Oregon Schools Facilities Management Association April 13, 2011 Dorothy Fisher Atwood Zero Waste...
-
Upload
ezra-terry -
Category
Documents
-
view
217 -
download
4
Transcript of Oregon Schools Facilities Management Association April 13, 2011 Dorothy Fisher Atwood Zero Waste...
Oregon Schools Facilities Management Association
April 13, 2011
Dorothy Fisher AtwoodZero Waste Alliance
Following nature's model...Working for the elimination of waste and toxics.
- Portland-based non-profit established in 1999 by Larry Chalfan
- SOSI – Sustainable Oregon Schools Initiative
- Development of standards (e.g. EPEAT, Outdoor Industry)
- Management systems implementation: sustainability, environmental (ISO 14001) , energy (ISO 50001)
- Direct technical services, waste stream reduction/elimination (PDC Green Gain Program)
www.zerowaste.org
Key Lessons
• What is waste– Importance of upstream – Mass Matters
• Less consumption is “more”– More money– More environmental benefits– More for future generations
• Can’t do zero waste alone
What is Waste?• Something we have purchased and reduced
to a value of zero or less
• Actions taken that don’t create or add value
• Costly - permits, fees, disposal costs, safety risks
• A sign of inefficiency and lost money
Waste is….
General Wastes:1. Solid Waste - Garbage
2. Hazardous Waste
3. Air Emissions
4. Waste of Resources - Energy, Water, Materials
5. Waste of Human Resources
6. Over consumption
7. Space
Manufacturing Wastes1. Waste from
Overproduction
2. Waste of Waiting Time
3. Waste of Transportation
4. Waste in Processing
5. Waste of Inventory
6. Waste of Motion
7. Waste from Product Defects
-from Toyota
Zero Waste - Defined
Zero Waste is a whole-system approach to redesigning the flow of resources through society.-Warren Snow, Zero Waste New Zealand
What and where are the impacts of waste?
Courtesy of David Allaway, DEQ
(503) 229-5479
Final Disposition – Landfill,
Combustion, Recycle, or Reuse
Raw Materials Acquisition
Materials Manufacture
Product Manufacture
Product Use or
Consumption
Energy Energy Energy Energy Energy
Wastes Wastes Wastes Wastes
Reuse
Product Recycling
Figure 1-1. General materials flow for "cradle-to-grave" analysis of a product system.
Materials & Materials &Materials & Materials & Materials &
“Upstream” (Production) Use
“Downstream” (end of life
management)
Life Cycle Stages
Upstream Impacts
• Extraction and harvesting of raw materials– Energy use– Habitat impacts– Pollution and wastes
• Product/packaging manufacturing– Energy use– Consumptive water use– Pollution and wastes
• Transportation of raw materials, products– Energy use– Pollution
Downstream Impacts
• Energy and pollution associated with collection and transportation of waste and recyclables
• Leachate from landfills• Methane and other air emissions from
landfills• Emissions from incineration • Liner failure• Land, air, and water quality impacts of
burning, stockpiling, and illegal dumping of garbage (not well quantified)
Tellus Institute Packaging Study (1992)
• Prepared for the Council of State Governments, U.S. EPA, and State of New Jersey.
• Relied solely on public sources of information.
• Evaluated and “monetized” human health impacts of emissions not captured by pollution control devices.
Tellus Study Results
Environmental Cost ($/ton material)
Material Production Disposal Total Virgin Corrugated Box*
$95 $2 $97
Recycled Content Corrugated Box*
$86 $2 $88
Virgin Aluminum
~$923 $5 $928
Recycled Content Aluminum
~$71 $5 $76
*Assumes ~2 pounds linerboard per 1 pound of medium.
Tellus Study Results (continued)
Note: These costs are per-ton, not per-package!
Environmental Cost ($/ton material)
Material Production Disposal Total Virgin Glass $69 $1 $70 Recycled Content Glass
$47 $1 $48
Virgin HDPE $124 $4 $128 Virgin PET $327 $4 $331 Virgin PVC $1,710 $4 $1,714
California/LBL Greenhouse Gas/Product Life Cycles (2004)
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%R
elat
ive
Co
ntr
ibu
tio
n t
o G
reen
ho
use
Gas
Em
issi
on
s
End-of-Life
Use
Manufacturing
What does all this mean?
