Closing the Recycling Loop
in University Halls of Residence
Victoria Hands
Environmental & Sustainability Coordinator,
London School of Economics
London’s University Halls of Residence Recycling
Project Founder
Outline
Background
Why halls of residence
Reuse - end of term schemes
Recycling – win win win scenarios
Purchasing
• Reuse to reduce purchasing
• Buy recycled to close the loop
Benefits for Halls of
Residence
• Potential waste management cost
savings
• Response to increased student demand
for recycling facilities
• Empowering residents to be aware
• Reducing end of term waste peak
• Providing low or no cost items
Benefits for Universities
• Competitive advantage for attracting
students and staff
• Contributing to high environmental
standards
• Demonstrating social responsibility
• Backing up academic expertise with
everyday practice
Benefits for Local
Authorities
• Meeting government recycling targets
• Extending recycling provision
• Creating a healthier environment
Why Halls of Residence?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
High density
Waste audit - 50-70% recyclable
Life change
Contractual obligations
Established communications
Backing up teaching
Habitual behaviour
Vocal active students
Role out across campus!!
The Waste Hierarchy
REDUCE
Halls can reuse & buy recycled content
REUSE
Halls save on waste disposal & purchasing
and extend service provision
RECYCLE
Halls can access free or low cost recycling
LAST OPTION LANDFILL
A Practical Approach
•
•
•
•
•
•
Identification of stakeholders
Background research
Initial contact
Interviews / questionnaires / reports
Partnership building & dialogue
Contact sheet & monitoring
Key Stakeholders
• Local Authorities (recycling officers)
• Waste management division
• Universities (environmental manager)
• Academic
• Operational
• Students union
• Halls of Residence (management)
• Cleaners
• Students
Project Origins
Experiences from:
• Students
• Cleaning staff (including contractors)
• Hall management
• Universities
• Local Authorities
• Reuse charities
The Waste Paper, issue 68 October 2000
Reuse Schemes
• Reuse Implementation Plan
– (RIP Waste)
• Notices
• Collection points
• Sorting and volunteers
– Types of donations
• Liaison with charities
– Hostels, reuse, London Remade
• Cleaning up
Reuse Donations
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
1 box of cutlery, 1 box of utensils
3 boxes of plates, 4 boxes of pans
40 black bin bags of men’s clothing
10 toasters, 11 kettles
2 computers, 8 screens
30 drying racks, 40 dish drainers
8 computer chairs
Reuse Scheme 2005
• 10 halls of residence – 3,748 students
• Estimated reuse participated rate: 10%
- 300 students
• 6 tonnes diverted from landfill – 20 kg
per student (textiles, IT equipment,
furniture)
Textiles 2005:
650kgs from
650 students
Estimated 65
participants
=
10 kg of
textiles per
student
Recycling
• Waste audit
– 20% paper/card
– 18% compostable
– 14% glass
– 13% plastic
– 4% cans
Start of term most effective
Design Challenges
• Micro kitchens and source separation
– Same as other urban MODs
– Small on floorspace
– Could look good/trendy/cool
– Reuse is real use!!
– Standard source separation does not
respond to the reality of micro living
Design Challenges
• Design of new halls of residence and
greening the campus
– Sustainable living
– Energy, water, waste
– Responsibility and empowerment
• Refurbishment of older halls of
residence
– Often without lifts
Action Plan
1. Recycle
•
Facilities and collections (external & internal)
2. Reuse
•
End of term schemes and collaborations
3. Raise Awareness
•
Communication materials (kitchen posters,
student tips leaflet)
•
Events with users (freshers fayres) and staff
training
4. Reduce
•
Green procurement
•
Influence student purchasing power
Findings
Issues
Findings
Responsibility
Responsibility to take out recycling materials given to students.
Results in full learning experience and responsible actions.
Cleaners and all hall staff have a new learning experience to take
into their non-working lives.
Ease
Recycling is not difficult if good infrastructure and effective
awareness raising is provided. In fact, waste is easier to manage.
The benefits of segregated waste include reduced odour.
Costs
Low or no cost because of recycling targets set for local authorities
by Europe
Kitchen space
Most kitchens do have space for recycling containers. There are
many designs of bins. New builds must design in recycling
provision.
External space
In many central London halls space is limited to the pavement (also
used by public-difficult to assess). Wheelie bins may be an option
here.
Champions
High rotation of students and local authority staff but continuity can
be found through wardens, managers and local councillors.
London Boroughs
Universities /
Intercollegiates
Barking & Dagenham
Barnet
Camden
Ealing
Enfield
Greenwich
Hackney
Hammersmith & Fulham
Haringey
Hillingdon
Islington
Kensington & Chelsea
Kingston Upon Thames
Lambeth
Lewisham
Richmond Upon Thames
Southwark
Tower Hamlets
Wandsworth
Westminster
Total 1
Halls of
residence
No. of Students Estimated No. of
Kitchens
1
2
5
1
1
2
5
2
5
1
5
3
1
2
2
1
4
3
3
8
1
5
33
1
4
5
5
2
8
8
13
11
4
4
7
1
14
24
25
18
508
1,007
6,620
331
815
1,480
642
261
795
2,661
2,574
906
2,212
726
1,127
218
4,928
1,536
3,414
3,710
85
168
1,103
55
136
247
107
44
133
444
429
151
369
121
188
36
491
256
569
618
57
193
36,471
5,748
38,295
6,382
Total 1 + 5%
Cost of reusable bags £0.97 per unit for quantities over 1000
£ 6,190
Cost of reusable box £4.99 per unit
£ 31,848
Cost of convert bins £14.95 per unit
£ 95,417
Closing the Loop
Reuse - end of term schemes
Recycling – win win win scenarios
Purchasing
• Reuse to reduce purchasing
• Buy recycled to close the loop
• National support??
London’s University Halls of
Residence Recycling Project
www.crispej.org.uk/hallsrecycling
Victoria Hands
v.e.hands@lse.ac.uk
Closing the loop by procuring
higher recycled content in paper
and construction
EAUC Annual Conference - 11 April 2006
Jim Wiltshire - Procurement Project Manager
Kara Jones – WRAP Paper Advocate
Outline
● About WRAP
● Materials resource efficiency - why recycled
● Using procurement
● The opportunities in paper
● The opportunities in construction
● WRAP assistance
WRAP exists to

