1
University of Oregon Waste Management Proposal
Lundquist College of Business
Andy Jiang
Brad Jones
Joe Gregoritch
Meghana Deodhar
Michael Bozzini
I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Proposal Description
The University of Oregon Waste Management Proposal aims to modify and streamline waste
management practices at the university in order to obtain higher levels of sustainability. This
proposal will affect current and future students, faculty, alumni and other stakeholders of the
university.
Opportunity
The University of Oregon currently implements a recycling plan consisting of 2000 collection sites,
allowing it to achieve a 50% diversion rate over the last ten years. However, we see an opportunity to
improve the waste management process to address inefficiency in managing paper waste and
recycling behavior.
Solutions: This proposal offers two solutions to address the opportunity. These solutions offer
effective, cost-efficient, and measureable ways to make recycling more attractive and efficient. By
implementing these solutions, the university will begin taking positive steps towards long-term
sustainability.
Recycling Bins: The university will completely streamline the appearance of its recycling
bins in order to make recycling more attractive. Studies have shown that consistency and
creativeness in appearance will lead to more recycling because it alters people’s behavior.
Dyson Airblades: Additionally, we will replace all paper dispensers in the bathrooms of
Lillis to reduce paper waste. Paper waste accounts for over 60% of all waste at the university
so cutting it down will be a major step in increasing overall sustainability at the university.
Costs
The total cost of the two-year implementation process will be $165,222. This includes replacing
1,000 bins with new, consistent receptacles and the installation of 26 new Dyson Airblades in the
bathroom of Lillis Business Complex.
Implementation
The implementation process of this proposal will begin immediately following acceptance. We will
begin meeting with Campus Operations as early as December. The proposal will be implemented
alongside the Zero Waste program to ensure the process goes smoothly and to monitor its
effectiveness to make necessary adjustments.
2
II. INTRODUCTION
The University of Oregon Waste Management Proposal is a detailed overview of objectives,
goals and strategies that will expand upon current university efforts in waste management and
sustainable practices on campus. We are a student group drafting this proposal to the ASUO for
support. As students, we experience current waste management initiatives first hand and because
of this we are able to objectively recognize the strengths and weaknesses of UO’s sustainability
efforts. We have drafted a proposal, which is aimed at improving current efforts while
minimizing costs and increasing efficiency.
We see great opportunity and have made it our goal to improve waste management processes on
campus – a goal that is in alignment with the mission statement of the UO’s Campus Zero Waste
Program. Preservation of scarce natural resources needs to continue to be an important
responsibility for the university so that our students can incorporate sustainable practices into
their lives. We provide a solution pathway for current university programs to expand upon
sustainability efforts. We will focus on minimizing paper waste and increasing the diversion rate
through our proposed solutions.
III. SITUATIONAL ANALYSIS
Since our university is densely populated we produce large amounts of waste, whether it is
educational material, food and beverage containers, or energy waste. Much of this waste can be
reduced or recycled. With increasing pressure on our resources, it is essential for our institution
to implement and follow sustainable practices.
The University of Oregon has implemented sustainable practices more effectively than many
other universities. In recent years, Dave Frohnmayer, our former President said, “We are
delighted that we received the highest score possible from The Princeton Review and intend to
remain at the forefront of practices and research on sustainability” (Portland Bizjournal). Here at
the University of Oregon, we take pride in our sustainability but our practice should not be
limited to what we have already implemented. Our practices need to continually improve and our
efforts need to outpace our increasing waste production.
An example of our waste management problem is outlined in the Erb Memorial Union (EMU)
Food Services Waste Study. This study found that the EMU food services generates on average
700lbs of garbage and 530lbs of recyclable materials daily. Of the 530lbs of materials, they
calculated that about 61% was paper product waste (paper wrappers and pastry sleeves: 29%;
paper plates: 16%; and napkins were 16%). From this data, we can determine that there is an
opportunity for the University of Oregon to improve its waste management, especially in regards
to recycling or reducing paper waste (EMU Food Waste Study).
