor, Chartwells, ―will be required to collaborate with the University and

City of Whitewater to develop a food separation process no later than six months into

the first year of the contract (Barry).‖ Through Chartwells agreement in staff

cooperation and upcoming planning, this offers the potential significantly ease the

process of initiating composting at Whitewater.

Initial Costs

To implement windrow composting at UW-Whitewater

for pre-consumer waste, university staff would be

needed in various stages, as outlined below (Harrod):

6 hours oversight/other

2 hours composting with machinery (See Fig. 2)

+ 2 hours picking up the material

10 hours per week

In order to allow for the best follow through with the dining service, an

employee would need to oversee the collection process. This employee could be a

university limited-time employee (LTE) or potentially a work-study student. This

position‘s duties would primarily involve communication with Chartwells to train

managers and potentially student workers on appropriate food separation. Contact

between the student employees will include initial training of the dining service

managers and/or staff as well as follow-up e-mails with updates or feedback on

which materials may need additional separation instructions. This communication

would start through in-person communication with managers and other Chartwells

staff and, through a semester; decrease to once or twice per week. With all needed

oversight and preparation, this position would be, on average, six hours per week.

Additional costs will include the cost of new machinery, bins for collection,

transportation funds and equipment as follows:

Five 35-gallon containers: may be donated or sold at a low cost by UW-

Madison contacts (Harrod)

Seven 5-gallon garbage containers: UW-Whitewater may have pre-

existing or saved containers

A dump truck, golf-cart, or other vehicle for collection of food waste

Potentially a lift for 35-gallon containers

Machinery to turn the compost

pH monitoring devices

Fig. 2 – Mechanical Mixer


9

Fig. 3 - UW-Madison‘s Composting Pick-up Machine

Fig. 4 - Lift for Compost Pick-Up

If the UC chooses to start separating materials at select areas first, collection

at the UC joint kitchen (for Ike Schaffer Commons, Graham Street Café, and Down

Under), Esker, and Drumlin are preferable starting locations. At these locations, it is

recommended that compostables be collected in a 35-gallon container (See Fig. 5).

Through expansion, the café areas: Beans, Center of the Arts Café, Deloitte Cafe at

Hyland Hall, and Food for Thought at Andersen Library, will also collect primarily

coffee grounds, as the majority of food preparation for these areas is done elsewhere.

Each of these locations will have a 5-gallon bucket (see Fig. 6) which can be emptied

into a larger bucket in a trash collection area when it is full and kept until the next

pick-up day. Through the new food service contract, Chartwells‘ previously flavoring-

based smoothies sold in Beans will soon use real fruit, possibly resulting in banana

peels and/or other food preparation waste being collected in these areas (Wick).

Fig. 6– 5-gallon bucket for collection

Fig. 5 - 35-gallon bins for larger kitchens


10

A consistent schedule would be determined to collect compostable material

from the kitchen each week and bring the materials to the chosen composting site. It

is recommended that collection days are no more than three days apart (Ex. each

week on Tuesdays and Fridays) and, if necessary, would allow for best compatibility

with the pre-existing systems. For instance, at Madison the same crew of workers

picks up the compost as the remainder of the waste, resulting in pick up of

compostable materials on a day opposite general waste to allow for similar shifts

each day (Harrod). Staff needed to transport materials may vary depending on the

location of the composting site and employees available.

We recommend that staff in charge of monitoring the composting procedures

go to the Midwest Composting School, which offers in-depth instructions on the

composting process during a three-day composting workshop.5Throughout their

training, staff will learn about monitoring compost through regulating pH, moisture,

and aeration. Appropriate regulation allows for the most efficient composting

operation with limited odor (to ensure that ammonia gas is not being released into

the air) and limited pests. The most typical compost options, all of which could be

appropriate to UW-Whitewater, are windrows (with or without temperature control

and aeration); piles and tunnels; bays, beds, and tunnels; and vermi-composting

(incorporating worms to increase the breakdown of material) (Compost).

Finding labor for these positions may be difficult, as both the landscaping

department on campus and the city compost site employees are under-staffed;

however, workers at the University Center may have more staff time available.