Create stable and efficient markets for
recycled materials and products, and

Remove barriers to waste minimisation
re-use and recycling
Closing the loop – why specifying
recycled is so important
Business
investment and
development
Specifying recycled
in procurement of
goods, works and
services
Product
development
Waste
segregation,
home composting
etc.
CREATING ECONOMIC
VALUE FOR RECOVERED
MATERIALS
Waste
awareness and
minimisation
Materials
resource efficiency
Materials resource efficiency cycle
Materials efficiency
Reduce raw
material use
Save
resources
Materials with recycled content
Recycling
Reduce
waste
Reduce
landfill
A two thirds reduction in consumption of fossil fuels and virgin materials is needed to achieve a
sustainable and globally equitable level
WWF – “One planet living study” - 2004
What are we talking about?
Reclaimed
materials
Waste
minimisation,
segregation
& recycling
Materials
Resource
Efficiency
Renewables
Recycled
Content
Procurement policy drivers
Landfill Tax
(1996)
ODPM-PPS1
Govt. Sustainable
Procurement Group
Scottish Executive
Policy Commitment
2003
OGC-AE11
SBTG
Buying into Sustainable
Procurement (WPI)
2004
Code for
Sustainable
Homes
Scottish Executive
Policy Proposal
2005
Increasing thrust of sustainability policy
2006
Where do we start ? - major
applications to consider

