Waste Audit at the University of Kansas, Spring 2012

8/2/2019 Waste Audit at the University of Kansas, Spring 2012

1/23

Waste Audit OfWescoe, Strong,and the

Spencer Museumof Art

Environmental Studies Capstone ProjectLauren Keith

Lydia Gibson

Karin Scott

Ryan Rastok

Renee Boyd

Sustainability Update.Revised May 2010


2/23

table of contents

01. what motivates people to recycle | why conduct a waste audit | whatwas found in previous audits | why this project is valuable to KU

psychology

02. creating a baseline for future audits | the procedure we followedmethodology

03. building proles | what we found | charts and graphsresults

04. what could have been done better | suggestions for theUniversity of Kansas to implement

recommendations

2

05. works cited | thanks toresources


3/23

abstract

the waste stream at the University of Kansas and provides

suggestions on how students and the University can reduce

waste by diverting recyclable, reusable, and compostable

materials from the waste stream.

We conducted a waste audit on three campus buildings: Wes-coe Hall, Strong Hall, and the Spencer Museum of Art. We

chose to examine these buildings because they represent

a variety of collegiate infrastructure. These buildings vary

in the classrooms, ofces, and administration activities, as

well as the differing degrees to which student, faculty, and

public have access to each building.

In none of the buildings surveyed was non-recyclable trash the

majority of the waste stream. By weight, the recycling found

in Spencer was 67% of the waste stream and 68% by

volume. In Strong, 72% of the waste by weight and 74%

by volume could have been recycled. In Wescoe, 76% of

the waste by weight and 72% by volume could have been

recycled.

Because previous audits of Wescoe Hall have been conducted, the

Wescoe audit in 2010 will be compared with those from

2004 and 2005. The waste from Spencer and Strong will

be compared with each other because similar sample sizes

were pulled.

This project seeks to develop a unied sampling procedure for

conducting waste audits to ensure that the results are com-

parable. When a baseline procedure is created, these audits

could be conducted annually and compared.

This project examines

3


4/23

01.psychology

Most studies have centered

on behavioral models and

regulating behavior through

rewards and punishments

(Mannetti et al 2004). The

idea behind these models is

that humans maximize ef-

ciency and human behavior

can be easily manipulated

through a system of sticks

and carrots. If it is nan-

cially benecial to recycle,

people will do it.

Recently, a more theoreti-

cal approach to this model

has been proposed. New

models consider the role of

socioeconomic and de-

mographic variables that

construct general attitudes

toward the environment anddene environmental re-

sponsibility. This notion has

been coined the theory of

planned behavior (Mannetti

et al 2004).

This theory is an model

based on the assumption

that humans attitudes have

a causal impact on behav-

ior. According to the theory,

people recycle becausethey internally rationalize

ecologically oriented be-

havior within the domain

of morality (Mannetti et al

2004). In this theory, the act

of recycling is not solely a

simple calculation of prots

and losses but a basic moral

question of right and wrong.

The connection between

pro-environmental behav-

ior and positively evaluated

social identities has even

been reected (and some

might argue that it has been

exploited) in commercial

advertising (Mannetti et al

2004). Because most people

associate buying green,

recycled, and eco goods as

the moral choice (though

not necessarily the cheap-

est), many companies have

seen the benets of brand-

ing themselves this new

identity.

However, even though this

concern for recycling and

taking care of the environ-

ment has evolved to besocially acceptable or even

desirable, the changes in

behavior required to recycle,

such as sorting and separat-

ing, have been disappoint-

ing (Derksen and Gartrell

434). Although, according

to surveys, the majority of

people think recycling is

important, hindrances and

inconveniences associatedwith sorting and transport-

ing material keep people

from carrying out the act.

Because of this, educational

tools such as waste audits

can be used to educate and

inform groups about their

waste streams and how to

decrease them.

What motivates people

to recycle?

4


5/23

01.psychology

Why conduct a waste audit?