Regulations

DNR regulations can be very specific to a particular area, requiring

appropriate distancing from floodplains, private water wells, navigable lakes, ponds,

flowage, rivers, or streams and other requirements. DNR regulations may be minimal

if we compost only our anticipated pre-consumer waste at the university site due to of

anticipating less than 50 tons of waste per year. At the city composting site, adding

food waste may require additional permits than their current permits and the site will

have over 50 tons of food waste per year, also adding a potential increase in

requirements. Conversely, some permits may overlap, decreasing permits needed.

Requirements will be covered broadly at the previously mentioned Midwest

Composting School (See footnote 4).

Ongoing Costs

The longer the project has been enacted, the easier trainings, pick-ups, and

oversight will become and the investments will more likely pay off or be invested into

additional expansion of the project. Monitoring hours required for the compost

overseer will sink to only one or two hours per week in later semesters, possibly being

combined with another position‘s hours. Pick up of materials may increase slightly

with additional food, but once all of the locations are included, the amount of time to

pick up material will generally not change depending out how much is collected, as

5 This training is presented through collaboration between the University of Wisconsin Extension, the

University of Minnesota, and Iowa State University. This year (2010), the composting school will be

held in Madison, WI June 8- June 10. For more information, contact UW Extension Recycling Specialist

Joe Van Rossum at [email protected] or (608) 262-0936 (―Solid‖).


11

the waste will continue to be picked up regardless of the amount. Compost

monitoring will maintain its two hours per week as well, with only slight increases

from additional food waste.


Through colder temperatures, if compostable bags are chosen to be used,

bags are potentially less likely to break down, as there is a very narrow range from

the typical 135ºF of an internal composting temperature and the 130ºF required for

compostable bags to break decompose. 6

Educational Benefits

Composting can offer significantly more of an impact on education at a

university location. This can include offering training associated with composting in

knowing how to separate materials As a result of separating compostable materials,

the estimated 200-300 Chartwells workers that are university students would learn

more about composting (Wick). Again, having university students knowledgeable

about compost separation can ease the process of post-consumer waste separating

in the future. This can also create positive impacts through awareness of

sustainability in student‘s own futures or promoting implementing future projects

both throughout and after attending UW-Whitewater. Creating a position for a

―Compost monitor‖ or potentially additional positions involved in monitoring total

waste can offer additional employment, with a positive impact on the economy, and

provide applicable work experience, especially for geology/science students or recent

graduates. With each system, student organizations, including our student

environmental association (SAGE), could also learn a lot through involvement in the

project, especially through incorporating available volunteer hours or through

promoting independent studies to further advance the project.

Ability to be Scaled

An advantage of windrow composting is its ability to be scaled easily. Despite

the amount of waste, the process is still the same. With large increases in the

amount of waste, changes would only require small and gradual additions such as

additional collection buckets. Time needed to pick up the material will also be a

gradual process and an increase in material will contribute minimal additional labor.

Further, the same site could be used throughout and there would not need to be any

additional large purchases. As with any system, through long-term usage, machinery

may wear down or have opportunities for upgrades.


1 A) At UW-Whitewater

If composting were to be done on the UW-Whitewater campus, material

from Chartwells kitchens would be picked up and potentially be taken behind

6Through winters, compost piles generally maintain their average internal temperature of

130ºF, and the composting process consequently is not affected from the outside temperatures

(―BioBag‖). As discussed earlier, bags not composting create additional labor to separate pieces of

bags that had not degraded (Wright).


12

the Facilities Planning and Management Building on campus, about 1 mile

from the UC (Swanson). A large benefit a site on the university offers is the

encouragement towards students and faculty to be aware of the projects and

advancements of the university. Being on campus may offer additional

educational opportunities to advertise the progress of the university with

effectively utilizing its food waste. Researching composting may be more-

easily promoted if the site was at the university as well, where researching

about our composting effort would have to be much more planned if the

compost were located at the city site. If volunteering were considered as a

means of monitoring the pile, the university may offer a more conducive

location for this as well.

