Phase I project Objectives

Phase I Project Objectives

• To acquire baseline information needed for planning a pilot program to collect and compost source separated organic matter (SSOM), primarily food waste, from a variety of urban institutions and businesses in the region.

Phase I Project Scope

Phase I Outcomes

• Estimates of food waste volumes and weights from participating institutions.

• Comparative economic models

• Approach to recruiting project participants

• Training requirements for FWGs.

• Criteria for program effectiveness

Task A Recruit urban businesses and institutions

• Food Waste Generators

• Compost Processors

• Independent Haulers

Task A Recruit FWGs

• Identified and contacted a total of 17 urban FWGs.

• 3 food markets
• 2 universities
• 1 college
• 3 health care organizations
• 8 businesses

• Conducted 12 interviews and 11 site visits

• Nine FWGs interviewed expressed an interest to participate in a pilot project

Task A – Recruit Compost Processors

• Identified and contacted nine composting processors

• 6 farms
• 2 commercial composting businesses
• 1 landfill operation

• Conducted 8 interviews and 5 site visits

• Five processors expressed serious interest in participating in a pilot program:

• 1 commercial compost processor with a permit to recycle food waste but without hauling
• 2 farmers with composting permits
• 1 commercial compost processor with a permit to compost only yard waste
• 1 landfill operation with a permit to compost only yard waste

Task A Recruit Independent Haulers

• Identified and contacted one independent hauler with a permit for hauling who is interested in participating in a pilot program.

Task B Conduct Abbreviated Food Waste Audits

• Three to four-day food waste audits were conducted at 5 FWGs:

• Whole Foods Market
• Carnegie Mellon University
• East End Food Cooperative
• Jewish Association for Aging
• Chatham College

In addition…

• Using on site interviews, food waste volumes and weights were estimated for the following FWGs:

• Mall at Robinson Center Food Court
• Greater Pittsburgh Community Food Bank
• Mung Dynasty
• Castel Co Packers
• Wholesale Produce Industry of Pittsburgh

Food Waste Audit Description

• Prepare for staff training

• Implement training with management and staff

• Verify set up and implementation plan

• Prepare food waste audit

• Implement food waste audit

• Collect and compile data

• Conduct a debrief session with FWG management and staff

What we learned…

• Space limitations are a significant obstacle for food waste composting.

• There is staff resistance when faced with “extra work.”

• Staff at “Green” businesses were generally eager to participate.

• If using a garbage disposal, there is little incentive to compost food waste.

• Management concerns for odor and pest problems were common.

• If the institution uses a lot of prepared food, there is very little green waste.

Task C Research options and costs

• Precedent Study of Three Existing Food Waste Collection and Composting Operations

• Norcal Waste Systems Inc. in San Francisco, CA

• Eastern Organics Resources (EOR) in Wrightstown, NJ

• Rutland County Commercial Food Waste Composting Program in Rutland, VT

Norcal Waste Systems Inc.

Eastern Organics Recycling

Rutland County Commercial Food Waste Composting Program in Rutland, VT

Precedent Study Conclusions

• In-vessel composting allows for increased capacity

• Staff training is critical to the success of the program

• Contamination of food waste is a persistent problem.

• All tried to ensure a minimum of a 25% price reduction in waste disposal costs

• Demand for compost outweighs production capacity.

• All anticipate a continued increase in food waste composting.

Task C Research options and costs

• Economic Analysis

• Wholesale Produce Industry of Pittsburgh (WPIP)

• Whole Foods Market (WFM)

• Greater Pittsburgh Community Food Bank (GPCFB)

• Carnegie Mellon University Center (CMUC)

• East End Food Coop. (EEFC)

Economic Analysis

Economic Analysis

Economic Analysis

• Variables Investigated include:

• Number of pulls per week for both food waste and solid waste

• Use of compactor and its effect on density and number of pulls per week

• Percentages of waste stream that can be composted

• Effect of subsidizing hauling costs for a pilot project

• Increase in landfill tipping fees

Economic Analysis

• Large FWGs- generate an average of 1.75 to 3 tons of solid waste a day, and their food waste comprises between 75% and 80% of their waste stream.

• Wholesale Produce Industry of Pittsburgh (WPIP)
• Greater Pittsburgh Community Food Bank (GPCFB)

• Mid-size FWGs - generate on average 1 to 1.75 tons of solid waste a day and their food waste comprises between 17% and 47% of their total waste stream.

• Whole Foods Market (WFM)
• Carnegie Mellon University Center (CMUC)

• Small FWGs - generate on average 0.6 tons of solid waste a day and their food waste comprises 12 % of their waste stream.

• East End Food Coop (EEFC)

Economic Analysis

Conclusions

• If the total number of pulls/collections for both the solid waste and the food waste equals or is less than the current number of weekly pulls/collections then the FWG can experience a cost savings when composting their food waste.

• Large FWGs, for which greater than 50% of their waste stream is food waste, are likely to benefit economically from a food waste collection and composting program.

Conclusions

• If the food waste and solid waste can be pulled/collected at the same time and taken to a composting facility and landfill that are either at the same site or in close proximity to each other, then there is a cost savings regardless of food waste generator size.

• The addition of food containing animal products to an in-vessel composting food waste diversion program did not result in a significant cost savings. However….

Conclusions

• An increase in solid waste tipping fees can result in the economic viability of a food waste collection and composting program for large FGWs with a high percentage of food waste in their waste stream.

• Grant funding to cover the capitol costs for collection and hauling equipment reduces the operating costs for the organics haulers and enables a significantly higher number of scenarios to be economically viable.

Task D Construct collection and composting model

• Developed by

• Food Waste Composting Coalition