From another similar case study done by University of Oregon students, they found that a huge
amount of paper towels were wasted at the UO every year. “According to Jerry Dominy, Head of
Custodial Services at the University of Oregon, 2455 cases of paper towels were used in 2009. A
single case holds six rolls, each measuring 8” x 800’. This means UO used over 11.7 million feet
3
of paper towels in 2009.” This is an incredible amount of paper waste that can be eliminated with
the Dyson Airblade dryer.
There are many benefits to managing waste. According to Weyerhaeuser’s Environmental
savings, recycling one ton of paper saves:
 17 trees
 6953 gallons of water
 462.57 gallons of oil
 586.5 pounds of air pollution
 3.06 cubic yards of landfill space
 4077.45 KWhr of energy
(See Weyerhaeuser Environmental savings)
To address the waste data and the benefits associated with managing waste, we will implement
more sustainable waste management strategies. To achieve this goal we will increase the
diversion rate of waste. The diversion rate is a measure of how much material is diverted out of
the waste stream and into the recycling process. The calculation for the diversion rate is as
follows:
tons of recycling collected
_________________________________________
x 100%
(tons of recycling collected + tons of refuse collected)
According to a waste management case study conducted on the University of Oregon in 2008,
the university averages around 50% diversion in a given year. This means that about half of
everything that is thrown away is taken out of the waste stream to be recycled. According to
Karyn Kaplan, the Environmental Resource and Recycling Manager of the Zero Waste Program
at the UO, 1,489 tons of materials were recycled and 1,569 tons of material went to landfills or
incinerators in 2010 (STARS analysis). This equates to a diversion rate of ~49%.
According to Karyn Kaplan, diversion rate is driven by consumer attitude towards recycling and
current recycling processes. She explained that students and faculty do not follow the recycling
processes currently implemented and that these processes are difficult to use due to the
inconsistency in the appearance of recycling receptacles. To change this consumer behavior we
need to streamline the recycling process by making collection sites uniform to overcome poor
recycling habits.
The viewpoint of our potential recyclers, whom are our students, is something that needs to be
considered. Our survey responses revealed that our students held favorable attitudes towards
recycling, however, inconvenience was cited as a cause of poor recycling habits. More
specifically, we found that 81% of students love or like recycling, and we found that the average
convenience of recycling for students ranked at only 7 out of 10.
Based upon this survey data and the findings of Karyn Kaplan we have found that in order to
increase recycling, it needs to become more convenient to students. Currently, the UO Zero
4
Waste recycling program provides collection services at over 2000 campus collection sites
(STARS analysis). Although 2000 receptacles seem to be a large number, the problem is the
convenience of the habit. Though adding more recycling bins seems to be a logical conclusion,
Karyn Kaplan revealed to us that the underlying problem, which is that students and faculty have
difficulty in distinguishing which receptacles are for recycling and which is for garbage. This
reveals that the appearance of the recycling bins is important to consider.
According to a psychological study conducted by Montazeri, et al., they found that the big
challenge in promoting sustainability is not so much the technical challenge, but more so
changing the behavior of people. This is the same challenge we are trying to overcome.
This study argues that some behaviors are partly initiated, navigated or changed by the
surrounding environment, which creates an opportunity for design. In this study, “designers
developed environments that created a demand, incentive or a nudge for people to behave one
way or another.” They extended this logic to sustainability and recycling efforts—they
hypothesized that salient colors increase the use of recycling bins, assuming all other aspects are
equal. After the study they found that 88% of subjects in the high-salience condition (green
recycling bin) recycled, whereas only 52% of subjects used the recycling bin in low-salience
conditions (grey recycling bins). This study therefore illustrates that the appearance of the
recycling bins does in fact alter people’s behavior—the same conclusion Karyn Kaplan
suggested.
To effectively address diversion rates, reducing costs of waste, and increasing recycling per
capita, we propose solutions that will not only encourage sustainable practices on campus but
will also increase the value and image of the university as a leader in sustainability. The
solutions for this opportunity include replacing paper towels with energy efficient hand dryers in
UO bathrooms, increasing the number of recycling collection sites on campus, and implementing
a reverse vending machine to increase and encourage recycling with an added incentive.