1 B) At the City

If composting were to be at the city location, a pertinent difference is

that the city site is currently only open to city residents from April to November.

During these operating times, the site is open twice per week: on Wednesdays

and Saturdays. During this time, the piles are turned once per week and once

per month during the winter (Nass).

Currently the city has four rows of compost, at varying levels of

readiness. The collection site is available for residents and city commercial

businesses to drop off their yard waste and materials and advertised through

a link from the city website. It collects leaves and offers BioBags to its

residents to bag their yard waste in (Nass).

A service that the city site offers, in part by themselves and in part

through an outside company, is wood-chipping. This is offered both at the site

and at resident‘s homes. With these woodchips, this could allow for less

transportation costs if woodchips were needed as a buffer in the compost.

The city site may offer additional permits for composting that would be easier

to obtain due to already composting at the site. The city will likely only have to

add an additional permit specifically for food waste, which they had not used

before.

Surprisingly, the change in transportation between the on-campus site and

the city composting site is less than ½ of a mile difference, with only 1 mile to nearby

agricultural buildings on campus from the UC compared to approximately 1.4 miles to

city composting site. Some campuses such as UW-Stout, have implemented plans

incorporating transporting their waste or further distances to be collected at a waste

recycling site (Norby). However, with a site on campus, classes or campus

presentations could more easily visit the site, as it can be within walking distance,

where even that ½ mile could require transportation and liability associated with this.

2) Garbage disposals

With such a majority of our current pre-consumer waste being disposed

through garbage disposals, it was pertinent to analyze the effects of this. With

positive effects, this could be promoted further, incorporating more post-consumer

waste.


13

A pertinent difference between composting

and garbage disposals is that garbage disposal

sludge is mixed with all other sewer systems

including biosolids and anything from household or

business toilets, sinks, showers, or other sewage

materials. This includes if any users were to dispose

of chemicals or other products down a drain,

potentially decreasing the quality of the sludge (Reel).

However, the Whitewater Wastewater treatment

facility also ―has an exceptional track record of

quality effluent (―Wastewater‖).‖

I

Initial Costs

The initial cost for garbage disposals is low due to

how garbage disposal usage is already largely enacted.

Regulations

There are only general safety requirements associated with garbage disposals

and there have been no significant injuries or difficulties associated with this (Wick).

Ongoing Costs

The ongoing costs on a day-to-day basis are minimal, as disposals are only on

while being used (Wick). The usage of water may increase in cost through time as

water is becoming an increasingly valuable resource. Garbage disposals typically do

not break down due to over-usage, but, rather, from the wrong materials being put

down the garbage disposal. Currently, all waste collected with the exceptions of

napkins is disposed of through garbage disposals (Wick). However, as our university

continues to utilize these disposals, it should consider limiting the types of materials

that are disposed of through garbage disposals. Stringy materials such as banana

peels do not break down as other food may, leaving large particles to be screened

out and potentially damage the piping to the wastewater treatment facility through

contributing to blockages in the collection system. With correct usage, clogging is

rare. However, one of the most frequent difficulties is from clogging, due to the

buildup of oil in pipes. When these clogs occur, this can be an extremely costly

process as much of the piping is underground and very difficult to access.7


Through Wisconsin winters, pipes are unlikely to freeze, the only expected

difficulty with a cold climate (Reel).

7 Grease build-up is a decreased concern due to state plumbing codes requiring grease interceptors

(or grease traps). When grease interceptors are maintained correctly, grease traps are now infrequent

(Reel).

Fig. 7 – Wastewater Treatment Facility collection final

stage of processing


14


There is only very minimal information on the environmental effects of

garbage disposals, although there has been growing curiosity on a research basis

about the impacts of the effects on farmer‘s fields from garbage disposal effects

compared to composting. As with much new research, some research states that

garbage disposals are a simple way to dispose of waste and give back to the

environment, where others advise avoiding it. In part, this is due to differences in

treatment plants and methods (Keleman).