The purpose of a wasteaudit is to nd out where a

school, community, home,

or business is in terms of its

waste management

practices. A good waste au-

dit identies wasteful prac-

tices and creates potential

opportunities for people to

increase efciencies, reduce

waste, and lower costs.

The rst step in the processis a waste audit. According

to the Guidebook on Waste

Minimisation for Industries,

the main objective of a

waste audit is to prole the

waste streams by ndingout information on the types

of waste, quantity of each

waste stream, how they are

generated, why they are

generated, where they are

being generated, and how

they are managed after be-

ing generated.

To reduce the volume of

waste a group or communi-

ty, in this case of this projectthe University of Kansas, is

producing, the group needs

to know more about the

composition of the waste

being produced.

5


6/23

01.psychologyWhat was found in previousaudits of Wescoe Hall?

6

Waste audits of Wescoe Hall

were conducted in 2004 and

2005. The amount of news-

paper being thrown away

was the biggest surprise,and newsprint made up

nearly half of the waste in

2004 and more than half of

the waste in 2005. Follow-

ing the waste audit that was

conducted on Earth Day

2004, the KU Recycling staff

places eight newspaperrecycling containers in the

north and south hallways on

the fourth oor of Wescoe.


7/23

01.psychology

The implementation of a

successful waste audit

can lead to source reduc-

tion and recycling, which

in turn could save money

(Solid Waste Policy Group).

From a business stand-

point, producing waste is

not economical or sustain-able, and it costs the Uni-

versity money when it is

hurting from budget cuts.

The potential reduction of

waste could also conserve

landll space, energy in the

manufacturing process, and

natural resources (Solid

Waste Policy Group).

A waste audit, as a tool in

implementing waste reduc-

tion, is a cost-effective

business tool for universities

and businesses alike.

Waste audits are also edu-

cational tools. By having

students and citizens par-

ticipate in their own waste

audit, these groups can

learn more about the wastethey generate and its ef-

fects on the campus. Our

group wanted to implement

this line of thinking into our

waste audit project, which

is why we created a public

event near Wescoe so that

people could see the waste

that they were generating

and participate in sorting

through it.

Why is this project valuable

to the University of Kansas?

7


8/23

02.methodology

Although waste audits were

conducted in Wescoe in

2004 and 2005 (Environ-

mental Stewardship Pro-

gram), a specic procedure

has not been developed and

outlined to serve as a base-

line for future audits at the

University of Kansas. Many

environmental organizations

have created materials and

procedures about how to

conduct a waste audit, but

it is incredibly important to

use the same procedure and

method each year so that

the results from the audits

are comparable over time.

When results from past

and present audits can be

compared, students andenvironmental organiza-

tions can target a particular

waste stream and determine

the best course of action to

alleviate or lessen this type

of waste. With comparable

data, it is also easy to de-

termine which actions have

worked over time and which

still need to be tweaked for

better future success.Our group decided to use

waste audit worksheets

that were created by Kan-

sas Green Teams, an initia-

tive that promotes waste

reduction, recycling and

environmentally responsible

purchasing in state and local

governments, businesses

and schools (Kansas Green

Teams). Rodney Fergu-

son and Sandy Barnett of

the Kansas Department of

Health and Environment

coordinate the organization.

Worksheets from the Kan-

sas Green Teams include a

building questionnaire that

calculates and maps the

number of waste and recy-

cling bins in the building, a

walk-through worksheet thatgives a visual sample to see

the approximate type and

composition of the waste

being disposed of, and a

table that we used during

the waste audit to record

the weight, volume and

composition of the trash be-

ing thrown out. These work-

sheets and walkthrough

documents are also includ-ed at the end of this report.

Creating a baseline

for future audits

8


9/23

02.methodology

Celeste Hoins, who works

with the EnvironmentalStewardship Program, was

instrumental in contacting

and coordinating trash col-

lection with Facilities Opera-

tions and giving our group

space in the ESP warehouse

for our trial run of sorting

trash from Strong Hall and

the Spencer Museum of Art.

