(moved teams and used reflist) |
|||
(36 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Tocright}} | {{Tocright}} | ||
==Introduction== | |||
This page is the compilation of a research project in partnership between [[Engr308 Technology and the Environment]], The Sustainability Office, and Dining Services at [[Humboldt State University]] during Fall 2016. The client leads on this project are | This page is the compilation of a research project in partnership between [[Engr308 Technology and the Environment]], The Sustainability Office, and Dining Services at [[Humboldt State University]] during Fall 2016. The client leads on this project are | ||
* Morgan King, Sustainability & Waste Coordinator | * Morgan King, Sustainability & Waste Coordinator | ||
Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
The objective of this project is to analyze and compare the effects of the HSU policy and pricing regarding mason jars and disposables in terms of its monetary costs, [[carbon dioxide]] emissions, and [[embedded energy]]. A secondary goal is to create a recommendation that would improve the overall functionality of the policy. Another goal was to create compelling comparisons for consumers. | The objective of this project is to analyze and compare the effects of the HSU policy and pricing regarding mason jars and disposables in terms of its monetary costs, [[carbon dioxide]] emissions, and [[embedded energy]]. A secondary goal is to create a recommendation that would improve the overall functionality of the policy. Another goal was to create compelling comparisons for consumers. | ||
==Findings== | ==Findings== | ||
[[File:Mason Jar | [[File:Mason Jar EE Buyback.jpg|thumb|left|Embedded energy in the production of a single Mason jar by source as produced by [[Media:Mason Jar Analysis.xlsx|Mason Jar Analysis]].]] | ||
[[File:Mason Jar | [[File:Mason Jar CO2 Buyback.jpg|thumb|left|Embedded energy in the production of a single Mason jar by source as produced by [[Media:Mason Jar Analysis.xlsx|Mason Jar Analysis]].]] | ||
This study of Mason jars, paper cups, and plastic cups compared three metrics: [[carbon dioxide]] emissions, [[embedded energy]], and cost. It was concluded that the materials used, transport of, and disposal of a single mason jar requires 1. | This study of Mason jars, paper cups, and plastic cups compared three metrics: [[carbon dioxide]] emissions, [[embedded energy]], and cost. It was concluded that the materials used, transport of, and disposal of a single mason jar requires 1.7 kilowatt-hours of energy, is responsible for 0.47 pounds of [[carbon dioxide]] emissions, and are sold for $0.75. In comparison, a single paper cup is responsible for using 0.261 kilowatt-hours of energy, releasing 0.052 kilograms of [[carbon dioxide]], and costs $1.00. A single plastic cup is responsible for using 0.270 kilowatt-hours of energy, releasing 0.034 kilograms of [[carbon dioxide]] emissions, and costs $1.50. In order to abate the [[embedded energy]] and [[carbon dioxide]] emissions incorporated in a Mason jar, the Mason jar must be reused 7 times (energy) and 9 times (carbon dioxide), rather than purchase and dispose of a paper cup. As for the plastic cup, a mason jar must be reused 6 times (energy) and 14 times (carbon dioxide). | ||
{| class="wikitable" | {| class="wikitable" | ||
Line 26: | Line 21: | ||
|- | |- | ||
| Embedded Energy (kWh/unit) | | Embedded Energy (kWh/unit) | ||
| 1. | | 1.7 | ||
| 0. | | 0.261 | ||
| 0. | | 0.270 | ||
|- | |- | ||
| Carbon Dioxide (kg/unit) | | Carbon Dioxide (kg/unit) | ||
| 0. | | 0.469 | ||
| 0. | | 0.052 | ||
| 0. | | 0.034 | ||
|- | |- | ||
| Mason Jar Reuses | | Mason Jar Reuses | ||
Line 39: | Line 34: | ||
| n/a | | n/a | ||
| 7 | | 7 | ||
| | | 6 | ||
|- | |- | ||
| Mason Jar Reuses | | Mason Jar Reuses | ||
(Carbon Dioxide) | (Carbon Dioxide) | ||
| n/a | | n/a | ||
| | | 9 | ||
| | | 14 | ||
|- | |- | ||
|} | |} | ||
The calculations and assumptions used to obtain these results can be seen in further detail in the following spreadsheet: | The calculations and assumptions used to obtain these results can be seen in further detail in the following spreadsheet: | ||
*[[File:Mason Jar Analysis.xlsx]] | *[[File:Mason Jar Analysis.xlsx|Mason Jar Analysis.xlsx]] | ||
