Princeton Environmental Reform Committee (PERC) Environmental Audit of Princeton University

Chapter 4 - Food Services

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Any waste stream analysis must adopt a life-cycle approach, analyzing such factors as procurement, source reduction, and waste disposal. This holds true for the food and associated packaging used at Princeton University. Princeton University Dining Services has made a concentrated effort in recent years to improve its impact in all three areas. In the past two years, Dining Services has purchased recycled napkins, implemented a ìBring Your Own Mugî program and reduced food waste through improved recycling of disposables and leftover food. These changes have not only had environmental benefits, but have, in many cases, cut costs.

In addition to Dining Services, undergraduate students also eat at the upperclass eating clubs, the Brown Co-op, or the 2-Dickinson Co-op. Dining Services, as the only university-operated food source and the primary food provider, is the focus of this chapter.

The waste stream of the various dining facilities on campus is considered first, listing the components of each. Waste production in food services occurs in each of the three stages: procurement, preparation and consumption; it is within these three steps that waste minimization efforts can be concentrated. Current methods of food waste disposal, recycling programs, and waste reduction efforts are also discussed. Based on the current situation recommendations are made which involve a reduction in waste disposal and procurement costs: 1) select suppliers who use minimal packaging; 2) educate workers on recycling opportunities; 3) expand recycling program; 4) expand the pig farmer leftover disposal system; and 5) combat the increasing problem of theft in the dining halls through increased education.

Most of the changes suggested are currently being tested in pilot programs by Dining Services. If successful, these changes will also be promoted in eating clubs and the co-ops.

INTRODUCTION

Until recently, advances in the reduction of food waste have been minimal. Since the formation of the residential college system in the 60s, Princeton undergraduate dining has been divided between service provided by the Department of Food Services, (now known as the Department of Dining Services) and the upperclass eating clubs. Very little was done in respect to food waste reduction other than an unsuccessful attempt to donate leftover food to a local soup kitchen. A series of improvements followed the reorganization of Dining Services in 1993.

Since the arrival of Director of Dining Services Stuart Orefice two and a half years ago, several improvements have been made. Procurement improvements include napkins made from recycled materials which are used in all Dining Services locations. Orefice has also pressed suppliers to reduce the amount of packaging used for shipment. In addition to reducing packaging, other new source reduction tactics include the expansion of the ìBring Your Own Mugî program in the Student Center where a discount is provided to customers using a reusable mug for beverage purchases. Finally, Orefice has introduced reusable silverware to the Student Center in addition to the disposable plastic cutlery.

Reduction in landfill disposal has been the greatest improvement. The student center currently recycles black plastic plates as well as polystyrene cups. Last year, Orefice not only set up a recycling system for polystyrene but also, with the aid of PERC, introduced a food waste reduction program that allows a local pig farmer to collect and recycle the university's food waste by feeding it to his pigs. Both the polystyrene recycling and food waste reduction programs have already cut costs tremendously for the university.

Schools such as Rutgers University have begun innovative programs in food management. The newly instated pig farmer option was adapted from a system currently in place at Rutgers. Rutgers also composts some vegetables, an option which is not feasible at Princeton.

OVERVIEW

Facilities Managed by Dining Services

Current dining at Princeton can be broken down into six areas. The primary food provider on campus is Dining Services, through which approximately 2800 people are regularly served.

All first and second-year undergraduates are required to purchase a contract with Dining Services in the residential colleges. Upperclass students have the option of either continuing their contract with Dining Services, going independent and cooking their own meals, or joining a private eating club or co-op. Table 4.1 illustrates the number of undergraduate students over the last five years who have contracted with Dining Services as well as the average cost of such contracts.

Table 4.1 Dining Services meal contract data for 1993-94 academic year. (Source: Dining Services).

Dining Services also operates several other dining locations. The locations and their relative use are indicated in Figure 4.1. As the figure indicates, the bulk of Dining Services food consumption occurs in the residential colleges and the student center.

Figure 4.1 Food consumption by location for 1993-94 school year. (Source: Dining Services)

Other Food Services

The twelve upperclass eating clubs service approximately 36% of all undergraduates. Other dining options for independent juniors and seniors include the vegetarian co-op 2-Dickinson and the Brown Co-op. Prospect House, a dining facility for faculty and staff, is managed by Linda Geren. There is a dining room as well as a snack bar and sandwich shop. The Murray Dodge Cafe is a once-a-week operation which is managed by the International Center.

Figure 4.2 displays the division of food services at Princeton.