Construction

Estates management

Printed matter

Tissue – catering and hygiene
Using procurement
Identifying
need
Requirement
specification
Supplier
selection
Tender
evaluation
Contract
management
Key point of
intervention
European Commission handbook on environmental public
procurement:
“As a contracting authority, you have the right…to demand a minimum
percentage of recycled and reused content where possible”.
OGC AE11:
“The (project) brief should include an outcome-based requirement for
overall materials efficiency, such as a minimum requirement for
recycled content in the project .”
Kara.Jones@wrap.org.uk
Recycled content
office &
publication papers
for your organisation
Why?
11th Apr-06
To cover:
•
•
•
•
Paper waste context
Why?......... environmental
Why?......... CSR / marketing
Why?......... quality and cost
• Product range
• How the Advocate Team can help
Paper waste in context
• UK > 100,000,000T commercial, industrial & municipal
waste per year.
• UK consumes approx 12,800,000T paper & board
• We recycle approx 7,000,000Tpa of paper & board
• But…….. More than 5,000,000Tpa still goes into landfill
• Landfill over 1,500,000T of paper from offices per
year
• Less than 4% of office / marketing / business papers
have any recycled content
Landfill / incinerate or recycle ?
• Landfill sites are filling up
• Landfilled paper produces methane and leakage
contributes to global warming
• Waste incineration not optimum and a long planning cycle
• Landfill or incineration is a waste of a valuable resource
• Most LCA’s show recycling is best
• We can recycle - economically
• Now a legal requirement to reduce landfill
= Recycle
Your customers are aware..
• National and EU push to increased recycling
• Increased recycling and promotion:
– Rolling out more kerbside collection
– National advertising
– Local advertising
• Government announcements on environmental issues and
sustainability
• Increasing central and local government sustainable
procurement
• Constant press coverage on all things environmental
In the media…
In the media…
In the media…
Why buy recycled content
paper?.........
Recycling = “collection”
+
“buy-recycled”
Your impact
The prime “buy-recycled” argument
is not about….
saving trees
…is about avoiding….
landfill
Why?......... Environmental
Landfill, methane production… also:
• Recycled paper also typically:
– uses less energy in production
– creates less VOC’s,
– uses less transport miles
– has a significantly smaller “environmental footprint”
– reduces pressure on forest resources
Why?.... CSR / marketing
Your customers:
• Your “customers” are increasingly being asked to recycle
• 50% of the population describe themselves as “committed
recyclers” (source NOP tracking survey Mar 2005)
• Recycled / recycling is seen as “good”. Opportunity to be
associated with a positive feelings such as:
–
–
–
–
•
caring
future looking
ethical
doing your bit…
Universities, and other higher education authorities, are seen as
exemplars, providing education, values and the future for the
next generation
Why?.... CSR / marketing
Stakeholders / Investors
• Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) a necessity for high
profile organisations
• Purchasing recycled materials is a positive action.
• >50% of your staff are committed recyclers, positive
reinforcement of your organisational values
• Supporting government commitment to sustainable
procurement
• Recycled content paper is:
– a “quick” win
– A demonstration you are doing something
So what is available?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Paper for printed publications
Magazine papers
Envelopes
Copier / printer paper
Tissue papers
Boxes
………..
Why?....... quality and cost
• You do not need to compromise “quality” by procuring
recycled content papers
– full colour publication papers
– office papers
• Technical developments have significantly improved the
performance and cost of recycled papers
– brands are readily available which match the
performance of virgin papers.
– need not pay more
• You can have a “traditional recycled look” if you want
It doesn’t have to be 100% recycled
Suggested minimum specification
for recycled content.
• Copier / Office paper 70%
• Printing Papers 50% (for marketing and publications)
• Tissue 100%
What is recycled content?
• Post & pre-consumer waste.
• Not mill broke
How WRAP can help you
• Advocacy team one2one support
– Advice on product availability
– On effective specification and policy for recycled
content
– Technical advice
– Facilitate trial material.
– Free
– Provided by a team experienced in paper and print
• Procurement guides:
– Recycled content Office and publication papers
– Recycled content Tissue papers
– Recycled content Business process papers
• Case studies
• Technical information sheets
• ……
Summary
Recycling = “collection”
+
“buy-recycled”
Recycled paper:
– Same quality
– Need not cost more
– Reduces landfill
– Supports your CSR and marketing
You could say….
…. using recycled paper is a no brainer!
thank you
The case for recycled
in construction
Materials efficiency in construction
M tonnes
Overall material consumption by
construction industry (~420 Mt
per year)
Quantity of construction and
demolition waste generated
(~90 Mt per year)
Waste construction
materials that are recycled
(~45 Mt per year)
Headline Construction Figures

One of the UK’s most productive sectors,
contributing almost 9% to the GDP

50% UK energy consumption associated
with buildings – construction & use

90% non-energy minerals extracted used in
construction - <1% new buildings uses
reclaimed materials

Biggest consumer of material resources:
420 million tonnes/year
KEY SUSTAINABILITY GOALS
Energy
Materials
Minimising
environmental Efficient use of finite
damage
natural materials
Material & Product
selection
Water
Material use &
waste
management
Using locally
sourced CDW
Waste avoidance and
minimisation
Use products with
high recycled content
Return packaging &
reduce over-ordering
Use of renewable
materials
Collection segregation
& recycling
Specifying materials
with low env impact
Mainstream, not green

Many mainstream products
already include recycled content

A range of products offer
above-average recycled
content at no extra cost

The potential for diversion
from landfill is substantial
Mainstream brands
0%
Recycled content
Eco-brands
Quick Wins
Where will we find Quick Wins that are . .