The spreadsheet allows for others interested in performing a similar analysis to easily input values pertaining to their particular study area. It is our hope that with this information and the pre-assembled spreadsheet, other institutions will be able to reach similar compelling conclusions that have the potential to influence future policies. | The spreadsheet allows for others interested in performing a similar analysis to easily input values pertaining to their particular study area. It is our hope that with this information and the pre-assembled spreadsheet, other institutions will be able to reach similar compelling conclusions that have the potential to influence future policies. | ||
==Mason Jars== | ===Mason Jars=== | ||
[[File:EE Mason.jpg|thumb|Embedded energy in the production of a single Mason jar by source as produced by [[Media:Mason Jar Analysis.xlsx|Mason Jar Analysis]].]] | [[File:EE Mason.jpg|thumb|Embedded energy in the production of a single Mason jar by source as produced by [[Media:Mason Jar Analysis.xlsx|Mason Jar Analysis]].]] | ||
[[File:CO2 Mason.jpg|thumb|Carbon Dioxide emissions from the production of a single Mason jar by source as produced by [[Media:Mason Jar Analysis.xlsx|Mason Jar Analysis]].]] | [[File:CO2 Mason.jpg|thumb|Carbon Dioxide emissions from the production of a single Mason jar by source as produced by [[Media:Mason Jar Analysis.xlsx|Mason Jar Analysis]].]] | ||
Line 69: | Line 64: | ||
|- | |- | ||
|Transportation | |Transportation | ||
| 0. | | 0.19 kWh/jar | ||
| 0. | | 0.052 kg CO<sub>2</sub>/jar | ||
|- | |- | ||
| Disposal | | Disposal | ||
| 0. | | 0.0055 kWh/jar | ||
| 0. | | 0.028 kg CO<sub>2</sub>/jar | ||
|- | |- | ||
|'''Total''' | |'''Total''' | ||
|'''1. | |'''1.7 kWh/jar''' | ||
|'''0. | |'''0.47 CO<sub>2</sub>/jar''' | ||
|- | |- | ||
|} | |} | ||
==Paper Cups== | ===Paper Cups=== | ||
[[File:EE Paper Cup.jpg|thumb|Embedded energy in the production of a single disposable paper cup by source as produced by [[Media:Mason Jar Analysis.xlsx|Mason Jar Analysis]].]] | [[File:EE Paper Cup.jpg|thumb|Embedded energy in the production of a single disposable paper cup by source as produced by [[Media:Mason Jar Analysis.xlsx|Mason Jar Analysis]].]] | ||
[[File:CO2 Paper Cup.jpg|thumb|Carbon Dioxide emissions from the production of a single disposable paper cup by source as produced by [[Media:Mason Jar Analysis.xlsx|Mason Jar Analysis]].]] | [[File:CO2 Paper Cup.jpg|thumb|Carbon Dioxide emissions from the production of a single disposable paper cup by source as produced by [[Media:Mason Jar Analysis.xlsx|Mason Jar Analysis]].]] | ||
Line 95: | Line 90: | ||
| Materials | | Materials | ||
| 0.25 kWh/cup | | 0.25 kWh/cup | ||
| 0. | | 0.05 kg CO<sub>2</sub>/cup | ||
|- | |- | ||
|Transportation | |Transportation | ||
| 0. | | 0.0026 kWh/cup | ||
| 0.001 kg CO<sub>2</sub>/cup | | 0.001 kg CO<sub>2</sub>/cup | ||
|- | |- | ||
Line 106: | Line 101: | ||
|- | |- | ||
|'''Total''' | |'''Total''' | ||
|'''0. | |'''0.26 kWh/cup''' | ||
|'''0. | |'''0.052 CO<sub>2</sub>/cup''' | ||
|- | |- | ||
|} | |} | ||
==Plastic Cups== | ===Plastic Cups=== | ||
[[File:EE Plastic Cup.jpg|thumb|Embedded energy in the production of a single disposable plastic cup by source as produced by [[Media:Mason Jar Analysis.xlsx|Mason Jar Analysis]].]] | [[File:EE Plastic Cup.jpg|thumb|Embedded energy in the production of a single disposable plastic cup by source as produced by [[Media:Mason Jar Analysis.xlsx|Mason Jar Analysis]].]] | ||
[[File:CO2 Plastic Cup.jpg|thumb|Carbon Dioxide emissions from the production of a single disposable plastic cup by source as produced by [[Media:Mason Jar Analysis.xlsx|Mason Jar Analysis]].]] | [[File:CO2 Plastic Cup.jpg|thumb|Carbon Dioxide emissions from the production of a single disposable plastic cup by source as produced by [[Media:Mason Jar Analysis.xlsx|Mason Jar Analysis]].]] | ||
Line 127: | Line 122: | ||
|- | |- | ||
|Transportation | |Transportation | ||
| 0. | | 0.0045 kWh/cup | ||
| 0. | | 0.001 kg CO<sub>2</sub>/cup | ||
|- | |- | ||
| Disposal | | Disposal | ||
Line 135: | Line 130: | ||
|- | |- | ||
|'''Total''' | |'''Total''' | ||
|'''0. | |'''0.270 kWh/cup''' | ||
|'''0. | |'''0.034 CO<sub>2</sub>/cup''' | ||
|- | |- | ||
|} | |} | ||
== | ==Impacts== | ||