Figure 4.2 Food consumption on Princeton campus, 1993-94 academic year. (source: Dining Services)

This chapter will make use of models that describe the various dining facilities with respect to their waste generation. Each model will analyze the waste stream of the facility with respect to steps of procuring, preparing and consuming the meal and the location of each of these steps.

As indicated in Figure 4.2, Dining Services provides approximately 62% of all campus food services. These services can be categorized into two subgroups, namely residential dining halls and other Dining Services dining facilities. Within the second subgroup are dining facilities that follow the same model as the residential dining halls and others that serve as cash operations.

Food Services Waste Production Model: The Residential College

Waste production in food services occurs in each of the three stages: procurement, preparation and consumption. This model is based upon residential college dining halls but can be applied to any food service system.

Procurement Stage

Various food inputs are needed to prepare any meal. These are procured by Dining Services and delivered to each facility separately. To avoid damage during transportation and to facilitate shipping, the inputs are packaged in various materials. Much of this packaging has little purpose beyond protection during shipping and handling, and is therefore disposed of directly upon arrival.

Preparation Stage

This step of the waste stream takes place in the kitchen portion of the residential dining hall. The two forms of waste generated during this step are packaging waste and food waste. This second stage of packaging that is disposed of contains many materials that can be reused and recycled. The food waste generated in the cooking and preparation of meals can be kept out of the waste stream through programs such as the pig farmer program, which is used in several residential dining facilities already.

Consumption Stage

This last step of the model takes place in the dining hall itself. It consists primarily of food waste from unfinished meals and small amounts of non-reusable and non-recyclable waste. Due to the use of reusable trays, dishware, glassware, and silverware, the waste generated in the dining halls is not significantly large. However, due to theft, Dining Services must often replace its dining utensils with disposable cutlery, plastic cups, and additional trays. Not only does this burden Dining Services financially, but it is a setback to the efforts of Dining Services to provide the students with environmentally sound catering. A similar problem is the theft of salt and pepper shakers. Although not on the same scale as the dishware theft, this theft still forces Dining Services to replace stolen property with disposable alternatives.

The theft of dining utensils has become a major economic and environmental problem. Not only are the annual costs of theft from the residential dining halls estimated at $30,000, but the replacement of stolen utensils with disposable utensils leads to increased amounts of non-reusable, non-recyclable waste. Table 4.2 estimates the relative financial impact of each kind of stolen item:

Table 4.2 Cost of stolen Dining Services supplies for the 1993-94 academic year. (Source: Dining Services).

The waste generated from the consumption of a typical meal in a dining hall consists solely of food leftovers, napkins, and small pieces of non-recyclable utensil waste (straws, sugar packets, etc.). This small amount of waste is due primarily to the fact that all dishes, glasses, cups, and silverware are washed after every meal and reused. Therefore, it is most important to focus on reducing food waste through such means as the pig farmer program. In the case of the dining halls, it is best to set up a receptacle for food waste and a receptacle for other waste. It is important that these receptacles be labeled clearly and that students are made aware of the new waste disposal arrangement.

Application of Model to Other Facilities

Dining Services: Cash Operations

The cash operation model only deviates slightly from the residential college model. The first two steps of the waste stream are identical; it is only the third step, consumption, that is different. Because cash operations do not provide reusable dining utensils, there is a large amount of non-reusable waste generated in addition to the large amount of food waste from leftovers. Although cash operations only comprise 15% of Dining Services' consumption, the disposal of trays, plastic cutlery, and paper cups after each meal still creates unnecessary amounts of waste. While the Student Center, the biggest of the three cash operations, provides silverware, the New South Cafeteria and the Woodrow Wilson Dining Room only offer disposable cutlery. The cause of this problem is a lack of sufficient dishwashing facilities in each location. This problem could be solved through installing dishwashers in every location and switching to reusable utensils, or by investigating a recycling program for these disposable utensils.

Eating Clubs

Princeton eating clubs are the primary dining facility for upperclass students. It is approximated that 35% of all dining services is consumed at the clubs. Every eating club is an independent organization and therefore not affiliated with either Dining Services or the university administration. Therefore, it is difficult to ascertain waste reduction tactics that can easily be applied to all eating clubs. Since the eating clubs are independent, it is difficult to subject them to university dining policy and it is hard to coordinate waste reduction decisions. The eating clubs follow the same model as that of the residential dining halls; the procurement of foodstuffs, the preparation of food, and the consumption of meals generate the same types of waste. Each eating club has a different policy with respect to waste reduction on the procurement, preparation, and consumption level. Currently, most eating clubs do have recycling programs in their kitchens and serve meals using reusable dining utensils. Unfortunately, the clubs have probably not focused on the reduction of food waste or packaging waste.