The first R, Reducing, ie – preventing waste by reducing consumption has the largest benefit by many times.
Solid Waste Policy in Oregon
• Waste management hierarchy:– Reduce (prevent waste), then
– Reuse, then
– Recycle, then
– Compost, then
– Recover energy, then
– Landfill
Comparison: Prevention and Recycling
• Recycling reduces upstream impacts.
• Prevention (reducing so not consuming) eliminates upstream impacts.
Bags and Boxes• Boxes have recyclability and recycled-content
advantages over most types of bags. • But bags have waste prevention advantages over
boxes (for non-breakable items), due to lower weight (less mass).
• Different types of bags and void fills for boxes exist – can we state with any certainty that one general approach is better than the other, from a cross-media perspective?
• Do different options shift pollution from solid waste to a different medium?
Common Business Perceptions• The choice of void fill is the most important
environmental choice.
• Plastic is “made from oil” and is therefore “bad”.
• By extension, products not made from oil aren’t “bad” (or as bad).
• Downstream (disposal) impacts are more important, than upstream (manufacturing) impacts.– Wastes that biodegrade are inherently “good”.– Recyclability is important.
DEQ Packaging Study: Materials Evaluated
Corrugated box* Void Fill (for boxes) Shipping Bags Polystyrene loose fill* Unpadded all-kraft mailer* Corn starch loose fill Unpadded all-poly mailer* Molded paper loose fill Kraft mailer with ONP padding* Inflated “air pillows”* Kraft mailer with poly bubble padding* Newsprint dunnage* Poly mailer with poly bubble padding* Kraft dunnage* Shredded office paper Shredded boxes
*Different levels of post-consumer content also evaluated.ONP = Old newspaper
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Million Btu of Petroleum per 10,000 Packages
High PC Bags
Low PC Bags
High PC Box/Fills
Low PC Box/Fills
Results: Petroleum
Results: Natural Gas
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Million Btu of Natural Gas per 10,000 Packages
High PC Bags
Low PC Bags
High PC Box/Fills
Low PC Box/Fills
Results: Coal
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Million Btu of Coal per 10,000 Packages
High PC Bags
Low PC Bags
High PC Box/Fills
Low PC Box/Fills
Results: Solid Waste
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000
Pounds of Solid Waste per 10,000 Packages
High PC Bags
Low PC Bags
High PC Box/Fills
Low PC Box/Fills
Results: Atmospheric Particulate
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Pounds of Atmospheric Particulate per 10,000 Packages
High PC Bags
Low PC Bags
High PC Box/Fills
Low PC Box/Fills
Results: Atmospheric NOx
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
Pounds of Atmospheric NOx per 10,000 Packages
High PC Bags
Low PC Bags
High PC Box/Fills
Low PC Box/Fills
Results: Atmospheric Fossil Derived Carbon Dioxide*
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000 40000 45000
Pounds of Atmospheric Fossil Derived CO2 per 10,000 Packages
High PC Bags
Low PC Bags
High PC Box/Fills
Low PC Box/Fills
*Landfill, waste incineration, and forestry-related emissions not included.
Results: Atmospheric Mercury
0 0.0002 0.0004 0.0006 0.0008 0.001
Pounds of Atmospheric Mercury per 10,000 Packages
High PC Bags
Low PC Bags
High PC Box/Fills
Low PC Box/Fills
Results: Biological Oxygen Demand
0 10 20 30 40 50
Pounds of BOD per 10,000 Packages
High PC Bags
Low PC Bags
High PC Box/Fills
Low PC Box/Fills
Results: Waterborne Suspended Solids
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Pounds of Waterborne Suspended Solids per 10,000 Packages
High PC Bags
Low PC Bags
High PC Box/Fills
Low PC Box/Fills
Mass Matters• Weight of materials used is a critical factor:
– All bags evaluated have lower burdens than boxes (in most categories) because of their much lower weight.
– This confirms the relative ranking of waste prevention and recycling in the waste management hierarchy.
• Recyclability and recycled content are not always the best predictor of life cycle energy use or emissions:– BUT, once you’ve chosen a packaging material,
increasing post-consumer content and recycling opportunities can have benefits.
Please . . .