Based off the calculations made above for the embedded energy, CO<sub>2</sub> emissions, and costs relating to each beverage container, various impacts on the HSU campus can be made. | |||
On a typical work day at HSU (Monday through Friday), it can be assumed that: | |||
*Mason jars: 75 jars sold | |||
*Paper cups: 100 cups sold | |||
*Plastic cups: 75 cups sold | |||
*Re-Usable Containers: 500 drinks sold | |||
Given that there are 146 work days in a year, the impacts below can be calculated: | |||
{| class="wikitable" | |||
|- | |||
! | |||
! Total Sold | |||
! Embedded Energy | |||
! CO<sub>2</sub> Emissions | |||
|- | |||
| Mason Jar | |||
| 10,950 jars | |||
| 18,558 kWh | |||
| 5,132 kg | |||
|- | |||
| Paper Cups | |||
| 14,600 cups | |||
| 3,806 kWh | |||
| 754 kg | |||
|- | |||
| Plastic Cups | |||
| 10,950 cups | |||
| 2,961 kWh | |||
| 375 kg | |||
|} | |||
= | In terms of the savings from the 500 refills, and assuming that the same ratio of paper and cups sold are now being avoided in those reusable refills, it can be said that: | ||
{| class="wikitable" | |||
|- | |||
! | |||
! Total Saved | |||
! Embedded Energy Savings | |||
! CO<sub>2</sub> Emissions Avoided | |||
|- | |||
| Paper Cups | |||
| 41,714 cups | |||
| 10,875 kWh | |||
| 2,154 kg | |||
|- | |||
| Plastic Cups | |||
| 31,286 cups | |||
| 8,460 kWh | |||
| 1,070 kg | |||
|- | |||
| '''Total''' | |||
| '''73,000 cups''' | |||
| '''19,335 kWh''' | |||
| '''3,224 kg''' | |||
|- | |||
|} | |||
The cost of 500 Mason jars equates to 847 kWh of embedded energy, and 234 kg CO<sub>2</sub> emissions. | |||
In total, this presents a savings of 18,488 kWh of energy, and 2,990 kg of CO<sub>2</sub> avoided. | |||
In addition, the value of 19,335 kWh saved outweighs the embedded energy in all of the mason jars purchased. So even if all of those mason jars purchased were single use, the savings would outweigh their embedded energy of 18,558 kWh. The same thing is not true for the embedded CO<sub>2</sub>. That said, the mason jars are not being used just once which makes mason jar implementation much more compelling. | |||
== | ==Comparisons== | ||
A number of comparisons have been made by each team which help understand the magnitude of the impacts of the policy change being analyzed in this report. These comparisons are represented as one or two lines of text on a relatable image, and are displayed in the gallery link below. | |||
*[[HSU mason jar comparisons]] | |||
*[[ | |||
==Research Synthesis== | ==Research Synthesis== | ||
====Embedded Energy, CO<sub>2</sub>, and Life Cycle Analysis Concepts==== | ====Embedded Energy, CO<sub>2</sub>, and Life Cycle Analysis Concepts==== | ||
<!-- | <!-- Does it make sense? --> | ||
During the spring of 2016, Humboldt State University chose to support the Kill the Cup Campaign, a national campaign to end the use of disposable coffee cups and to promote the use of reusable cups. After the Campaign ended, Waste Reduction and Resource Awareness Program (WRRAP), Zero Waste Humboldt, and Humboldt State University’s Dining services decided to sell Mason Jars as a way to promote the use of reusable cups. They are sold along side paper cups, but by reusing a mug instead of purchasing a paper cup, the coffee would costs less. This literature review, will go over the | During the spring of 2016, [[Humboldt State University]] chose to support the Kill the Cup Campaign, a national campaign to end the use of disposable coffee cups and to promote the use of reusable cups. After the Campaign ended, Waste Reduction and Resource Awareness Program (WRRAP), Zero Waste Humboldt, and Humboldt State University’s Dining services decided to sell Mason Jars as a way to promote the use of reusable cups. They are sold along side paper cups, but by reusing a mug instead of purchasing a paper cup, the coffee would costs less. This literature review, will go over the embedded energy and CO<sub>2</sub> emissions of the individual products, the energy and carbon impact of shipping the products, and disposal of the products, as well as creating a total energy and carbon dioxide impact of the product once the product is bought. | ||