One aspect of eating clubs dining is of special environmental interest: the plastic cup. The eating clubs are not only dining facilities, but social organizations as well. Social functions held at the clubs over the weekends rely solely on the plastic cup as a beverage container. Theft concerns as well as dishwashing convenience are the primary reasons for the use of the cup. Unfortunately, the cups are not recyclable, and are sometimes not even disposed of in the proper waste containers. Princeton Environmental Action sponsored a ìBring Your Own Mugî night at the ìStreetî in the Spring of 1994 which was highly successful.

Prospect House

This facility is mainly used by professors, staff, and leading members of the university administration. It approximates a restaurant in almost every aspect. Therefore its waste stream is similar to that of the residential dining halls. It would not be a hard task to convince the manager of Prospect House to join the pig farmer program due to its economic incentives. However, it would take some more effort to persuade Prospect House to reuse and recycle more of its waste as well as conduct a procurement analysis. One possible solution to this problem would be to have a PERC task force analyze these two issues.

Murray-Dodge Cafe

The Princeton International Student Organization runs a cafe in the basement of Murray-Dodge. This operation is open on a bi-weekly basis; therefore the scale of its waste generation is trivial. Meals are usually served as "take-out", which poses an obvious problem; the consumption of a meal not only creates food waste, but also non-reusable and non-recyclable packaging and utensil waste.

The Co-ops

Currently there are two upperclass co-ops on campus, Brown and 2 Dickinson. Since they mainly serve vegetarian and vegan meals, the amount of waste produced per person by these co-ops is the lowest of all dining facilities on campus. The 2 Dickinson co-op composts all of its leftovers and recycles most of its other waste. The Brown co-op does not compost, yet its waste generation is still below the average. Both co-ops will eventually be part of the pig farmer program, since the current food waste composting program will eventually lead to an pile-up of food waste that is not composted.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Residential Dining Halls

4.1 Select suppliers which use minimal amounts of packaging.

A list of companies should be compiled which consists of "eco-friendly" companies whose products use minimal amounts of packaging and whose packaging is reusable and recyclable. These companies should be selected over less environmentally responsible ones whenever possible. Since every residential dining hall receives the same shipments, one investigation of a storage room should provide information applicable for all dining halls.

Furthermore, if Dining Services must use an "eco-unfriendly" supplier, it should press this supplier to use more environmentally sound packaging while attempting to find a supplier whose packaging is more environmentally friendly.

4.2 Educate Dining Services workers on recycling opportunities.

It is Dining Services' duty to make sure that the methods of reusing and recycling packaging are explained to Dining Services employees and implemented correctly. The frequent policy changes this past year have been hard to implement due to a lack of worker education. This is partly attributed to poorly labeled waste containers. To achieve better efficiency, a system of well labeled and visible containers must first be devised.

Simultaneously, those who dispose of the recyclables, i.e., Dining Services' kitchen employees, must be educated to understand the system and its purpose. Dining Services employees should be educated in recycling matters at least once a year. Furthermore, if the recycling system is expanded, i.e., to include polystyrene or Tetra-Pak recycling, Dining Services should again label the containers clearly and educate its employees on the change.

4.3 Expand recycling program.

The following items are being collected and recycled in Dining Services' preparation facilities:

- plastic bottles and containers ( Grade 1 and 2 )

- glass bottles, containers, and jars

- aluminum, tin, and steel cans

- corrugated cardboard

- cooking oil

This list includes most packaging types that can be recycled. It is important for Dining Services to expand its recycling system to cover polystyrene and Tetra-Pak as well.

4.4 Expand the pig farmer left-over disposal system to all the residential colleges.

Currently, plans are underway to set up a collection of food waste by a pig farmer from all dining halls managed by Dining Services. Under this system, all food waste from the dining halls, together with kitchen food waste, will be collected. This waste is then boiled at high temperatures and the cooled product is fed to the farmer's pigs. The pigs' manure is sifted and converted to peat moss. The plastic that is sifted from the manure is bought by building companies and used to reinforce building material.

The pig farmer program is an environmentally friendly and economic choice. Not only does it reduce the amount of waste disposed in the landfill, but it also lowers disposal costs. Also, the collection of waste within the kitchens and dining halls should progress smoothly, since food waste receptacles are well labeled and contamination hardly affects the reuse of this resource.