Key parts to the environmental impact are whether or not the

treatment plant uses anaerobic digestion and captures methane, both

which can be very beneficial (Keleman). Through capturing methane,

this can offer a potential cost-avoidance to the Whitewater Wastewater

Treatment Facility from using this to heat their buildings. Currently, the

Whitewater facility also has anaerobic digestion and is nearing

completion of a study on biogas use. It previously collected methane

while a nearby dairy was open, but since stopped collecting this (Reel).


UW-Whitewater garbage disposals have not had any difficulty in the past with

having too large of an amount of waste disposed in the garbage disposals and it is

not predicted to have any additional complications in the near future if they are is

continued to be used correctly, however disposals are typically engineered differently

depending on the expected amount of use of the disposals.8


This solution fits well with UW-Whitewater due to so much already being

largely implemented already. With an excellent history of quality effluent, passing

each year ―with flying colors,‖ the Whitewater Wastewater Treatment Plant

specifically would offer one of the safest sludge mixtures (Reel).

3) In-Vessel Composting System In an in-vessel system, compost is generated from the

system/machine which grinds, dehydrates, or in some way

composts the materials. An in-vessel system would still require

separation of materials.

3A) Dehydrator

Upon begin presented to campus administrators, the Somat

model ET-1000w dehydrator initially appeared to be a ―clean and easy way to

compost without having to have the city or campus develop a compost site (Barry).‖

Being a dehydrator indicates that the system would only decrease the weight of the

total waste through dehydrating the material. This does not, however, result in a

8 In communities with varying garbage disposal usage, engineers use different design standards (.22

lbs of BOD/person/day in communities with significant garbage disposal usage compared to .17 lbs of

BOD/person/day with less usage). This is not overly significant; however, it does indicate that an

increase in usage of garbage disposals, there may be a need for varying design standards (Reel).

Fig. 8 – Methane Collection Tank

Fig. 9 – Somat Dehydrator


15

compostable product (Norby). In fact, if this were used as compost, it would re-

hydrate ―essentially giving the appearance that food scraps have been strewn about

(Barry).‖ Similarly, once this material is placed in a landfill, it would re-hydrate with

natural rain and runoff (Norby). Furthermore, because food waste is 70% water,

dehydration can be a costly and energy-inefficient procedure (―Environmental‖).

Some campuses have chosen this option to decrease tipping costs, as this fee

is generally paid by ton and a dehydrator would decrease the weight of the material.9

Through disposing of our garbage in garbage disposals, we have already avoided this

fee for our garbage disposal waste (pre-consumer waste and post-consumer waste at

Esker). Collection of post-consumer waste at Drumlin dining hall has added difficulty

from not having any type of system for post-consumer waste collection such as a

turn-style (See footnote 10).

Through not creating a compostable product, its energy inefficiency, and not

saving a significant disposal cost, the dehydrator is not a recommended food waste

removal system for the UW-Whitewater campus.

3B) Earth Tub

An Earth Tub was also considered. This is a smaller-

scale option very similar to an in-vessel composting system.

This would use a lot of electricity, and would still require

transportation to gather food. The option, from Green Mountain

Technologies, offers an option of a self-enclosed unit ―specifically

designed for food waste.‖ It contains a power auger for mixing; a

biofilter to control odors; and separate loading and discharging hatches.

Its manufacturers pledge a user can simply add cut food waste; a

bulking agent, such as woodchips; and turn the rotating, powered auger

for approximately ten minutes a few times per week. Then, once the compost is full,

workers need to only continue mixing for two weeks and a final composting product

would result (―Earth‖).

Initial Costs

The initial cost, optimal for operation with 40 to 150 pounds of organic

material each day, would cost $9,975 for the smallest system (―Earth‖). In addition,

installation, transportation of the 750 pound machine, permits, and training quickly

add up (Donahue).

Regulations

A significant part of installation of an Earth Tub is the variety of permits that

may be needed. In Eugene, Oregon a study was conducted analyzing Earth Tubs.