She contacted Vic Kane at

Facilities Operations, whoinstructed the custodial

staff to put the trash col-

lected into a separate blue

container next to the dump-

ster. Trash is emptied in

Strong and Spencer twice

per week (on Mondays and

Thursdays). This amounted

to seven bags of trash for

the Spencer Museum of Artand eight bags of trash from

Strong Hall. The bags from

Spencer included trash from

the entire building, and the

trash from Strong was from

the third oor only. Trash

from the galleries and library

at the Spencer Museum

were considered negligible

for this study because no

food or drink is allowed.About 25 bags of trash were

collected from the fourth

oor and third oor auditori-

ums in Wescoe.

We conducted a test run of

the trash from Strong and

Spencer to make sure that

we all knew what to ex-

pect for the larger event on

Earth Day when we audited

Wescoe. We divided 18-gal-lon storage containers into

the labels indicated on

the worksheets from Kan-

sas Green Teams, such as

trash, plastic bags, paper

cups, and newspaper. The

waste was sorted and then

weighed on a pallet scale.

(For future audits, we rec-

ommend that a more pre-

cise scale be used to geta more accurate weight of

each container, instead of

having to round to the near-

est pound. See the recom-

mendations section.)

For the Wescoe audit, we

used the same procedure,

but a spring scale was used

instead of a pallet scale for

convenience. Waste wassorted into types in 50-gal-

lon bags, and then bags

were weighed and recorded.

We conducted this audit on

Earth Day to raise aware-

ness of the event. Our proj-

ect was picked up by the

Lawrence Journal-World,

KUJH-TV and The University

Daily Kansan. Although it

was raining this Earth Day,we moved into a dry over-

hang between Wescoe and

Stauffer-Flint. Because of

the rain, the weights might

have been slightly heavier

than they would have been

if it were dry. However, we

did not adjust the weights

that we recorded.

How we did it

9


10/23

03.results

The results of the waste

audits of the Spencer Muse-

um of Art, Strong Hall, and

Wescoe Hall are depicted by

volume, not compacted, and

by weight. Both measures

have their own utility for

evaluating the waste stream.Landlls and other disposal

services base disposal fees

based on weight, usually

with a tonnage tipping fee.

However, volume often dic-

tates when containers are

removed for disposal. At the

University, individual waste

receptacles are emptied

into larger dumpsters out-side of campus buildings,

and these are collected as

dictated by a set schedule

or as they ll. This method

places increased emphasis

on the volume of material

being disposed of rather

than the weight.

Volume measurements are

more subjective than weight

measurements because

they were estimated instead

of specically calculated.

In the waste audits con-

ducted for this study, coffee

and drink cups were sepa-

rated from trash because of

the amount we found in the

initial audits. They are clas-sied as trash.

The plastic bags category

includes recyclable bags

found in the waste stream

and trash bags used to con-

tain the waste. The volume

and weight of these trash

bags are important because

they are often under-lled

and result in the creationof extra waste. They also

represent a key problem

in waste generation and

disposal. Trash bags are

necessary for sanitation and

health reasons, but they are

often under-utilized. The

most common problem is

that bags are larger than

their containers, which uses

more plastic than is needed.

What we found

10


11/23

03.results

Area audited:All oors

Number of classrooms(estimated): 5

Number of ofces

(estimated): 14

Square feet: 91,095

Spencer has two custodians

and one dumpster.

Recycling bins have been

added in ofces for paper,

newspaper, and catalogues

at the request of the of-

ces occupants. An old

outdoor central location will

be removed, and containers

for ofce paper, newspaper,

bottles, and cans will be

added throughout the build-

ing this summer.

Fourteen cans were found

on the second oor. Fivewere examined. The cans

were about half full and con-

tained coffee cups, sand-

wich bag, soup cup, to-go

box, two magazines, snack

bags, an envelope, and two

pieces of paper. Cans on the

third oor contained similar

materials.

The fth oor was all of-

ces. There were 10 cans in

open rooms, and three were

examined. The rst can con-

tained paper. A can near the

top of the stairs was half-full

of plastic packaging used

for shipping. There were

several empty cans.