Since the program has just been implemented, there are no exact figures available for how much the system has saved in avoided landfill costs. However, general trends indicate that if the program were expanded to all Dining Services facilities, the cost-savings would be significant.

4.5 Combat the problem of theft in the dining halls through increased education.

There have been several suggestions on how to remedy this problem. One policy option is to require students to purchase dining utensils for their own use. Dining Services could procure dining utensils that would be easily distinguishable from utensils used in dining halls and sell the former to interested students. Such a proposal must be followed up with punitive fines for theft of dining hall utensils. This action could be undertaken by fire marshals on their frequent inspections through student dorms. By adding Dining Services utensils to the fire hazard list, students would be fined for their theft. Another solution would be to employ a dining hall guard, whose monitoring of the exits would probably eliminate theft problems altogether. However, such a solution is quite costly and difficult to implement.

In the following analysis, the above recommendations are applied to non-residential dining facilities:

Cash Operations

Since these dining facilities are very similar to the other facilities managed by Dining Services, any recommendations made in the residential college section apply to this model as well. The only significant deviation from the residential college model is in the consumption step. With the exception of the Student Center, which provides reusable silverware, cash operation facilities do not provide reusable dish-, glass-, or silverware. Since these facilities do not have the capacity to wash dining utensils, the best solution to this problem is to execute an efficient recycling system.

The current solution underway is to collect the disposable utensils, which are mostly made of polystyrene, and have these shipped to Bridgeport, N.J. to be recycled. From the current waste stream, the facilities' black plates are being collected and recycled. Just recently Dining Services switched from non-recyclable paper cups to recyclable Styrofoam cups, which can be collected together with the trays and other plastic dining utensils of grade #6. In addition, polystyrene cutlery can be procured (if it is not already) and disposed of together with the polystyrene plates and cups. These planned actions will reduce the consumption waste to food waste, recyclable waste, and negligible amounts non-recyclable.

Eating Clubs

The best method of solving food waste-related problems on Prospect Avenue is to conduct a waste audit of the clubs. It should be done by a proposed task force with permission of the Inter-Club Council. Therefore, it is important that the Inter-Club Council is aware of this audit and the changes brought about in Dining Services. At the same time it is important that the managers of the individual eating clubs are made aware as well, since they will most likely not turn down a chance to lower operation costs.

Since the setup of the eating clubs is comparable to the residential dining hall model, it would be easy for the eating clubs to adopt any changes that have been successful in the residential dining halls. For example, the pig farmer solution is certainly applicable to any, if not all of the eating clubs, since it facilitates waste disposal and carries an economic incentive as well. Increased recycling efforts are also desired, yet difficult to enforce; an analysis of procurement is also just as important.

Just recently, there have been complaints by the Town Health Board about the litter of plastic cups seen on Prospect Avenue every Friday and Sunday morning. A timely proposal to the Inter-Club Council will have a good chance of receiving an approval. The best solution to this problem is to convince the Eating Clubs to provide reusable cups, instead of the current disposable sort. Through such a switch, the eating clubs would definitely also capture an economic incentive: A one-time purchase of reusable cups in a large amount will definitely cost less than repeated purchases of disposable cups. The Inter-Club Council could procure a standard "Street" cup and distribute it to the eating clubs. A sponsorship by various beverage companies would furthermore lower the costs of purchasing reusable cups. These savings should be sufficient to cover any expenses incurred through collection, cleaning, and theft of the reusable cups. To prevent the latter problem, it is advisable to place a collection site for cups at each exit. Since each club usually only has one main entrance/exit, safeguards could easily monitor the disposal of cups as students are leaving.

Murray-Dodge Cafe

Since this dining facility is constrained to a "take-out" set-up, recommendations must consider the limits of the facility. First, the cafe can reduce the amount of packaging that comes with the meal and only provide the minimal amount of utensils need (fork, knife, napkin). The operation can also become involved with the recyclable utensils system that would also encompass the Student Center. Small changes such as the posting of signs urging patrons to minimize their napkin and utensil use might also prove useful. Lastly, patrons could be encouraged to either bring their own plates and utensils or, more likely, to wash their own dishes (which would be provided by the Murray-Dodge Cafe).

REFERENCES

University Contacts

Stuart Orefice, Director of Dining Services

Other Sources

McRecycle Registry Service (708) 575-3000

(a listing of 500 producers and suppliers of recycled products)

Task Force Members

Eckhart Richter '98, Coordinator

Stuart Orefice

This material may be used for educational and non-profit use. Commercial use of this information is prohibited without written consent. Copyright © 1995, Princeton Environmental Reform Committee, Princeton University.