Sustainability Solutions Opportunity Assessment Report€¦ · Florida International University |...

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


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


Housing 1 NA 1 2

E&G Areas 1 1 1 2


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

http://bbc.fiu.edu/



Waste Management


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



Waste Management


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



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.



Waste Management


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



Waste Management


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



Waste Management


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 $



Waste Management


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



Waste Management


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



Waste Management


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.



Waste Management


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



Waste Management


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.



Waste Management


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


Housing 8 NA 1 9

E&G Areas 8 5 2 10


Library 2 NA 1 3

Athletics 2 NA 0 2

Total 29 5 6 40

Table 11 - Recycling Sampling Plan


Housing 1 NA 1 2

E&G Areas 1 1 1 2


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.



Waste Management


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;



Waste Management


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



Waste Management


Table 14 - Mean Composition for Waste



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



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.



Waste Management


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.



Waste Management


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



Waste Management


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



Waste Management


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



Waste Management


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



Waste Management


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 $



Waste Management


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.



Waste Management


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.



Waste Management


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



Waste Management


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



Waste Management



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


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



Waste Management


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.

http://www.wmlamptracker.com/



Waste Management


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.



Waste Management


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.



Waste Management


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



Waste Management


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.


Waste Management Sustainability Services i

Waste Management


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


2 Waste Management Sustainability Services i i

Waste Management


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


Waste Management Sustainability Services i i i

Waste Management


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


4 Waste Management Sustainability Services iv

Waste Management


Sample

#

Date Campus

Building


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


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


32

Wednesday

Feb 16,

2011


33

Wednesday Feb 16,

2011


34

Thursday

Feb 17, 2011



Waste Management Sustainability Services v

Waste Management


Sample

#

Date Campus

Building


Material Stream

35

Thursday Feb 17,

2011


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


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


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


BBC Housing Bay Vista Housing Recycling


6 Waste Management Sustainability Services vi

Waste Management


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%


Waste Management Sustainability Services vii

Waste Management




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%


8 Waste Management Sustainability Services vii i

Waste Management


Table 24 - Characterization Results - Recycling



Pa

per

1 Newspaper 7.4% 2.1% 15.3%


3 Office 37.3% 14.7% 63.4%




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%


12 Film 1.8% 0.5% 4.0%



Meta

l





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%


HH

W

24 Batteries 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%


26 CFL 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

27 Sharps 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%



Oth

er W

ast

e

30 Appliances 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%


32 E-waste 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%


1 Newspaper 1.4% 1.0% 1.9%


Waste Management Sustainability Services ix

Waste Management


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%


3 Office 8.0% 3.7% 1.5%




Pla

stic

7 #1 containers 2.8% 3.0% 3.4%


9 #3-#7 containers 1.9% 0.8% 1.0%

10 EPS - packaging 0.2% 0.6% 0.5%


12 Film 16.9% 20.4% 16.8%



Meta

l





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%


HH

W

24 Batteries 0.0% 0.1% 0.0%


26 CFL 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

27 Sharps 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%



Oth

er W

ast

e

30 Appliances 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%


32 E-waste 0.2% 0.2% 0.3%


34 C&D 0.4% 0.0% 0.0%


10 Waste Management Sustainability Services x

Waste Management



35 Bulky Wastes 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

36 Fines / dirt 1.8% 2.1% 2.1%


Table 26 - Characterization Results - Recycling By Campus

Group # Material MMC EC BBC P

ap

er

1 Newspaper 2.7% 0.0% 13.0%


3 Office 15.4% 75.4% 78.7%




Pla

stic

7 #1 containers 3.2% 0.0% 0.5%


9 #3-#7 containers 0.5% 0.0% 0.0%

10 EPS - packaging 0.1% 0.0% 0.0%


12 Film 2.1% 0.0% 0.2%



Meta

l





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%


HH

W

24 Batteries 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%


26 CFL 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

27 Sharps 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%



Oth

er

Wa

ste

30 Appliances 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%


32 E-waste 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%


Waste Management Sustainability Services xi

Waste Management




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%


Sustainability Solutions Opportunity Assessment Report€¦ · Florida International University |...

Documents

Transcript of Sustainability Solutions Opportunity Assessment Report€¦ · Florida International University |...