cost-effective

with comparable performance

and readily available?
Many examples in
Concrete blocks
Asphalt
Paving slabs
Bricks
Flooring
Various aggregate
Ceiling tiles
Chipboard
Plasterboard
Insulation
Roof tiles
products
Examples of mainstream products
available
Product type
Option
with lower
recycled
content
Dense block
0%
Hanson Conbloc - Up to 70%
Wall insulation
0%
Superglass Superwall Cavity Slab > 80%
Concrete roof tile
0%
Lafarge – various, e.g. Grovebury - 17%
>10%
Armstrong – various – 28 to 52%
50-70%
Sonae – Sonaefloor – 90 to 95%
Ceiling tiles
Intermediate floors,
e.g. timber
Option with higher recycled content
Project specific example
Floor coverings –
safety
0%
BSW Regupol Everroll rubber flooring - 80%
Using your procurement strategy
to drive resource efficiency

Sustainable Buildings Task Group:

Specify 10% or higher minimum
requirement for recycled content as a
proportion of the value of materials for
the whole project

You can also encourage higher
performance e.g. through tender
evaluation criteria
What is being achieved without
asking for good practice?
Type of project
Detached/terraced
house
Commercial office
School, hospital
Road reconstruction
Bridge
reconstruction
* Excluding building services
Baseline/
actual
practice %
6 - 26
10* - 22
12* - 20
8 - 16
18 - 23
Cost neutral
good
practice %
16-29
12*-30
15*-27
27-29
33-49
Housing example
Standard/actual
practice
Good practice
Timber-framed house,
Hillcrest HA
7%
15%
Timber-framed house,
Milnbank HA
12%
21%
Brick/block house,
Taylor Woodrow
16%
20% – 28%
(cost-neutral)
Steel framed housing example
Standard practice
20 – 23%
As built
specification
23 - 25%
Good practice
26 – 29%
Best practice
30 – 31%
Product type
Base
case
Insulation – Roof 0%
General fill
0%
Insulation wool – 50%
external walls
facing Brick
5%
Quick Win
80%
50- 100%
70%
11 – 20%
Evidence base - DfES Exemplar
designs for schools
Design S2 - Suburban edge of town setting
Design S5 - Inner city sites
City Academy, Brent – Recently completed
Design S2
Design S5
City Academy,
Brent
Build cost of school £M
14.1
15.1
12.2
Approx value of materials £M
3.3
3.7
3.6
% recycled content – Standard practice
15.5%
17.3%
12.9%
% recycled content – Product substitution
18.1%
21.2%
15.6%
400
490
830
3100
4800
4300
Tonnage avoiding landfill – Standard
practice
Tonnage avoiding landfill – Product
substitution
Case study – Glasgow school
Best opportunities to increase recycled content
Where
Glasgow
When
2004
Building
Camstradden
Primary
School
General fixtures, furnishings
and equipment, flooring
(inside)
Plasterboard dry lining,
partitions, ceiling
(inside)
Asphalt
Total
£3.4m
construction
works value
Total
materials
value
Excavating
and filling
£2m
Interlocking brick,
block roads,
paving
Mixing, casting,
curing in-situ
concrete
Drainage below
ground
Quick Wins
Top Quick Wins
Coated macadam/Asphalt roads/Pavings
Rubber/Plastics/Lino/Carpet tiling
Actual (£)
Readily achievable (£)
Mixing/Casting/Curing in Situ concrete
Excavating and filling
Interlocking brick/Block roads/Pavings
Plasterboard dry lining/partitions/ceilings
Drainage belowground
0
10000
20000
Recycled Content Value £
30000
40000
Who is taking action?
Adopted minimum 10% value requirement

Glasgow City Council

Bristol City Council

Aberdeen City Council

Whipps Cross Hospital

Dundee City Council

Lancashire County Council

Newcastle City Council

Building Schools for the Future (BSF)

Solihull MBC

Raploch URC

Sheffield CC
Who is taking action?
Increasing the use of recycled content

BAA

British Land

Ely Bridge

Worcestershire CC

Yorkshire Forward

Major supermarkets

Major housebuilders - Redrow

Glamorgan Gwent HA
How WRAP can help
WRAP assistance

RC Toolkit

Case studies

Procurement advice

Site waste management

Demolition guidance

Web resources

AggRegain, tools, research reports

Trailblazer projects

Events
Toolkit – data requirements
Material Resource Efficiency in Construction
www.wrap.org.uk/construction
Publications & guidance
Quick Win & Procurement guidance documents

Housing Quick Wins

Preliminary works

General building

Office & commercial refurbishment

Highways maintenance

Councillor briefing documents
Resources for procurement


Construction procurement
template wording:

Design/project brief

Appointment of design team

Supplier pre-qualification and
audit

Tender specification (D&B,
traditional)

Contract clauses
Construction product listing
For further information
Thank you!
www.wrap.org.uk/construction
jim.wiltshire@wrap.org.uk