| Overall Rating | Gold |
|---|---|
| Overall Score | 73.37 |
| Liaison | Olivia Herron |
| Submission Date | Feb. 28, 2022 |
Miami University
OP-18: Waste Minimization and Diversion
| Status | Score | Responsible Party |
|---|---|---|
|
4.16 / 8.00 |
Adam
Sizemore Director of Sustainability Physical Facilities Department |
Figures needed to determine total waste generated (and diverted):
| Performance Year | Baseline Year | |
| Materials recycled | 1,489.85 Tons | 1,763 Tons |
| Materials composted | 1,994 Tons | 337 Tons |
| Materials donated or re-sold | 0 Tons | 0 Tons |
| Materials disposed through post-recycling residual conversion | 0 Tons | 0 Tons |
| Materials disposed in a solid waste landfill or incinerator | 2,648.35 Tons | 3,961 Tons |
| Total waste generated | 6,132.20 Tons | 6,061 Tons |
A brief description of the residual conversion facility:
NA
Start and end dates of the performance year and baseline year (or three-year periods):
| Start Date | End Date | |
| Performance Period | July 1, 2018 | June 30, 2019 |
| Baseline Period | Jan. 1, 2005 | Dec. 31, 2005 |
A brief description of when and why the waste generation baseline was adopted:
A third party study had previously established baselines for 2005.
Figures needed to determine "Weighted Campus Users”:
| Performance Year | Baseline Year | |
| Number of students resident on-site | 7,871 | 4,795 |
| Number of employees resident on-site | 19 | 35 |
| Number of other individuals resident on-site | 0 | 0 |
| Total full-time equivalent student enrollment | 16,963 | 10,552 |
| Full-time equivalent of employees | 3,194 | 3,199 |
| Full-time equivalent of students enrolled exclusively in distance education | 0 | 347 |
| Weighted campus users | 17,090.25 | 11,260.50 |
Total waste generated per weighted campus user:
| Performance Year | Baseline Year | |
| Total waste generated per weighted campus user | 0.36 Tons | 0.54 Tons |
Percentage reduction in total waste generated per weighted campus user from baseline:
Percentage of materials diverted from the landfill or incinerator by recycling, composting, donating or re-selling, performance year:
Percentage of materials diverted from the landfill or incinerator (including up to 10 percent attributable to post-recycling residual conversion):
In the waste figures reported above, has the institution recycled, composted, donated and/or re-sold the following materials?:
| Yes or No | |
| Paper, plastics, glass, metals, and other recyclable containers | Yes |
| Food | No |
| Cooking oil | No |
| Plant materials | No |
| Animal bedding | Yes |
| White goods (i.e. appliances) | No |
| Electronics | Yes |
| Laboratory equipment | No |
| Furniture | No |
| Residence hall move-in/move-out waste | Yes |
| Scrap metal | Yes |
| Pallets | No |
| Tires | Yes |
| Other (please specify below) | Yes |
A brief description of other materials the institution has recycled, composted, donated and/or re-sold:
Capturing accurate, holistic data for this section is difficult for us. (1) Given the COVID-19 pandemic, the last full fiscal year within the three-year reporting timeline was FY19 (July 1, 2018 - June, 20, 2019). Given campus closure, other years were not representative of a normal, operational year with respect to waste diversion. (2) Rumpke, our waste contractor, weighs our landfill and commingled recycling waste three weeks a year. As a result, we have to use use three data points -- generally once in the Spring, Summer, and Fall --- to project an entire year's performance. For this submission we used one week in Summer 2018, Fall 2018, and Fall 2019. All data points were within the FY19 performance year, except for Fall 2019. We did not have data for Spring 2019, so we had to use the closest data available to the FY. Using these three weeks, we averaged Fall weeks and multiplied the average by 30 (15 weeks in Fall and 15 weeks in Spring). For Summer data, we multiplied by 20, which attempts to equate to the time the majority of students and faculty are away from campus. Thus, we left off 2 weeks to equate to winter break, where the majority of the campus community is away from campus. (3) Given these barriers, we were also able to capture data for batteries, ballasts, lamps/lights, sheet metal, used oil, used tires, and copper wire recycled within the performance year. Generally, this data is accurate as we have invoices detailing amounts recycled. However, we did have to make the following assumptions if invoices only indicated amount and not total weight.
*Lamps/lights - multiplied the total number by the assumed pound and a half per fixture to account for assorted fixtures.
*Used Oil - estimated 6 pounds per gallon
*Used Tires - multiplied total number by assumed 20 pounds per tire to account for assorted tires.
Composting -- Miami currently does not compost food waste, as we do not have an accessible option to take our waste. Thus, Miami's equestrian center does pay a local farmer to take our horse manure to use on their land as composted fertilizer. Composting figures is limited to the amount of horse manure the local farmer picked up in FY19.
Given the assumptions made, we feel landfill and commingled figures pose the largest barrier to completing this section. However, based on years of receiving data from Rumpke, we have historically found an estimated diversion rate of 25%-30% which is reflected in this figure.
We were also unable to capture significant waste diversion efforts by Miami such as Sharefest (move-out collection for donation), items annually sent to the local Auction for resell, and Eco-Reps specialty recycling (i.e. printer cartridges and solo cups) in the Residence Halls due to data issues.
Materials intended for disposal but subsequently recovered and reused on campus, performance year:
Does the institution use single stream recycling to collect standard recyclables in common areas?:
Does the institution use dual stream recycling to collect standard recyclables in common areas?:
Does the institution use multi-stream recycling to collect standard recyclables in common areas?:
Average contamination rate for the institution’s recycling program:
A brief description of any recycling quality control mechanisms employed:
A brief description of the institution's waste-related behavior change initiatives:
A brief description of the institution's waste audits and other initiatives to assess its materials management efforts and identify areas for improvement:
A brief description of the institution's procurement policies designed to prevent waste:
A brief description of the institution's surplus department or formal office supplies exchange program that facilitates reuse of materials:
A brief description of the institution's platforms to encourage peer-to-peer exchange and reuse:
A brief description of the institution's limits on paper and ink consumption:
A brief description of the institution's initiatives to make materials available online by default rather than printing them:
A brief description of the institution's program to reduce residence hall move-in/move-out waste:
A brief description of the institution's programs or initiatives to recover and reuse other materials intended for disposal:
Website URL where information about the institution’s waste minimization and diversion efforts is available:
Additional documentation to support the submission:
Data source(s) and notes about the submission:
Contact Susan Meikle meiklesb@miamioh.edu
Contact Susan Meikle meiklesb@miamioh.edu
The information presented here is self-reported. While AASHE staff review portions of all STARS reports and institutions are welcome to seek additional forms of review, the data in STARS reports are not verified by AASHE. If you believe any of this information is erroneous or inconsistent with credit criteria, please review the process for inquiring about the information reported by an institution or simply email your inquiry to stars@aashe.org.