Food is Not Trash Redefining Wellesley’s Waste Culture by Composting Presented By Capstone ES 300: Environmental Decision Making

aka “Wellesley’s Environmental Consultants” ES 300 Environmental Decision Making

For the next 20 minutes:  About Wellesley  Methodology  Diversion Options  Conclusions

Wellesley College

Dining at Wellesley College

Wellesley’s Food Waste x 220 Wellesley produces ~ 220 metric tons of food waste per year.

Where Does Our Waste Go? Deer Island Incinerator

Our Project Some are not feasible for Wellesley Excess Food Waste and the 2014 Organics Waste Ban All Possible Approaches Feasible Approaches ReductionDiversion Environmental, Social, and Cost Analysis Most Appropriate Options for Wellesley ES 300's Recommendations Composting at Wellesley? X

Methodology

Methodology: Research Design Collaboration Organization Delegation of tasks "Divide and Conquer" MassDEP Other colleges WC Administration Communication with: Needham Recycling and Transfer Station Site Visit

Life Cycle Analysis Our functional unit = 1 metric ton of food waste (1 elephant)

Quantitative Decision Making Tools Environmental impacts Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) and SimaPro Material input Energy Water use Costs Direct Operational Equipment Offsets Social Factors Campus experience Education Difficulty Social justice

How can we address food waste at Wellesley?

12 Diversion Options

Traditional Methods Piles Windrows Tumblers

In-Sink Disposal Anaerobic Digestion Dehydration Dehydration w/enzymes Mechanized forms of composting Mechanized Methods

Other Forms of Waste Diversion Donating to People Donating to Pigs Vermicomposting

Methods Analysis Cost Environmental Impacts Social Factors

Cost per Metric Ton of Waste Diverted

Environmental Impacts per Metric Ton

Environmental Impact Comparison Total Environmental Impact Score

Social Factors Comparison Ranked Social Factors Score

Overall Score Based on Ranking Total Impact of Each Method

Overall Comparison Total Impact Environmental, Economic, and Social

Conclusions

Diversion Scenarios for Wellesley Quick and Cheap Windrows Tumblers Anaerobic Digestion

Diversion Scenarios for Wellesley Innovative and Responsible Donation to People Vermicomposting (small scale)

Diversion Scenarios for Wellesley Down the road… Tumblers Anaerobic Digestion

Remaining Questions

Take Home Points for Wellesley Opportunity for a paradigm shift, innovation, and leadership. Wellesley College can choose from many feasible options. Organic waste diversion must be institutionalized.

General Take Home Points Decisions need to be institution specific. Useful framework does not give all answers. Student driven project provides educational value and increases awareness

Acknowledgments Professor Elizabeth DeSombre Professor Monica Higgins Patrick Willoughby Environmental Studies Program John Fischer, Mass DEP Jeff Labrie (AVI General Manager, Wang Center) Cherie Tyger (AVI Director of Operations) Tim Gould (Agresource, Inc) Bill Hanley (Biogreen 360 Vice President) Pete Grillo (Biogreen 360 Representative) Heather Billings (Center for Ecotechnology) Geoff Kuter (Agresource Inc.) Mark Roche (Wellesley College Club, General Manager) Emma McCarthy (Lovin' Spoonfuls Operations Manager) Paul Starrett (Starrets Farm, Owner) Casella Organics CP Trucking

Thank You

Additional Information Slides

Social Factors Social Factor Score

Waste Reduction Strategies 1 Modify the Meal Plan 2 Change display and/or serving 3 Food Waste Tracking 4 Education and awareness 5 Redistribution of excess food to students 6 Reduce waste from big events

Social Impact of the Reduction Options

Reduction Scenarios for Wellesley Food Waste Reduction Creation of Identity Behavioral Change Education Monitoring

Social Factors Donation to People Donation to Pigs Piles (Off Campus) Windrows (Off Campus) Tumblers (On Campus) Tumblers (Off Campus) Anaerobic Digester (On Campus) Anaerobic Digester (Off Campus) Traditional Dehydrator Biogreen360 Dehydrator Vermicomp osting In-Sink Disposal DETRIMENT TO CAMPUS EXPERIENC E Medium LowMedium LowMedium LACK OF EDUCATION MediumHigh Medium HighLowHigh LowHigh DIFFICULTY SeparationHighLowMediumLow HighLowHighLow Permitting and Regulations Low MediumLowHighLowMedium Low Time Until Implementatio n Low MediumLowHighMedium Low RiskMedium Low MediumLowHighMedium HighLow Social Factor Score