. . . don’t interpret the study as being “anti-paper”
. . . don’t interpret the study as being “anti-box”
. . . don’t interpret the study as being “anti recycling” or “anti-recycled content”
Comparison: Reuse and Recycling
• Reuse = using a product in its original form, without the repulping, melting, grinding, or other mechanical or chemical reformulation associated with recycling.
• Benefits of reuse are typically greater than the benefits of recycling. For example:Reusing a personal computer saves 5 - 20
times more energy than recycling it.Reusing a corrugated box saves 3 - 4 times
more energy than recycling it, and may save the business 5 - 10 times more money.
Net Energy Savings from Recycling
• Aluminum Cans: 207 MM BTU/ton• Carpet: 106 MM BTU/ton • HDPE/LDPE: 51 – 56 MM BTU/ton• PET: 53 MM BTU/ton• Personal computers: 44 MM BTU/ton• Steel cans: 20 MM BTU/ton
Source: US EPA
Net Energy Savings from Recycling (continued)
• Newsprint: 17 MM BTU/ton• Corrugated: 16 MM BTU/ton• Phone books: 12 MM BTU/ton• Office paper: 10 MM BTU/ton• Glass: 2.7 MM BTU/ton• Magazines/third class mail: 1.1 MM BTU/ton• Aggregate: 0.6 MM BTU/ton
Source: US EPA
How Much Energy Does Oregon Save by Recycling?
• Recycling in Oregon in 2007 saved ~30 trillion BTUs of energy
• ~2.7% of total statewide use
• Equivalent of ~241 million gallons of gasoline
• Recovery in Oregon in 2007 reduced greenhouse gas emissions by ~3.6 million tons of CO2e
• ~5.1% of total statewide emissions
• Equivalent of 770,000 “average” passenger cars
What is Zero Waste?• Goals:
- Closed Loops or “Cradle to Cradle”- Goal: 100% resource efficiency, no released toxics
• Drives Design- Design for the Environment- Design for End-of-Life Management
• The concept acknowledges that our “Take-Make-Waste” society is compromising nature’s ability to provide for us and future generations
Zero Waste’s System View
Nature’sCycles:Cyclical,No Waste!
Goal:Society’sCycles:Closed-Loop
Biodegradable Non-biodegradable
Zero Waste Leader
Epson Portland Inc.
Zero Waste to Landfill as of March 2001• 90% diversion, 4.5M lbs in 2000• 10% to energy recovery for electricity
generation
Since its baseline year of 1997 • Reduced total waste by 37%, • Reduced VOC emissions by 96%, • Reduced hazardous waste by 24%
Saved $308,000 in 2000 via Zero Waste to landfill through recycling.
Zero Waste supports the triple bottom line
Economic Sustainability
•Waste reduction improves efficiency and lowers costs
• Costs of compliance with regulations is reduced
Environmental Sustainability
• Reduces demand for resources and energy from nature
• Reduces wastes to nature
Social Sustainability
• More resources and energy become available for others
• Closing the loop (cradle-to-cradle) generates new jobs
Sustainability and Zero WasteSustainability is a vision
• Considers future generations
• Doesn’t tell us what to do
A Zero Waste Strategy
• Visionary, stretch endpoint (not a short-term goal)
• Looks at all processes, products, activities and services
• Utilizes tools of industrial ecology, LCA, DfE, EMS, etc.