Embodied or embedded energy (EE) is defined as the energy used during the entire life cycle of a product. For example, the EE of a mason jar or a disposable cup could include extraction and processing of raw materials, manufacturing, transportation, distribution, use, reuse, recycling and final disposal. EE calculations are used to conduct life cycle | Embodied or embedded energy (EE) is defined as the energy used during the entire life cycle of a product. For example, the EE of a mason jar or a disposable cup could include extraction and processing of raw materials, manufacturing, transportation, distribution, use, reuse, recycling and final disposal. EE calculations are used to conduct [[life cycle assessment]]s (LCA). LCA is a well-explored concept and has been used as an environmental management tool since the late 1960’s.<ref>Menzies, Gillian F., Seyhan Turan, and Philip FG Banfill. "Life-cycle assessment and embodied energy: a review."Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers-Construction Materials 160.4 (2007): 135-144</ref> LCA provides a tool for evaluating the relative environmental impact of various materials and calculates externalities otherwise excluded from pricing. Our LCA will include emissions and the EE of the materials and shipping.<ref>http://buildingsdatabook.eren.doe.gov/TableView.aspx?table=Notes/</ref> | ||
Some background information: | |||
* [http://thelumberjack.org/2016/04/27/mason-jars-on-campus/ Lumberjack article on the mason jars] | |||
* [http://now.humboldt.edu/news/students-promoting-kill-the-cup-contest/ Students Promoting ‘Kill the Cup’ Contest] | |||
* [[Media:HSU_149000_single_use_cups.pdf|Sign from 2015 regarding single use coffee cups on campus.]] | |||
====Embedded Energy and CO<sub>2</sub> Emissions in materials==== | ====Embedded Energy and CO<sub>2</sub> Emissions in materials==== | ||
'''Mason Jars''' | |||
{| class="wikitable sortable" | {| class="wikitable sortable" | ||
! Material !! Embedded Energy (MJ/kg) !! | ! Material !! Embedded Energy (MJ/kg) !! CO<sub>2</sub> Emissions (kg CO<sub>2</sub>/kg) | ||
|- | |- | ||
| Soda-Lime || 11 || .8 | | Soda-Lime || 11 || .8 | ||
Line 199: | Line 242: | ||
Stainless steel lid: 56.7 MJ/kg (EE), 6.15 (CO<sub>2</sub>E) <ref>http://www.viking-house.co.uk/downloads/ICE%20Version%201.6a.pdf</ref> | Stainless steel lid: 56.7 MJ/kg (EE), 6.15 (CO<sub>2</sub>E) <ref>http://www.viking-house.co.uk/downloads/ICE%20Version%201.6a.pdf</ref> | ||
'''Paper Cups''' | |||
Paper: 66 (Mj/Kg) . | *Paper: 25.66 (Mj/Kg), 1.29(kg CO<sub>2</sub>/kg)<ref name=”dart”>https://www.dartcontainer.com/media/1889/ilea.pdf </ref> | ||
*Glue: EE 61.67 MJ/kg; CO<sub>2</sub>E 1.3 kgCO<sub>2</sub>/kg | |||
*Lid (polycarbonate): EE 112.9 MJ/kg; CO<sub>2</sub>E 7.62 kgCO<sub>2</sub>/kg | |||
*Sleeve: EE 29.97 MJ/kg; CO<sub>2</sub>E 1.29 kgCO<sub>2</sub>/kg | |||
'''Plastic Cups''' | |||
Plastic: | Polylactide Plastic: EE 54.1 (Mj/Kg); CO<sub>2</sub>E 1.8 (kg CO<sub>2</sub>/kg) <ref>http://www.natureworksllc.com/~/media/The_Ingeo_Journey/EcoProfile_LCA/EcoProfile/NTR_CompleteLCA_EcoProfile_1102_pdf.pdf?la=en</ref> | ||
====Embedded Energy and CO<sub>2</sub> Emissions in Transportation==== | ====Embedded Energy and CO<sub>2</sub> Emissions in Transportation==== | ||
'''Transport by sea''' <ref>http://www.sname.org/HigherLogic/System/DownloadDocumentFile.ashx?DocumentFileKey=8fc28849-71a2-4f98-886f-7b5e7b8819a8</ref> | |||
*6,000 TEU Container Ship: Embedded Energy: 0.143 MJ/t/km | |||
*6,000 TEU Container Ship: CO<sub>2</sub>Emissions: 11.1 g/t/km | |||
*1,500,000 ton bulk carrier: Embedded Energy 0.027 MJ/t/km | |||
* | *1,500,000 ton bulk carrier: CO<sub>2</sub> Emissions 2.1 g/t/km | ||
For Diesel Fuel | '''Transport by Land''' | ||
For Trucks the Fuel efficiency of Class 8 Truck by Vehicle Weight Range on Flat Terrain at 65 mph 9.2 miles/gal <ref name="cta">http://cta.ornl.gov/vtmarketreport/pdf/chapter3_heavy_trucks.pdf</ref> which we then convert into km which is 14.8 km/gal. | |||
*For Diesel Fuel | |||
Energy intensity: 135.8 MJ/gal<ref>https://www.extension.iastate.edu/agdm/wholefarm/pdf/c6-87.pdf</ref> | Energy intensity: 135.8 MJ/gal<ref>https://www.extension.iastate.edu/agdm/wholefarm/pdf/c6-87.pdf</ref> | ||
Carbon Intensity 10.15 kg CO<sub>2</sub> /gal <ref name= “EIA”>http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=307&t=11</ref> | Carbon Intensity 10.15 kg CO<sub>2</sub> /gal <ref name= “EIA”>http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=307&t=11</ref> | ||