Spencer Museum: Building profle and walkthrough

11

Spencer Museum of Art, 1301 Mississippi St


12/23

03.results

As was found in all of the

buildings we audited, reus-able and recyclable ma-

terials made up a majority

(about 67%) of the waste

stream by both weight

and volume. Ofce paper

was the biggest recyclable

material that ended up in

the waste stream, despite

additions of desk-side paper

collection. Of the portion

of the waste stream that

was trash, almost half of it

was made up of coffee and

other drink cups. Food andcompostable waste made

up a signicant portion of

the materials in the waste

stream that could have been

reused. Compostable mate-

rial was just over one-fourth

of the recyclable/reusable

stream. There was great di-

versity of the materials that

could have been recycled in

both the weight and volume

categories.

Spencer Museum of Art

12

fgures 01, by weight.Amount of trashvs. recyclables in Spencer, in pounds

>>

>>

of the trash,

of the recycling,

fgures 02, by volume.Amount oftrash vs. recyclables in Spencer

>>of the trash,

>>

of the recycling,

Material Weight (lbs) Volume (gal)

Cardboard 1 18

Ofce paper 9 18

Magazines 5 5.4

Chip board


13/23

03.results

Area audited: Third oor

Number of classrooms: 11Number of ofces: 10

Square feet: 175,806

Strong Hall has ve

custodians and two large

dumpsters. Five trash cans

from this oor were ex-

amined. One was half-full

and contained ofce paper.

Another trash can contained

a #1 plastic soda bottle. The

third was full of both news-

paper and regular ofce pa-

per. A fourth can was empty,

as were many others on the

oor. The fth can contained

another recyclable bottle.

The International Program

ofce was open, and ve

trash cans were examinedinside. Two of them had

food boxes. One contained

two pieces of paper. Anoth-

er contained plastic bags,

and the last one contained a

sandwich bag, a recyclable

bottle, and newspaper.

Four cans in the algebra

tutoring room contained of-

ce paper, food wrappers, a

plastic bottle, a disposable

cup, a pizza box, and plastic

wrap.

There were also trash cans

in the hallway, which con-

tained a plastic bottle, used

tissues, a disposable cup, a

milk carton, and a food box.

Strong Hall: Building profle and walkthrough

13

Strong Hall, 1450 Jayhawk Blvd.


14/23

03.results

The waste stream from

Strong was different fromSpencers, as the third oor

of Strong contains several

more classrooms. Cof-

fee cups and other drink

cups made up a signi-

cantly smaller percentage

of the waste stream, by

both weight and volume.

However, much more com-

postable materials such as

food scraps were found in

the trash on the third oor

of Strong. Ofce paper and

newspaper make up anothersignicant portion of the

recyclable waste stream.

Although a few aluminum

cans were found on this

oor, they seem to have

been mostly eliminated from

the waste stream. However,

this waste could also just be

taking a different form as #1

plastic bottles that students

can get from vending ma-

chines.

Strong Hall

14

fgures 03, by weight.Amount of trashvs. recyclables in Strong, in pounds

>>

>>

of the trash,

of the recycling,

fgures 04, by volume.Amount oftrash vs. recyclables in Strong

>>of the trash,

>>

of the recycling,


Cardboard 1 18

Ofce paper 3 18

Magazines 0 0

Chip board 1 18

Newspaper 6 9

Aluminum cans


15/23

03.results

Comparison between Strong and Spencer

15

By weight

Disposing of food products,

wrappers and bottles was

the largest component of

waste in Strong, most likely

because of its location near

Wescoe and its Hawk Shop

on the rst oor that serves

food and drinks. Food andother compostable materi-

als were two of the largest

portions of the waste stream

that could have been divert-

ed, and the amount of food

and compostable waste in

Strong was nearly half of

the overall recyclable/reus-

able stream (45%). News-

paper and ofce paper are

other big weight targets thatshould be eliminated next.

