Sustainability Analysis of Smith Dining: Grab ‘N’ Go vs. Non Grab ‘N’ Go Houses Wiam Turki-Judeh Partnered with Irma Leon-Torres Evs 300: Environmental Science and Policy Smith College May 4, 20052 Abstract Food and food related packaging is rising in the United States. Colleges and Universities are not immune to this increase and because of their visibility, these institutions have the potential to serve as role models for waste prevention. The aim of this study was to see which type of residential dining halls produced the most amount of food and food related waste: Non-Grab ‘N’ Go houses or Grab ‘N’ Go houses. Over a two week period, my partner and I went to four dining halls (two Non-Grab ‘N’ Go and two Grab ‘N’ Go) three times and gathered data on: 1) the number of students who ate each at each of the four dining halls, 2) the number of 2.5 gallon “slop” buckets used for each meal and 3) the number of 60 gallon trash barrels used at the end of the day, including the 2000 pound dumpsters. The results show that Grab ‘N’ Go houses far exceed the amount of food and food related packaging waste produced, with Chapin at 9.37 lbs of waste produced per capita per day. We recommend that Smith College implement the recommendations that we listed at the end of the report. They include for the college: 1) to replace the bottled water and cups at Grab ‘N’ Go locations to Nalgene bottles that should be given out at the beginning of the school year, 2) replace the individual containers of food to a recyclable tray, 3) reinstall composting 4) put recycling containers near Grab ‘N’ Go containers and 5) educate the campus about the hazards of food waste. We hope that with these recommendations, Smith College will move toward a more sustainable campus, thus, proving to be a role model for the community at large. Introduction Every school, college, and university has a formal curriculum described in its catalog. But it also has a hidden curriculum consisting of its buildings, grounds, and operations. Like the infrastructure of the larger society, it structures what students see, how they move, what they eat, their sense of time and space, how they relate to each other, how they experience particular places - and it affects their capacity to imagine better alternatives1. --David Orr The amount waste produced in the United States is rising, specifically food and food related packaging. According to a study conducted by the University of Arizona, a shocking forty to fifty percent of all food ready for harvest never gets eaten.2 Surprisingly, food waste is the third largest component of generated waste by weight, not including food-related packaging.3 Students attending United States colleges and universities produce approximately 3.6 million tons of waste a year, or about 2 percent of the country's total waste stream. Food and food-related items may account for 10 to 20 percent of this waste--at some schools, the largest component of the waste after paper4. There are simple strategies that have been successfully employed on campuses around the country to prevent this waste through more efficient materials use. From cutting food waste by preparing smaller batches throughout the meal, to discouraging excessive napkin use by moving dispensers away from cafeteria lines and onto tables, to reducing the use of disposable cups by providing durable mugs and offering discounts to those who use them--these are measures that are helping schools reduce their operational and waste management costs as well as the 1 I got Orr’s quote from: http://titan.iwu.edu/~environ/greening2.html, 2005 2 Numbers retrieved from http://foodproductiondaily.com/news/ng.asp/id=56340&n=dh330&c=tzlvsrxywshqwyj, 2005. 3 Numbers retrieved from http://www.wasteage.com/mag/wastefood2/, 2005 4 All the statistics on colleges and universities was retrieved from http://www.grrn.org/campus/campus_compost.html, 2005.3 environmental impacts of their own activities. But the reasons for stressing waste prevention at colleges and universities go far beyond targeting their contribution to the nation's waste burden. As we learned from David Orr, because of their educational mission, high community visibility, and active involvement in research, development, and new technologies, colleges and universities have the potential to serve as models of waste prevention for their communities as well as for students, faculty, and alumni. On most campuses, dining services are responsible for generating and managing enormous amounts of waste. This includes from food waste and food packaging for starters. With the growing trend of to-go places on college campuses, disposable food ware has increased this waste stream. A college campus may have multiple dining facilities that offer various forms of dining including: all-you-can-eat sit down, purchase by item sit down, take out and snacks. From food obtainment and production to the serving line and the check out counter, decisions are made that impact the waste stream. Food and food related packaging waste is not an anomaly to Smith College. The tremendous amount of waste produced at the end of each meal makes one question Smith’s position toward sustainability. Luckily, throughout the last few years, Smith has implemented sustainable programs to manage the estimated 300 tons of compostable waste generated each year. In 2002, approximately 1.3 of the 30% recycling material was comprised of “highly visible waste” from the 28 kitchens on campus (White, 2002); thus, pre-consumer food composing as employed in 2001-2002 in a few kitchens on campus (White, 2002). Since then, plans exist to put in practice this effort and include post-consumer composting to all kitchens over the next few years. The latest sustainability effort implemented to minimize food waste has focused on Smith’s dining services. It was proposed that Smith’s dining move into a more centralized system, while providing for the needs and services of all students. The driving force behind the recent change to the traditional residence and dining system was to apply a more sustainable system, and possibly decrease economic burdens. To do this, a Dining Implementation Committee was established in 2003-2004 to oversee the development of the proposed system. Since the implementation of the new system, in September 2004, no updates have been reported to