General embedded energy in shipping by land <ref>http://pubs.acs.org/doi/pdf/10.1021/es702969f</ref> | *General embedded energy in shipping by land <ref>http://pubs.acs.org/doi/pdf/10.1021/es702969f</ref> | ||
traveled by truck: 2.7 MJ/ t-km | traveled by truck: 2.7 MJ/ t-km | ||
Line 241: | Line 288: | ||
====Embedded Energy and CO<sub>2</sub> Emissions in Disposal==== | ====Embedded Energy and CO<sub>2</sub> Emissions in Disposal==== | ||
It was found that Humboldt State University sends it's | It was found that Humboldt State University sends it's waste to landfills at Redding, CA and at Medford, OR <ref>https://humboldtgov.org/DocumentCenter/View/4203</ref> | ||
Humboldt State also sends their Recyclable | Humboldt State also sends their Recyclable waste to Willits, CA <ref>http://www.northcoastjournal.com/humboldt/the-recyclable-journey/Content?oid=2166785</ref> and to Strategic Material in San Leandro, CA | ||
The efficiency for a variety of trash trucks was averaged at 3 miles per gallon which was then converted to km instead of miles<ref>http://www.cert.ucr.edu/events/pems2014/liveagenda/25sandhu.pdf</ref> which ended being 4.8 km/gal. | |||
Diesel Energy | Diesel Energy intensity: 135.8 MJ/gal<ref>https://www.extension.iastate.edu/agdm/wholefarm/pdf/c6-87.pdf</ref> | ||
Carbon Intensity 10.15 kg CO<sub>2</sub> /gal <ref>http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=307&t=11</ref> | Carbon Intensity 10.15 kg CO<sub>2</sub> /gal <ref>http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=307&t=11</ref> | ||
Line 262: | Line 307: | ||
*Explore alternate options as to whether or not other viable products have the potential to reduce the embedded energy or carbon dioxide emissions from any of the beverage containers. | *Explore alternate options as to whether or not other viable products have the potential to reduce the embedded energy or carbon dioxide emissions from any of the beverage containers. | ||
*Determine outlets for promoting and distributing this research to make it widely accessible. | *Determine outlets for promoting and distributing this research to make it widely accessible. | ||
*Partnership with other CSUs to strive towards waste, energy, and CO2 reduction initiatives. | |||
==Teams== | |||
===TEAM 1=== | |||
*[[Carlos Arreola]], [[User:Wess62|Rufus Brown]], [[User:Jcb290 |Jesus Cornejo]], [[User:Njr220|Nick Rasmussen]] | |||
===TEAM JAR-JAR BINKS=== | |||
*[[User:CarolineJane25|Caroline Stoddard]], [[User:mcl450|Michael Lyons]], [[User:alfonsoh|Alfonso Herrera]], [[User:klw573|Kendra Wong]] | |||
===The Jarheads=== | |||
*[[User:Mnf148|Melissa Fawcett-Routh]], [[User:kan324|Katherine Nunes-Siciliani]], [[User:nitopoop|Juan Miranda]] | |||
===FREE MASONS=== | |||
*[[User:Cro106|Christina O’Neill]], [[User:Rcg211|Rebeca Griner]], [[User:Hwb26|Henry Baker]] | |||
===Jar-Droppers=== | |||
*[[User:Kelsey_Summers|Kelsey Summers]], [[User:Jsalinas|Josh Salinas]], [[User:Solis_Jennifer|Jennifer Solis]], [[User:Jmyres|James Myres]] | |||
===Meta Team=== | |||
*[[User:Sjhawkins1|Skyler Hawkins]], [[User:Hcp82|Henry Panti]], [[User:Nsvoma7|Nick Svoma]], [[User:Clay_Smeback|Clay Smeback]] | |||
==References== | ==References== | ||
{{Reflist}} | |||
[[Category:Engr308 Technology and the Environment]] | [[Category:Engr308 Technology and the Environment]] | ||
[[Category:Humboldt State University]] | [[Category:Humboldt State University]] | ||
[[Category:Life cycle analysis]] | [[Category:Life cycle analysis]] |
Revision as of 07:24, 11 December 2016
Introduction
This page is the compilation of a research project in partnership between Engr308 Technology and the Environment, The Sustainability Office, and Dining Services at Humboldt State University during Fall 2016. The client leads on this project are
- Morgan King, Sustainability & Waste Coordinator
- Katie Koscielak, Sustainability Analyst
- Ron Rudebock, Director of Dining Services
The objective of this project is to analyze and compare the effects of the HSU policy and pricing regarding mason jars and disposables in terms of its monetary costs, carbon dioxide emissions, and embedded energy. A secondary goal is to create a recommendation that would improve the overall functionality of the policy. Another goal was to create compelling comparisons for consumers.