IV. OBJECTIVES
The overall objective of this proposal is to help facilitate the implementation of more sustainable
waste management methods at the University of Oregon. Through these strategies, waste
management, cost efficiency, global conscience and overall sustainability will be improved.
Improving sustainability as an institution has many benefits such as better health for students, the
reduction of the environmental footprint, increased stakeholder support, and consequently the
recruitment and retention of new students.
Objective 1: Increase Recycling
Our main goal is to increase recycling on campus. We also aim to streamline the appearance of
recycling bins to make recycling more accessible and therefore prevalent.
Goal:
 We propose to replace 1000 of the 2000 recycling bins currently on campus with
color coordinated bins by 2014 and to work towards making 100% of recycling bins
uniform by 2022 (See Appendix B)
5

We intend to achieve a short-term goal of a 75% diversion rate by 2015 and a longterm goal of zero waste by 2022.
Objective 2: Decrease Paper Waste
As seen in the EMU case study, we found that about 61% of waste was paper product waste. We
also found from another case study conducted by UO students that we consumed about 11.7
million feet of paper towels in 2009. Based upon this data, our goal is as follows:
Goal:
We intend to eliminate all paper towel dispensers in the Lillis Business Complex and
replace them with the Dyson Airblade hand dryer. Though we will only focus on
replacing Lillis dispensers for this proposal, we have the vision to eliminate all paper
towel dispensers in all campus bathrooms in years to come.
V. SOLUTIONS
In order to increase recycling and the diversion rate, we propose two solutions to tackle our
objectives:
Recycling Bins
To encourage more recycling, we propose to replace 1000* of the current recycling bins
with the ones found in Appendix B (example 4). There will be three new receptacles in
order to make sure recycling is done correctly.
*Currently, the budget can only accommodate for purchasing 1000 recycling receptacles. However, we
intend for all of the recycling bins to be replaced in the near future (i.e. this will not be addressed in this
proposal)
Why
Having these receptacles will reduce confusion, increase proper recycling and
therefore will impact the diversion rate. As concluded in the psychological study
by Montazeri, et al., the appearance of the recycling receptacles affects people’s
recycling behavior. For this reason, we suggest making all recycling bins on
campus have a consistent appearance to help students visually associate the color
of the bin to the correct recyclable material.
How
Through our research we have found that there are currently 2000 recycling bins
on campus and we will replace 1000 of them by Fall 2014. Next Step recycling
as well as Campus Operations will help to replace the old bins and install the new
ones.
Where
High traffic areas will be targeted in order to help facilitate this new, uniform look
and to impact people’s behavior. Areas such as Lillis, the EMU, Lewis
Integrative Science Complex and Allen Hall will all have these new bins.
Additionally, all recycling bins close to the entrances of buildings will have first
priority.
6
Air Dryers
To decrease paper waste, our solution is to replace paper towel dispensers in each
restroom in Lillis with the Dyson Airblade. As compared to paper towels and other handdryers, these Dyson hand dryers will cut down paper waste, thus reducing the Co2
emissions (see Appendix F). We propose to start this process in Lillis because on
average about 5,500 people visit this building on any given business day (UO Case
Study).
Why
Having the Dyson Airblade in each bathroom will save paper, increase the overall
hygiene, and finally cut costs. The Airblade kills 99.9% of the germs attached to
the hands and the outer casing of the unit is also made with anti-bacterial
materials. Another reason we propose the Dyson Airblade is due to the fact that it
does not use heat when drying. This feature will not increase the growth rate of
bacteria unlike other hand air dryers.
How
In order to install the Dyson Airblade into each bathroom, the bathrooms will
have to be wired to support electrical equipment. This will be done by campus
operations and will be a one-time cost.
Where
There are currently 26 paper towel dispensers in Lillis and our plan is to replace
each and every one of these. Lillis will be one of the first buildings on campus
that have these new hand dryers.
VI. RISK ANALYSIS
While implementing our solutions, it is equally important to understand the associated risk. The
biggest risks we face are the potential long-term value risk for current and upfront expenses, and
the alteration of people’s thought and behaviors regarding waste management.