By volume

Plastic bottles and coffee

and other drink cups are

an increasing problem for

disposing of waste by vol-

ume. They take up a lot of

space but are relatively light,

so they give the illusion that

the trash cans need to beemptied when they usually

do not. This also creates a

large amount of waste in

the plastic trash bags that

must be thrown away al-

though they contain very

little weight in trash. In fact,

both Strong and Spencer

had about 15% of waste

by volume that could have

been recycled in trash andother plastic bags.


16/23

03.results

Area audited: Fourth oor and

large third oor auditoriumsNumber of classrooms: 35

Number of ofces: 42

Square feet: 179,844

Wescoe has six custodians

and four small dumpsters.

Each auditorium has 300+

seats.

Vic Kane, the assistant di-

rector for facility operations

custodial services, said,

I cant really estimate the

number of trash containers

in each building. As an ex-

ample, I can tell you Wescoe

has 400+ small trash cans in

the ofce areas.

There are 23 recycling bins

(two ofce pack, two maga-

zine, 11 cans/bottles, andeight newspaper) and six

trash cans in the hallway.

Ten trash cans from different

rooms were sampled. Cans

in the hallway were also

inspected. The hallway trash

cans had a much higher vol-

ume of waste than the trash

cans in the classrooms,

which were empty except

for candy wrappers, coffee

cups, and paper. The hall-

way trash cans were almost

full and contained bottles,

newspaper, mixed paper,

coffee and other cups,

wrappers and compostable

material, and trash.

Wescoe Hall: Building profle and walkthrough

16

Wescoe Hall, 1445 Jayhawk Blvd.


17/23

03.results

Wescoe had similar break-

downs of trash vs. recyclingcompared with the other

buildings that were audited.

A smaller portion of the

trash was made up of cof-

fee cups by weight, but

the amount by volume was

similar to the measurements

from Strong and Spencer.

Again, there was a great di-

versity in the types of waste

that could have been reused

or recycled. Newspaper and

ofce paper again made

up large percentages of therecyclable material that was

found in the trash. A signi-

cant percentage of plastic

bags were found, most likely

as a result of having din-

ing areas close by but also

because many of the trash

bags are not completely

lled when they are emp-

tied. Food and compostable

items were also a large por-

tion in this building.

Wescoe Hall

17

fgures 03, by weight.Amount of trashvs. recyclables in Wescoe, in pounds

>>

>>

of the trash,

of the recycling,

fgures 04, by volume.Amount oftrash vs. recyclables in Wescoe

>>of the trash,

>>

of the recycling,


Cardboard


18/23

03.results

Comparison between Wescoe in 2010 and 2005

18

Material (by weight) 2005 2010 Percent Change

Newspaper 110 26 -76%

Chipboard/cardboard 4 25 +525%

Steel cans 0.9 0 -100%

Mixed Paper 6 29 +383%

Aluminum cans 5 7 +40%

Plastic #1 & #2 41 16.5 -60%

Glass 0.9 0.9 0%

Trash 39 133 +241%

TOTALS 207 237.4 +15%

Because only the basics of

the procedure were known

for the last audit of Wescoe

Hall in 2005, it was difcult

to compare exactly the dif-

ferences in waste that we

collected. The waste audit

conducted in 2010 broke

down the waste into more

categories that were notincluded in the 2005 audit.

For this comparison, the

results from the 2010 audit

were recalculated and con-

strained into the parameters

of the 2005 audit.

Categories that were not

included in the 2005 audit

(food waste, plastics 3-7, re-

usable materials, and plastic

bags) were simply added to

the trash amount, although

this will alter the results. It is

hoped that future audits will

use the categories outlined

by the Kansas Green Teams

so that those results will beeasier to compare.

The results from the 2004

and 2005 audits by volume

were not accessible, so the

chart below compares the

years by weight. Future re-

sults should compare both.


19/23

04.recommendations

Suggestions for future audits

When measuring the waste

and recycling from Strong

and Spencer, better scales

should be used in the future.