Findings
This study of Mason jars, paper cups, and plastic cups compared three metrics: carbon dioxide emissions, embedded energy, and cost. It was concluded that the materials used, transport of, and disposal of a single mason jar requires 1.7 kilowatt-hours of energy, is responsible for 0.47 pounds of carbon dioxide emissions, and are sold for $0.75. In comparison, a single paper cup is responsible for using 0.261 kilowatt-hours of energy, releasing 0.052 kilograms of carbon dioxide, and costs $1.00. A single plastic cup is responsible for using 0.270 kilowatt-hours of energy, releasing 0.034 kilograms of carbon dioxide emissions, and costs $1.50. In order to abate the embedded energy and carbon dioxide emissions incorporated in a Mason jar, the Mason jar must be reused 7 times (energy) and 9 times (carbon dioxide), rather than purchase and dispose of a paper cup. As for the plastic cup, a mason jar must be reused 6 times (energy) and 14 times (carbon dioxide).
Mason Jar | Paper Cup | Plastic Cup | |
---|---|---|---|
Embedded Energy (kWh/unit) | 1.7 | 0.261 | 0.270 |
Carbon Dioxide (kg/unit) | 0.469 | 0.052 | 0.034 |
Mason Jar Reuses
(Embedded Energy) |
n/a | 7 | 6 |
Mason Jar Reuses
(Carbon Dioxide) |
n/a | 9 | 14 |
The calculations and assumptions used to obtain these results can be seen in further detail in the following spreadsheet:
The spreadsheet allows for others interested in performing a similar analysis to easily input values pertaining to their particular study area. It is our hope that with this information and the pre-assembled spreadsheet, other institutions will be able to reach similar compelling conclusions that have the potential to influence future policies.
Mason Jars
The Mason jars analyzed in this study were the 16 oz wide-mouth glass jars with a steel ring and rubber sealed, stainless steel lid. The jars were produced by the company Jarden Home Brands based out of Fishers, Indiana, and were transported to Humboldt State University in Arcata, California. The jars are purchased by the pallet for $0.59 per jar, and are sold for $0.75 each, generating a profit of $0.16 per jar. It was estimated that about 2% of all the jars purchased were thrown out, and 3% were recycled.
Output | Embedded Energy | Carbon Dioxide Emissions |
---|---|---|
Materials | 1.49 kWh/jar | 0.39 kg CO2/jar |
Transportation | 0.19 kWh/jar | 0.052 kg CO2/jar |
Disposal | 0.0055 kWh/jar | 0.028 kg CO2/jar |
Total | 1.7 kWh/jar | 0.47 CO2/jar |
Paper Cups
The paper cups analyzed in this study were the 16 oz disposable Karat Earth “ONE Earth” cups. These cups were produced by the company LolliCup based out of Chino, California, and were transported to Humboldt State University in Arcata, California. The cups are purchased by the pallet for $0.08 per cup, and are sold for $1.00 each, generating a profit of $0.92 per cup. It was estimated that 100% of all the paper cups purchased were thrown out.
Output | Embedded Energy | Carbon Dioxide Emissions |
---|---|---|
Materials | 0.25 kWh/cup | 0.05 kg CO2/cup |
Transportation | 0.0026 kWh/cup | 0.001 kg CO2/cup |
Disposal | 0.008 kWh/cup | 0.002 kg CO2/cup |
Total | 0.26 kWh/cup | 0.052 CO2/cup |
Plastic Cups
The plastic cups analyzed in this study were the 16 oz disposable Karat Earth PLA eco-friendly cups. The cups were produced by the company LolliCup based out of Chino, California, and were transported to Humboldt State University in Arcata, California. The cups are purchased by the pallet for $0.12 per cup, and are sold for $1.50 each, generating a profit of $1.38 per cup. It was estimated that 100% of all the plastic cups purchased were thrown out.