Recycling Attitude
We recognize the risk that some people will simply not care about waste management.
Despite the psychological study results, we acknowledge that students are busy and often
turn to the most convenient disposal method, even though they may understand that
recycling in the proper receptacle is more sustainable. In essence, habits die hard, and it is
always going to be a challenge to change one’s behavior. However, uniform appearances
for recycling bins have proven to improve recycling habits up to 88% revealing that our
solution outweighs the risk.
Elimination of Paper Towels
Though this is our ultimate goal for Lillis and eventually for the remainder of campus, we
realize that removing all paper towels could be a concern to users who care deeply about
hygiene. Users might feel an aversion to this idea as there would be no paper towels to
open doors or for other uses. This risk however is worth taking because the Dyson
7
Airblade has addressed the hygiene concern by proving that the air blade kills 99.9% of
all bacteria in the air before it reaches your hands through a HEPA filter. Airblades also
do not use a heat source therefore eliminating an environment that promotes bacterial
growth.
Although implementing our solutions will inevitably incur risk for our policy, the value that the
solutions bring to the university in terms of cost efficiency and improving the process for
sustainable practices outweighs these risks. Adopting our proposal will improve overall campus
sustainability and will help the University of Oregon to maintain our beautiful and green campus.
VII. TECHNICAL PLAN
To successfully accomplish our specific objectives, it is essential for us to work together with the
UO Zero Waste Program and the Campus Operations office to meet the following timeline:
Implementation of 1000 Consistent Recycling Bins: By Fall 2014
Tasks:
Timeline:
Meet with Campus Operations
Dec. 10, 2012
Meet with Eugene Fire Department
Dec. 11, 2012
Strategically decide where to place bins
Jan. 7, 2013
Purchase bins
Mar. 1, 2013
Place 56 bins at 1-month increments, beginning
Apr. 1, 2013
Replacement of Paper towels with Dyson Airblade dryers: By Fall 2013
Tasks:
Timeline:
Wiring
Jun. 17, 2013
Ordering the Dyson Airblade
Jun. 24, 2013
Installation
Jul. 1, 2013
VIII. COSTS (see Appendix D)
Recycling Bins
Recycling bins ........................................................................$80,000 (over 2 years)
Delivery of recycle bins .........................................................$11,822 ($35.50 shipping/set of 3)
Removal of old receptacles ....................................................$3,000 (subject to change)
Dyson Airblades
New Dyson Air Blade dryers .................................................$36,400
Wiring restrooms ...................................................................$32,000
Installation of Dyson Airblade dryers ....................................$2,000
Total .......................................................................................$165,222
Management Plan
Once our proposal is approved our team will begin work the planning phase for the placement of
new recycling bins no later than December 10, 2012. We will work closely with the Campus
Operations office to decide where the new bins will be most beneficial and arrange the removal
of current recycling receptacles. We will need to obtain permission from various building
managers when placing new receptacles inside of buildings to ensure the new receptacles are
8
approved by the fire marshal for their intended use. Once that phase is complete, we will contact
Karyn Kaplan to organize the purchase of the first set of receptacles, and begin placing those
bins approximately 1 month later. We will replace 56 bins every month thereafter until our quota
of 1000 has been met in fall 2014.
With regard to the Dyson Airblade installations, we will put that process off until after spring
term has come to a close, as to avoid any possible disruptions or delays while classes are in
session. On June 17, the university will contact an electrical contractor to outfit the restrooms in
Lillis with the proper wiring for the Dyson Airblade dryers. After the completion of the wiring,
we will initiate purchase of 26 Dyson Airblades via Dyson’s website. Upon arrival, the dryers
will be installed and ready for use.