Approaches and Support Tools
Life-Cycle Assessment (LCA)Design for the Environment (DfE)Green Chemistry Environmental Management Systems (EMS)Product Stewardship/Extended Producer
Responsibility (EPR)Supply Chain ManagementFull Cost Accounting (FCA)Pollution Prevention (P2)Resource Flow MappingWaste Exchanges and Eco-Industrial Parks
Steps to Zero Waste
1. Understand Current Conditions– Map resource flows– Do a waste audit
2. Create a Zero Waste Vision of your organization– Set goal with target date and interim milestones– Select metrics
3. Identify Potential Zero Waste Opportunities
4. Prioritize and select
5. Implement, monitor, measure, check back
Resource Flow Mapping
Air
Materials
Human
Product
By-products
Administrative Activities
Production Activities
Zero Toxics Use
Water Soil
Solid
Energy
Hazardous
Resources
Emissions
Lifetime
Emissions
Waste
Waste
Waste
Waste Waste
Apply the model to each department and operation
Example: Operations Map
Vehicle Maintenance Yard
Resources Products
Recyclables
Waste
• Combustion gasses• Used parts (some)• Used spill clean up
materials
• Trash• Haz. Waste
• New vehicles• Vehicle fuel (B20
and gasoline)• Lubricants• Service parts• Misc. shop
supplies• Tools and equip.• Office supplies• Water• Electricity• Nat. gas
• Used vehicles• Scrapped vehicles• Used parts
(rebuild)• Used oils• Scrap metal• Cardboard, paper
• Transportation services, mobility
• Vehicles maintained
Management & Procurement
Facilities Management
Fuel Islands Emergency
Service Heavy Equipment
Light Vehicles Fabrication Parts Mark Ready Acquisition Remote
Fueling
Functions
Current Conditions - Waste Audit/Sort
Why do it?• baseline information• progress measurement – program refinement• actual information vs. speculation• tangible, graphic, and persuasive (in the front
hall)
Creating a Zero Waste VisionImagine ~• no technological barriers• no economic barriers• no infrastructure barriers• collaboration between all parts of society
Imagine closing all the loops
BHAGS:Big Hairy Audacious Goals Sustainability Endpoints
• Matter: zero-waste, closed-loop systems
• Energy: from renewable sources, not ancient sunlight
• Non-toxic chemicals and materials
• No net carbon releases
• Zero Emissions
• Zero harm to the ecosphere - habitat, atmosphere, water
Bold Vision What do we intend to look like in 20-50
years?
Will we earn the respect of future generations for our social, ecological and economic legacy?
Collaborative Partnerships
Proactively address complex environmental and
community issues. • Share best practices; leverage information• Create a community of participants• Build common purpose - Goals• Share resources
– By products become feed-stock– Waste heat is used as a benefit
• Collaborate on transportation logistics
Principle: Garbage in… Something of value out.
Anne Anderson, illustrator. Anne Anderson's Old, Old Fairy Tales. Racine, Wisconsin: Whitman Publishing Company, 1935.
Like Rumplestiltskin, spinning straw into gold!
Materials Exchanges
• “One business’ trash may be another business’ treasure.” Example: Sattex obtains 100 fiber drums a month from exchange services, saving $16,000/year
• Statewide promotion of exchange services: www.NWmaterialsmart.org (NOT www.materialsexchange.org
• IMEX
DEQ Waste Prevention Strategy: Guiding Principles
• Prevent waste to achieve the greatest environmental benefits.
• Determine benefits by examining the full life cycle, not just the waste stage.
• Responsibility should be shared between consumers and producers.
• Collaboration with partners is essential to successful execution of the Strategy.
Key Lessons Learned
• What is waste– Importance of upstream – Mass Matters
• Less is more– More green house gas reductions– More environmental benefits– More money
• Can’t do zero waste alone
Parting thought...
“We do so much to prepare our children for the future, but
are we doing enough to prepare the future for our children?”
Larry Chalfan, ZWA Founder
Contact:Dorothy Fisher AtwoodManagement Systems SpecialistZero Waste Alliance Associate503 [email protected]
Sources for Information:
• Zero Waste Alliance www.zerowaste.org
• NW Pollution Prevention Resource Center www.pprc.org
• National Recycling Coalition: www.nrc-recycle.org
• Association of Oregon Recyclers www.aorr.org/
• The Composting Council of Canada www.compost.org
• The Institute for Scrap Recycling Industries www.isri.org
• The Steel Recycling Institute www.recycle-steel.org
• Tetra Pak www.tetrapakusa.com/environment/
• The Plastics Foodservice Packaging Group www.polystyrene.org
Federal, State, and Local Government• Environmental Protection Agency www.epa.gov/epawaste/index.html
• Oregon Department of Environmental Quality www.deq.state.or.us
• Metro Recycling Information metro-region.org
• Portland Bureau of Planning and Sustainability www.sustainableportland.org
• King County Solid Waste Division dnr.metrokc.gov/swd/nwpc
• California Integrated Waste Management Board www.ciwmb.ca.gov
• Alameda County Waste Management Authority www.stopwaste.org/home