Here, local codes and regulations required fencing, electrical and plumbing permits,

and analysis by city planners, land use analysts, and electrical and plumbing

supervisors. Installation for two Earth Tubs had cost approximately $4,700 in

addition to the Earth Tubs themselves. Additionally, supervision for the first year

9 This could range from a land-filling fee of approximately $40 per ton or a fee of $136 per ton

incorporating all labor, transportation, and including the landfill fee (Janesville, Mallard, Swanson).

See implementation study for additional information.

Fig. 10 – Earth Tub


16

totaled 250 hours, and at $15 per hour, this totaled $3,750 for the first year:

significantly more than the $2,000 estimated cost savings (Donahue).

Ongoing Costs

After the initial year, routine labor is expected to consist of 20 minutes to mix,

5 days per week with an additional 11 hours of yearly maintenance and discharge,

accounting for around 100 hours per year. Through one year, electricity cost

approximately $100. With only one Earth Tub, these costs would be cut in half.


The Earth Tub manufacturer states ―The Earth Tubs have been installed in

some very cold locations,‖ but that ―It may need supplemental heat if the

temperature remains below 10ºF for more than 7 days. The aerations system should

be shut down during cold weather (―Earth‖).‖ Wisconsin‘s average temperature for

the month of January is 13.2ºF and December and February average 19ºF. In the

Whitewater area, the average amount of days with temperatures even lower than

zero degrees Fahrenheit is around 20-25 days per year (―Statewide‖). The power

auger may also have difficulty working in an excessively cold climate. With this, an

Earth Tub may either not be used during winter months or require supplemental

heating and additional safety instructions, permits, electricity, or monitoring

associated with this, increasing costs (―Earth‖).


Students may have increased interest in the Earth Tub, especially if in a

visible, on-campus location. The Earth Tub could fit in well with the marketing and

business aspects of UW-Whitewater in its visually appealing design (―Earth‖). The

Earth Tub would also have the potential for less lechate than a compost pile. Workers

or possible volunteers may be more interested in a clean, enclosed system with

simple operations than a windrow compost system.


The Earth Tub website claims to be scaled ―easily,‖ yet collecting more than

150 pounds of food waste requires purchasing an additional Earth Tub (―Earth‖). This

may also require changes in space, electricity, and permits.

Campuses have not been satisfied with their Earth Tubs because it created

excessive odor and did not result in a high-quality compostable material. The

decreased daily monitoring only seemed to create a decrease in quality product.

Some campuses have even given away their Earth Tubs or sold them at a very low

cost due to their disappointment (Harrod). Thus, using an Earth Tub has not proven

to be a recommendable system.

Analysis

A key component to food waste removal is what impact it has on the

environment. This is important to follow through with our campus‘ sustainability

efforts and to give back to the environment. In composting, the nutrients are put

directly into the soil and through re-using the material as compost, the soil is


17

strengthened. Composting also can result in saved costs from purchasing fertilizer or

soil amendments (Bertagnolli). In addition, when compost is high quality, it could

potentially even be sold to offset further costs as well (Compost).

The impact of waste from garbage disposals is still uncertain overall, requiring

additional research beyond the scope of this study. Although food‘s nutrients are

potentially saved and diverted into the soil of farmer‘s field, the potentially toxic

material added to septic system may be a legitimate concern.

With dehydrators, there is as much actual waste material disposed of in a

landfill, with the entirety of the nutrient being wasted; only initially taking up less

weight and space in transportation. Furthermore, the material available to collect on

campus is primarily pre-consumer waste that is already being disposed of through

garbage disposals, therefore there would not be a significant decrease tipping fees

until additional post-consumer waste is collected10.

Even though an Earth tub may require fewer instructions, this only decreases

the quality of the compost and many labor costs will still apply with collection of

material.

At this point in time, composting appears to be the most environmentally-

friendly option, but further research on garbage disposals may provide added results.

Cost

Both our university Landscaping and Grounds Department and city

composting site have few staff to offer. The UC may have additional workers available

to assist with a waste removal system and, as needed, funding and labor may be

able to be spread through a variety of departments. Thankfully, collecting materials

will be eased with the food service contract implying cooperation from Chartwells.