Output | Embedded Energy | Carbon Dioxide Emissions |
---|---|---|
Materials | 0.26 kWh/cup | 0.031 kg CO2/cup |
Transportation | 0.0045 kWh/cup | 0.001 kg CO2/cup |
Disposal | 0.006 kWh/cup | 0.002 kg CO2/cup |
Total | 0.270 kWh/cup | 0.034 CO2/cup |
Impacts
Based off the calculations made above for the embedded energy, CO2 emissions, and costs relating to each beverage container, various impacts on the HSU campus can be made. On a typical work day at HSU (Monday through Friday), it can be assumed that:
- Mason jars: 75 jars sold
- Paper cups: 100 cups sold
- Plastic cups: 75 cups sold
- Re-Usable Containers: 500 drinks sold
Given that there are 146 work days in a year, the impacts below can be calculated:
Total Sold | Embedded Energy | CO2 Emissions | |
---|---|---|---|
Mason Jar | 10,950 jars | 18,558 kWh | 5,132 kg |
Paper Cups | 14,600 cups | 3,806 kWh | 754 kg |
Plastic Cups | 10,950 cups | 2,961 kWh | 375 kg |
In terms of the savings from the 500 refills, and assuming that the same ratio of paper and cups sold are now being avoided in those reusable refills, it can be said that:
Total Saved | Embedded Energy Savings | CO2 Emissions Avoided | |
---|---|---|---|
Paper Cups | 41,714 cups | 10,875 kWh | 2,154 kg |
Plastic Cups | 31,286 cups | 8,460 kWh | 1,070 kg |
Total | 73,000 cups | 19,335 kWh | 3,224 kg |
The cost of 500 Mason jars equates to 847 kWh of embedded energy, and 234 kg CO2 emissions.
In total, this presents a savings of 18,488 kWh of energy, and 2,990 kg of CO2 avoided.
In addition, the value of 19,335 kWh saved outweighs the embedded energy in all of the mason jars purchased. So even if all of those mason jars purchased were single use, the savings would outweigh their embedded energy of 18,558 kWh. The same thing is not true for the embedded CO2. That said, the mason jars are not being used just once which makes mason jar implementation much more compelling.
Comparisons
A number of comparisons have been made by each team which help understand the magnitude of the impacts of the policy change being analyzed in this report. These comparisons are represented as one or two lines of text on a relatable image, and are displayed in the gallery link below.
Research Synthesis
Embedded Energy, CO2, and Life Cycle Analysis Concepts
During the spring of 2016, Humboldt State University chose to support the Kill the Cup Campaign, a national campaign to end the use of disposable coffee cups and to promote the use of reusable cups. After the Campaign ended, Waste Reduction and Resource Awareness Program (WRRAP), Zero Waste Humboldt, and Humboldt State University’s Dining services decided to sell Mason Jars as a way to promote the use of reusable cups. They are sold along side paper cups, but by reusing a mug instead of purchasing a paper cup, the coffee would costs less. This literature review, will go over the embedded energy and CO2 emissions of the individual products, the energy and carbon impact of shipping the products, and disposal of the products, as well as creating a total energy and carbon dioxide impact of the product once the product is bought.
Embodied or embedded energy (EE) is defined as the energy used during the entire life cycle of a product. For example, the EE of a mason jar or a disposable cup could include extraction and processing of raw materials, manufacturing, transportation, distribution, use, reuse, recycling and final disposal. EE calculations are used to conduct life cycle assessments (LCA). LCA is a well-explored concept and has been used as an environmental management tool since the late 1960’s.[1] LCA provides a tool for evaluating the relative environmental impact of various materials and calculates externalities otherwise excluded from pricing. Our LCA will include emissions and the EE of the materials and shipping.[2]
Some background information:
- Lumberjack article on the mason jars
- Students Promoting ‘Kill the Cup’ Contest
- Sign from 2015 regarding single use coffee cups on campus.
Embedded Energy and CO2 Emissions in materials
Mason Jars
Material | Embedded Energy (MJ/kg) | CO2 Emissions (kg CO2/kg) |
---|---|---|
Soda-Lime | 11 | .8 |
Float Glass | 15.511 | 1.136 |
Primary Glass | 15.00 | .86 |
Secondary Glass | 11.50 | .55 |
Fiberglass | 28.00 | 1.54 |
Toughened | 23.50 | 1.27 |
"Not recycled: 8.4 kg CO2E per kilogram of glass
Recycled : 1.4 kg CO2E per kilogram of glass" [5]
Stainless steel lid: 56.7 MJ/kg (EE), 6.15 (CO2E) [6]
Paper Cups
- Paper: 25.66 (Mj/Kg), 1.29(kg CO2/kg)[7]
- Glue: EE 61.67 MJ/kg; CO2E 1.3 kgCO2/kg
- Lid (polycarbonate): EE 112.9 MJ/kg; CO2E 7.62 kgCO2/kg
- Sleeve: EE 29.97 MJ/kg; CO2E 1.29 kgCO2/kg
Plastic Cups
Polylactide Plastic: EE 54.1 (Mj/Kg); CO2E 1.8 (kg CO2/kg) [8]
Embedded Energy and CO2 Emissions in Transportation
Transport by sea [9]
- 6,000 TEU Container Ship: Embedded Energy: 0.143 MJ/t/km
- 6,000 TEU Container Ship: CO2Emissions: 11.1 g/t/km
- 1,500,000 ton bulk carrier: Embedded Energy 0.027 MJ/t/km
- 1,500,000 ton bulk carrier: CO2 Emissions 2.1 g/t/km
Transport by Land
For Trucks the Fuel efficiency of Class 8 Truck by Vehicle Weight Range on Flat Terrain at 65 mph 9.2 miles/gal [10] which we then convert into km which is 14.8 km/gal.