The scale used in this years

audit rounded to the closest

pound, which did not ac-

count for slight variations in

weight and could not show

us weights in pounds and

ounces. Something like a

bathroom scale would have

been more useful andaccurate.

Second, there was subjec-

tivity involved in sorting dur-

ing the audits. The purpose

of our audit was to nd what

ideally could have been

recycled if it hadnt been

thrown in the trash originally.

Paper that had become

soaked in food or liquid,

was recycled because if

it had not been put in the

trash, it would have been

viable.

We suggest that instead of

leaving it up to individual

sorters best judgment, the

next group develops more

consistent method to make

the audit better quality.

There was also some sub-

jectivity involving calculat-

ing the volume of waste orrecycled materials. Because

this years group had no

dened may of measuring

volume, the group estimated

the waste based on the

volume of trash bags it was

in. This could be improved

upon in the future to make

the comparisons and data

more useful and viable.

19


20/23

04.recommendations

Suggestions to curb waste

and encourage reusing

19

Coffee cups, plastic bottles

and aluminum cans

The volume of cups being

discarded was surprisingly

high. It is important to target

cups and drink containers

because it is possible that

discarded drink contain-

ers could be easily diverted

from the waste stream.Other campuses have at-

tempted this. On Earth

Day 2006, the University

of Oregon started a cam-

paign to promote reusing

by giving out free mugs on

the premise that if every-

body on campus bought

one beverage a day in a rell

mug instead of a dispos-

able cup, more than 9 mil-

lion cups would be saved a

year (University of Oregon).

The campus was inspired

to do this when it was dis-

covered that 25% volume

of the waste stream on

campus. (Wescoes waste

stream has about 12%

drink cups by volume.) The

University of Oregon alsofound that many people

thought disposable coffee

cups were recyclable when

they are not. Oregon has

found that it is difcult to

convince people to reuse

because only 11% of bever-

ages purchased on campus

are in rellable containers.

KU Dining offers reusable

drink mugs that cost only

89 cents to rell, but more

marketing for this discount

should be considered as an

incentive for more students

to start reusing.

Freshman orientation could

have a presentation dedi-

cated to reusing and how

it helps green efforts oncampus. Freshmen could be

issued their own reusable

container with a barcode

on it with their student ID

number. The barcode could

be scanned every time the

student reuses the container

and adds that amount Beak

Em Bucks. An incentive

could be after the container

is lled 10 times, the next

drink is free.

Pop bottles and cans made

up a another recyclable por-

tion of the waste stream and

have been identied in the

past by KU Recycling and

the Center for Sustainability

as a target material.

In 2008, it was found that

about 10.6 tons of plasticbottles and 1.1 tons of alu-

minum were recycled, but a

survey conducted by Coca-

Cola revealed that less than

one-half of students were

recycling (KU News). Again,

more promotion of reusable

cups from KU Dining and

student media could reduce

this amount.


21/23

04.recommendations

Suggestions to curb waste

and encourage composting

20

Food, napkin and silverware

composting

Wescoe had a large amount

of food and compostable

waste (13% by weight).

It is possible to compost

much of this waste. Fruit

and vegetable scraps are

ready to compost. Food is

not the only thing that canbe composted. The dispos-

able utensils purchased and

used by KU Dining are now

biodegradable (KU Dining

Services). It would allow for

a reduction in the need to

purchase fertilizers and a

lower cost to haul waste.

The compost could benet

student gardens and the

student farm. Furthermore,

the compostable waste will

have a shorter distance to

travel. The campus garden

already has its own compost

piles. The two existing piles

consist of fruit and veg-

etable scraps, leaves, and

grass clippings.

The University has con-

sidered composting in the

past. In 2008, a site on

West Campus was pro-

posed to handle appropriate

food waste from cafeterias

(Earles 2008). This report

recommended starting

composting sites near the

dining centers but noted the

lack of space around these

areas. An article in TheUniversity Daily Kansan sug-

gested using an Earth Tub, a

closed composting unit with

an auger inside for mixing.