From a cost perspective, garbage disposals are the least expensive solution.

Suggested Future Implementation

Once pre-consumer composting is established, it is recommended the

university expand the project to include first post-consumer at Esker, at the UC, and

expanding to other cafés and Drumlin dining hall.11

Conclusion

10

Within the next three years, the Drumlin food service area will have a Heating, Ventilation,

and Air Conditioning (HVAC) re-model where a turn-style for dish collection could very likely be installed.

With a turn-style this could allow for an increased ability to collect post-consumer waste. This could

also include transitioning from using disposable containers to purchasing additional reusable

serviceware and having a traditional resident dining buffet-style eatery (Wick). 11

Another university has offered an opportunity for their student to be involved by having

clean yogurt containers labeled ―compost tubs‖ offered for students who wanted to collect their own

food waste and combine it with the university‘s compost pile ("Composting‖). These could be available

at the residence halls, the UC, or at SAGE (our campus environmental organization) meetings.

Also, with any improvement it is important to advertise to consumers the impacts the

business through signage around campus or around the dining areas. This could also include posting

information or videos on the campus website in addition to Chartwells own dining service website,

Royal Purple (the school newspaper) or other local newspapers‘ articles.


18

Through this analysis, we believe that windrow composting best meets the

criteria laid out and is consequently the best option for the University of Wisconsin-

Whitewater.

With each sustainable project students, faculty, staff and campus visitors who

hear about positive improvements on the campus can be inspired to make their own

positive impact on the environment. This could be through home composting,

discussing options of sustainability on their own campus, being more conscious of

their waste, or inspired to clean up litter. Positive improvements also result in

promoting UW-Whitewater as an environmentally-aware campus. Collaboration with

the city or vendors may encourage similar environmentally-sustainable improvements.

Overall, composting can create a sustainable, feasible option for the campus, adding

another step to create a positive impact on the world.

If there are any additional ideas, findings, questions or comments regarding

this research proposal, please contact us at UW-Whitewater professor Eric Compas at

(262) 472-5126 or [email protected] or Alyssa Peschke at (920) 627-2597 or

[email protected] .

Throughout the study, there are many additional goals recommended to

improve the sustainability of universities, some of the best of which I would like to

include here:

1) Setting up a collection of old furniture, electronics, posters, un-opened, non-

perishable food, and other items that would be otherwise thrown out at the end of

the year. This would be through having a designated collection area for these items

while students move out of dorms for other students or community members to be

welcome to re-use on their own at no cost. The items could be separated by area or

simply collected. This would be advertised throughout the end of the school year

throughout campus.

2) Have an Earth Day event on your campus with information about sustainability

on campus and throughout the world.

3) Have your food service label which items are locally grown to allow student to

see how their own food items are making an impact on the community

4) Have ―exchange racks‖ for magazines or used items that may be

5) Increase advertising for collection areas on campus of items such as used

electronics, empty ink cartridges, or old cell phones or batteries.

6) Encourage your campus to do a ―Clean Plate‖ project encouraging students to

take less food so they are able to decrease waste, but ALSO to donate money from

saved food to the local food pantry!

mailto:[email protected]


19

Table 4 - Contacts throughout the study:

Contact Position E-mail Ph. #

Bob Barry UW-W UC Executive Director [email protected] (262) 472-6223

Steve Bertagnolli UW-W Buildings/Grounds

Supervisor

[email protected]

(262) 472-6721

Eric Compas UW-W Faculty Researcher and

Professor

[email protected] (262) 472-5126

Amanda Dent UW-Stevens Point Graduate [email protected] (920) 296-1114

Brent Flickema Johns Disposal Service, Inc.