- For Diesel Fuel
Energy intensity: 135.8 MJ/gal[11]
Carbon Intensity 10.15 kg CO2 /gal [12]
- General embedded energy in shipping by land [13]
traveled by truck: 2.7 MJ/ t-km
Traveled by Truck: 180 (t CO2E / t-km x 10^6)
General embedded CO2 in shipping by land 80 g/tonne/km[16]
Embedded Energy and CO2 Emissions in Disposal
It was found that Humboldt State University sends it's waste to landfills at Redding, CA and at Medford, OR [17]
Humboldt State also sends their Recyclable waste to Willits, CA [18] and to Strategic Material in San Leandro, CA
The efficiency for a variety of trash trucks was averaged at 3 miles per gallon which was then converted to km instead of miles[19] which ended being 4.8 km/gal.
Diesel Energy intensity: 135.8 MJ/gal[20]
Carbon Intensity 10.15 kg CO2 /gal [21]
Next Steps
After completing the initial analysis, there are various alterations to the methods that could be made to create even more accurate results. These include:
- What are people's methods of washing the Mason jars? Is it significant enough to change the final outputs?
- How often are Mason jars actually reused compared to the number that are purchased simply due to the lower price?
- Include accurate reports of overall sales increases/decreases of Mason jars and disposables after implementation of the policy.
- Determine the volume of waste avoided by the implementation of a policy such as this.
- Calculate the embedded energy and carbon dioxide emissions in each unit produced by the manufacturing facilities, and the acquisition of the raw materials.
- Explore alternate options as to whether or not other viable products have the potential to reduce the embedded energy or carbon dioxide emissions from any of the beverage containers.
- Determine outlets for promoting and distributing this research to make it widely accessible.
- Partnership with other CSUs to strive towards waste, energy, and CO2 reduction initiatives.
Teams
TEAM 1
TEAM JAR-JAR BINKS
The Jarheads
FREE MASONS
Jar-Droppers
Meta Team
References
- ↑ Menzies, Gillian F., Seyhan Turan, and Philip FG Banfill. "Life-cycle assessment and embodied energy: a review."Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers-Construction Materials 160.4 (2007): 135-144
- ↑ http://buildingsdatabook.eren.doe.gov/TableView.aspx?table=Notes/
- ↑ Ashby, M. (2012). Materials and the Environment - Eco-informed Material Choice.
- ↑ http://www.viking-house.co.uk/downloads/ICE%20Version%201.6a.pdf
- ↑ http://www.greenrationbook.org.uk/resources/footprints-glass
- ↑ http://www.viking-house.co.uk/downloads/ICE%20Version%201.6a.pdf
- ↑ https://www.dartcontainer.com/media/1889/ilea.pdf
- ↑ http://www.natureworksllc.com/~/media/The_Ingeo_Journey/EcoProfile_LCA/EcoProfile/NTR_CompleteLCA_EcoProfile_1102_pdf.pdf?la=en
- ↑ http://www.sname.org/HigherLogic/System/DownloadDocumentFile.ashx?DocumentFileKey=8fc28849-71a2-4f98-886f-7b5e7b8819a8
- ↑ http://cta.ornl.gov/vtmarketreport/pdf/chapter3_heavy_trucks.pdf
- ↑ https://www.extension.iastate.edu/agdm/wholefarm/pdf/c6-87.pdf
- ↑ http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=307&t=11
- ↑ http://pubs.acs.org/doi/pdf/10.1021/es702969f
- ↑ http://cta.ornl.gov/data/chapter2.shtml
- ↑ http://www.dot.ca.gov/trafficops/trucks/quickguide.html
- ↑ http://www.ics-shipping.org/docs/co2,
- ↑ https://humboldtgov.org/DocumentCenter/View/4203
- ↑ http://www.northcoastjournal.com/humboldt/the-recyclable-journey/Content?oid=2166785
- ↑ http://www.cert.ucr.edu/events/pems2014/liveagenda/25sandhu.pdf
- ↑ https://www.extension.iastate.edu/agdm/wholefarm/pdf/c6-87.pdf
- ↑ http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=307&t=11