IX. CONCLUSION
The UO has always been on the forefront of sustainability practices, constantly looking for more
efficient ways to manage our resources. From already implemented zero-waste-sponsored events
to composting for the UO’s urban farm, decreasing the amount of waste that gets deposited in
our region’s landfills has been a long-standing goal for our campus recycling initiatives. It only
makes sense that we continue to strive for improvements to the process in areas such as our
efficient use of energy and natural resources as well as being mindful of our footprint on the
environment, all the while making it an enjoyable process for all. Let us work together in
aligning our policy’s goals with those of the campus’ Zero Waste program and make a solid
effort to do what is best for the world. Through these efforts, the University of Oregon will
continue to be a leader and innovator of environmental stewardship.
9
X. SOURCES
 http://www.bizjournals.com/portland/stories/2008/07/28/daily11.html (Portland
Bizjournal)
 http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~recycle/Composting.htm (EMU Food Waste Study)
 http://pages.uoregon.edu/recycle/Factoids.htm (Weyerhaeuser Environmental Savings)
 http://www.nyc.gov/html/nycwasteless/html/resources/reports_rate_definitions.shtml
(NYC Department of Sanitation)
 https://stars.aashe.org/institutions/university-of-oregon-or/report/2011-02-25/ (STARS
analysis)
 http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1021&context=envstudthese
s (Case Study)
 http://iaspub.epa.gov/sor_internet/registry/termreg/searchandretrieve/termsandacronym
s/search.do
 http://www.tomra.com/default.asp?V_ITEM_ID=40
 http://ode.engin.umich.edu/publications/PapalambrosPapers/2012/305.pdf (Recylcing
bin appearance)
XI. APPENDIX A: Qualtrics Survey Results
Recycling effort value (1-10)
1. Rate Campus Recycling Efforts
(1-10)
10
10
7.29
8
6
4
3
2
0
Min Value
Max Value
Average Value
10
# of responses
2. What is your general attitude
towards recycling?
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
13
12
4
2
0
Love it
Like it
Neutral
Dislike it
Hate it
1
2
3
Attitude rating
4
5
# of responses
3. How many items do you recycle
a day on campus?
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
15
14
0-1
2 to 4
1
2
1
1
4 to 7
7+
3
4
# of items
# of responses
4. Would you recycle more on
campus if an incentive (i.e. Campus
Cash) was offered?
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
27
4
Yes
No
1
2
11
Recycling convenience (1-10)
5. How convenient is recycling on
campus? (1-10)
10
10
8
7.03
6
4
2
0
0
Min Value
Max Value
XII. APPENDIX B: Recycling Bins Photos
Current Recycling Bin: Example 1
Current Recycling Bin: Example 2
Average Value
12
Current Recycling Bin: Example 3
Targeted Recycling Bins: Color Coordinated Receptables - Example 4
XIII. APPENDIX C: Dyson Airblade Hand Dryer
13
XIV. APPENDIX D: Cost Summary
Recycle Bins
According to Karyn Kaplan, the UO can obtain the receptacles at a price of $80/receptacle. We
intend to order 1,000 bins at this price over an 18 month period, totaling $80,000.
Delivery of Recycle Bins
The costs associated with the delivery of the recycle bins was obtained via recycleaway.com,
which is the website for a recycle bin manufacturer. The total shipping associated with
RecycleAway’s Simple Sort Triple Station is $35.50 per set of 3. Since we will be ordering 333
sets over the next 18 months, the total shipping and delivery costs equals $11,821.50.
Removal of Old Bins
This figure is an estimation based on the amount of time it would take 10 employees to remove
old recycle bins and replace them with the new bins at 5 minutes/site and at an average wage of
$12/hr
333 sites x 5 min/site = 1,665 minutes or 27.75 hrs/employee.
27.75 hrs x 10 employees = 277.5 total man hours x $12/hr = $3,330
Dyson Airblade
The wiring and installation costs are derived from information in a previous proposal submitted
to the ASUO by a group of UO students, which stated that the quoted wiring costs would equal
around $32,000 and the installation would total approximately $2,000. Pricing information for
the actual product was obtained by contacting a Dyson representative over the phone at 888-3976622, and that amount totaled $1,400 per dryer bringing the total cost of the Dyson Airblade to:
32,000 + 2,000 + 1,400(6) = $70,400
XV. APPENDIX E: Dyson Co2 emissions
14