CVEN 4434
CU Food Waste
Project Description:
The goal of this project is to determine if food waste at CU could be better handled. Currently, food waste is sent to the landfill with other co-mingled wastes. A better option based on lifecycle analysis may be to compost the food waste, thus saving landfill space and returning valuable organic materials to the carbon cycle.
CU has already received an EPA grant to implement in-vessel composting of food waste, but requires a well-considered design and appropriate permits to proceed. Your report will to useful to CU by making a strong case for optimal handling of its food wastes.
Objectives

Conduct a cost benefit analysis to determine the best alternative for handling CU food waste
 compare on campus treatment versus off site contracting, etc
 detailed cost estimates are needed to justify the best option

Determine the best equipment that is available for in-vessel composting of CU-type food wastes

Determine a location for the in-vessel composting system

Determine what permits are needed for the process and prepare drafts of the required permits

Produce an operations and maintenance manual that addresses start-up, monitoring for regulatory compliance, and routine maintenance
Constraints

Minimize operator skills and time by simple, reliable processes.

Ensure that process is compatible with local climate conditions.

Minimize both capital and operation/maintenance costs.

The facility must meet all applicable federal, state, local, and University requirements and regulations.
G.
Proposed Scope of Work:
A.
Methods for handling food waste and Facilities at Similarly Sized Institutions a.
Various food composting methods b.
Types of facilities used at similarly sized institutions
B.
Summarize Current CU Problem a.
food quantity and characteristics
C.
b.
existing waste handling method and cost
Evaluate likely Future Conditions (through 20 year period)
D.
E.
F.
increases in quantity and/or changes in quality due to student enrollment, etc
Summarize the technical state-of-the-art for In Vessel Composting
Evaluate of Applicable Regulations/Permit Requirements (with likely future regulatory changes discussed) a.
include Federal, State, Local, and University requirements b.
consider groundwater contamination, vector control, ... c.
consider CU process
Define project constraints and criteria
Constrains should be quantified
H.
To the extent practical, incorporate stakeholder views in the criteria and weighting
Carefully define all of the criteria
Include cost as a criteria, including capital, operation/maintenance, and present value
Include sustainability as a criterion
Criteria of optimal location and treatment processes
Evaluate Alternatives for Food Waste Management based on Cost:Benefit Analysis i.
Existing method (no recovery, landfilled with comingled trash) ii.
Contract food waste composting to an independent entity for off-site composting iii.
Contract operation to out source, but at a self-owned facility (on or off campus) iv.
In house operation and ownership of facility
Evaluate Equipment Available for In Vessel Composting

CVEN 4434
CU Food Waste
Include a minimum of 4 different manufactured systems
I.
Evaluate Site Location Options if CU owned a.
can be incorporated with Giii and Giv b.
Include competing land uses, land cost, construction per location, transportation cost differences, aesthetics, etc.
J.
K.
Recommend the Best Food Waste handling method, equipment, and Location
Summarize why this plan is optimal.
Design Selected Alternative i.
Produce drawings showing the layout of proposed facilities. ii.
Run detailed sizing calculations accounting for seasonal climate variability and produce preliminary plan and profile views of the processes. iii.
Recommended specific types (model #s) for equipment and why best
L.
Refined Cost Estimate a.
include capital costs with detailed breakdown of elements b.
include O&M costs, and likely user fees
M.
Construction of Facilities
N.
Operation and Maintenance Guidelines a.
Level of Operator training needed b.
Start-up considerations c.
Monitoring, including per permit requirements d.
Routine maintenance needs
O.
Collection System evaluate a good method to collect and transport the food wastes to the facility
P.
References a.
utilize industry standards for design such as EPA guidelines and peer reviewed documents b.
complete documentation of sources is required throughout the written reports
Q.
Public and Client Meetings
Describe when and how the local community will be involved in the decision process.
A presentation of the alternative selection and design shall be made between Dec. 2-11, 2003.
P. Written Reports
The alternative evaluation will be submitted to the client for review, and a draft is due on Oct. 30, 2003. A revised alternative evaluation (addressing comments from the Client) will be submitted with the design by Dec.
11, 2003.
Q. Project Management
Appropriate project management should be provided throughout the study and should ensure, at a minimum: work is completed within budget limits and on schedule, quality control of the work, and coordinate input from local personnel
The consultant shall provide a written interpretation of the scope of work (the Proposal), emphasizing aspects of the work requiring specific attention. Recommended revisions or additions to the scope of work and schedule based on
Respondent's experience should be presented. Descriptions of specific tasks presented in the proposed scope of work above should be expanded or modified to address any special considerations or approaches.
In addition, the Respondent should provide a draft table of contents for the written reports anticipated to be developed as part of the scope of work.
The following factors will be considered in the selection of a consultant for this study and design: o quality of proposal in response to the Scope of Work presented above o overall firm experience o quality of staff assigned to the project: experience with similar studies, design experience with similar projects, breakdown of staff time assigned to project o references o cost
Presentation of the Proposal and Workplan should be directed to Angela Bielefeldt on Sept. 16-18, 2002. Provide a hard copy of the visual aids. Written submissions are due no later than 5 pm, Sept. 18, 2003.