The unit also has a biolter

that will prevent unpleasant

odors. Food waste, napkins,

biodegradable serviceware,

and tougher materials such

as leaves or straw can be

added to this unit.

The most numerous item

by volume from the Wes-

coe audit was chipboard.

Besides recycling, it can be

shredded or chopped for

mulch and then covered

with soil. It may be possible

to reduce this waste by al-

lowing chipboard to be col-

lected with newspapers.


22/23

05.resources

Works citedCAP-KU: Creating a Climate Action Plan for the University of Kansas. Publication. C-CHANGE IGERT Program and the

Urban Planning Graduate Program, Spring 2009. Web.

Derksen, Linda and John Gartrell. Social Context of Recycling. American Sociological Review 58.3 (1993): 434-42.

Environmental Stewardship Program. Wescoe Hall Waste Audit 2004. Chart. KU Facilities Operations. Apr. 2005. Web.

http://recycle.ku.edu/pages/events_and_projects/earth_day/wescoewaste_compare.shtml.

Earth Tub. Green Mountain Technologies. Web. 28 Apr. 2010. http://www.compostingtechnology.com/invesselsystems/

earthtub/.

FAQ. Environmental Stewardship Program. Web. 28 Apr 2010. http://www.recycle.ku.edu/faq. shtml

Kansas Green Teams. How to Conduct a Waste Audit.

Kate Gould, Joey Warren, and Shane Capra. Chapter 3: Closing the Loop: Materials and Waste Management. The Sus

tainable University. 2008. Clark University, Web. 9 Feb 2010. http://clarku.biz/ofces/campussustainability/docu

ments/EN%20103%20The%20 Sustainable%20University%20Class%20Report%202008.pdf#page=55

KU Dining Services. KU Memorial Unions, 2010. Web. 28 Apr 2010. http://union.ku.edu/dining.shtml.

KU Dining Services Sustainability. KU Memorial Unions. University of Kansas, 2010. Web. 27 Apr 2010. http://www.

union.ku.edu/sustainability.shtml

KU News - Coca-Cola, Unions Promote Recycling by Students; Special Discounts on April 22. Home - KU News. Web.

28 Apr. 2010. http://www.news.ku.edu/2009/april/21/recycling.shtml.

Mannetti, Lucia, Antonio Pierro, and Stephano Livi. Recycling: Planned and Self-expressive Behaviour. Journal ofEnvironmental Psychology 24.2 (2004): 227-36. Web.

Mott, Stephanie. University considers recycling. University Daily Kansan 2008. n. 28 Apr 2010. http://www.kansan.

com/news/2008/jun/26/compost/.

National Environment Agency, JTC Corporation, Singapore Manufacturers Federation, and Waste Management & Recy-

cling Association of Singapore. Guidebook on Waste Minimisation for Industries. National Environment Agency, 2002.

Personal Communication. Vic Kane, Assistant Director for FO Custodial Services. 01 May 2010

Personal Communication. Celeste Hoins, Administrative Manager of Environmental Stewardship Program. 23 Feb 2010

Solid Waste Policy Group. Waste Audit. Rutgers State University of New Jersey, 2004. Web. 22 Apr. 2010.

University of Oregon Campus Recycling. EMU and Campus Recycling Gave Away FREE MUGS. Rep. 26 Apr. 2006.

Web.

21

Thanks to Celeste Hoins and Vic Kane for making this waste audit possible.

campus photos and design by Lauren Keith

May 6, 2010


23/23

Weight(lbs)

Volume

Co

mments

Batteries

Nameofauditor:

EVRN615:CAPSTONEPROJECT,CA

MPUSWASTEAUDIT

Date/timesampled

:

LocationofSource:

Total

Trash

Other:Reuseable

Other:PlasticBags

Glass

HazardousMaterials

Styrofoam

Food/compostable

Plastic#3-7

MaterialsType

Magazines

Plastic#1

Coffee/drinkcups

Cardboard

ChipBoard

Aluminumc

ans

Steelcans

Newsprint

OfficePaper

Documents

Waste Audit at the University of Kansas, Spring 2012