Commercial Service

Representative


Wes Enterline UW-W Sustainability

Coordinator

[email protected]

(262) 472-6709

James Harrod UW-Madison Graduate [email protected] (608) 516-7632

Tom Hinspater Resident District Manager,

Chartwells


Michael

Keleman

Environmental Engineer for

InSinkerator Disposals

Michael.Keleman@emerso

n.com

(262) 598-5219

Chuck Nass City of Whitewater Streets

Superintendent


Eileen Norby University of Wisconsin System

Administration Waste

Minimization Manager


Tim Reel City of Whitewater

Wastewater Superintendent


Greg Swanson UW-W Facilities Planning and

Management Director

[email protected]

(262) 472-6703

Ann Wick Chartwells Campus Dining

Services Marketing Director


Thomas Wright UW-Madison W. Agricultural

Research Station

Superintendent



20

Works Cited

"About Compost." Project Compost. Associated Students of the University of California,

Davis. Web. 15 Apr. 2010. <http://projectcompost.ucdavis.edu/node/23>.

Bertagnolli, Steve. Message to the author. 26 Apr. 2010. E-mail.

―BioBag.‖ BioBagUSA.com. 2007. BioGroupUSA. 31 Mar. 2010.

http://www.biobagusa.com/index.htm

Compas, Eric. Personal interview. 8 Feb. 2010.

Compost Facility Operating Guide. Rep. 1st ed. Alexandria: Composting Council,

1994. Print.

"Composting Food Waste: Recycling & Waste Management." UVM.edu. 1 Dec. 2008.

University of Vermont. 26 Mar. 2010.

<http://www.uvm.edu/~recycle/?Page=Composting/Composting.html>.

Donahue, Anne. Best Practices Manual. Rep. City of Eugene. Apr. 2000. Solid Waste

and Recycling Program. 24 Mar. 2010. <http://www.eugene-

or.gov/portal/server.pt/gateway/PTARGS_0_2_15009_0_0_18/>.

―Earth Tub.‖ Green Mountain Technologies. 29 Mar. 2010.

<http://www.compostingtechnology.com/invesselsystems/earthtub/>

"Environmental Benefits of Garbage Disposals." InSinkErator.com. InSinkErator. 26

Mar. 2010. <http://www.insinkerator.com/environmental.shtml>.

―Fact Book 08-09.‖ The University of Wisconsin System Office of the President.

<http://www.uwsa.edu/cert/publicat/factbook.pdf>.

Harrod, James. Telephone interview. 18 Mar. 2010.

Keleman, Michael. Personal interview. 25 Feb. 2010.

Nass, Chuck. Personal interview. 14 Apr. 2010.


21

Norby, Eileen. Personal interview. 25 Feb. 2010.

"RecycleMania." University of Wisconsin - Whitewater. Web. 06 Apr. 2010.

<http://www.uww.edu/sustainability/waste/recyclemania.html>.

Reel, Tim. Personal interview. 17 Feb. 2010.

"Signatory List by Institution Name." PresidentsClimateCommitment.org. American

College and University Presidents' Climate Commitment. 24 Mar. 2010.

<http://www.presidentsclimatecommitment.org/signatories/list>.

"Solid & Hazardous Waste Education Center News." UWEX.edu/CES/. University of

Wisconsin-Cooperative Extension. 24 Mar. 2010.

<http://fyi.uwex.edu/shwec/midwest-compost-school>.

―Statewide Wisconsin Climate‖ University of Wisconsin-Madison Department of

Atmospheric and Oceanic Studies. 21 Dec 2009. Wisconsin State Climatology

Office. 24 Mar. 2010. <http://www.aos.wisc.edu/~sco/clim-

history/state/index.html >.

Swanson, Greg. Personal interview. 22 Dec. 2009.

"Wastewater Utility." The City of Whitewater, Wisconsin. Whitewater Municipal Center.

Web. 19 Apr. 2010.

<http://www.ci.whitewater.wi.us/index.php?option=com_content&view=categ

ory&id=147:wastewater-utility&layout=blog&Itemid=543>.

Wick, Ann. Personal interview. 16 Dec. 2009, 1 Apr. 2010.

Wright, Thomas. Personal interview. 11 Dec. 2009.

UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN SYSTEM SOLID … pizza containers Food wrappers Coffee creamers, stirrers...

Documents

Transcript of UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN SYSTEM SOLID … pizza containers Food wrappers Coffee creamers, stirrers...