Grantee Research Project Results
2016 Progress Report: Exchange Network for Expanded Polystyrene Bio-Shipping Containers
EPA Grant Number: SU835731Title: Exchange Network for Expanded Polystyrene Bio-Shipping Containers
Investigators: Middlecamp, Catherine , Lindstrom, Timothy , Martin, Brooke , Conradt, Aaron
Current Investigators: Benson, Craig H. , Middlecamp, Catherine , Lindstrom, Timothy , Hicks, Andrea , Markley, Andrew , Kooistra, Frank , Bradshaw, Sabrina , Baumann, Emily , Budke, Katelyn , Ottmann, Jared , Walsh, Jenna , Marten, Brooke , Cupp, David , Liang, Lulu , Conradt, Aaron , Markel, Tyler , Tijoe, Marco , McCall, Benjamin , Bartels, Bart , Harris, Olivia , Panganiban, Christy , Gatdula, Aaron , Peterson, Chelsea , Delgado, Maria , Bizot, Ray , Webb, Olivia , Tirakian, Colin , Xu, Hantao , Grego, Lorenzo , Juarez, Diana , Valko, Phil , Hage, Cassandra
Institution: University of Wisconsin - Madison
EPA Project Officer: Hahn, Intaek
Phase: II
Project Period: September 1, 2014 through August 31, 2016 (Extended to August 31, 2017)
Project Period Covered by this Report: September 1, 2015 through August 31,2016
Project Amount: $88,111
RFA: P3 Awards: A National Student Design Competition for Sustainability Focusing on People, Prosperity and the Planet - Phase 2 (2014) Recipients Lists
Research Category: P3 Challenge Area - Sustainable and Healthy Communities , P3 Challenge Area - Chemical Safety , Sustainable and Healthy Communities
Objective:
This project aims to reduce the landfilling of expanded polystyrene (EPS, aka StyrofoamTM) containers on university campuses. Furthermore, we hope to provide metrics and protocols that will be useful to other universities.
Biological research on a university campus depends on the timely delivery of temperature-sensitive reagents. The most common way to ship these reagents is in expanded polystyrene. Typical reagent containers have three components: an exterior cardboard box, an interior EPS container, and freezer gel packs. The cardboard box is readily recycled or reused. The freezer gel packs, if present, get reused or discarded as waste. The EPS container is the object of this study.
Nearly all of these EPS containers have lifetime. That is, once the container is opened, the EPS shifts from a critical asset (protective package) to a liability (campus waste). Handling the EPS container in a mixed-stream recycling program is either cost-prohibitive or not feasible due to the incompatibility of EPS with other plastics at materials recycling facilities. Consequently, virtually no EPS shipping containers are recycled which results in significant waste and lost value to the biotechnology industry.
During Phase I of this project, our team set up an EPS container collection program on the UW-Madison campus for analysis, reuse, and recycling of this material. The EPS containers were aggregated and delivered to Uniek, a local company that densifies the product and remanufactures it into polystyrene picture frames.
Our team also encouraged the reuse of EPS containers locally through contacts we made with local biotech companies, small businesses, and the University surplus store. For example, the local Madison St. Vincent de Paul thrift stores were willing to accept EPS containers for reuse. These stores were able to quickly sell these items; however, we suspect that the buyers eventually discarded the EPS containers in the trash, so that they subsequently were sent to the landfill. Therefore, while local reuse can extend the lifetime of EPS containers, it does not necessarily solve the problem of end-of-life disposition.
During Phase II of this project, our team worked to expand EPS recycling on the UW-Madison campus and to implement the system we developed and optimized in Phase I at two other research universities: Washington University in St Louis and the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC). The success of the UW-Madison operation is not extraordinary; thus, it should be possible to replicate this program at other institutions.
Phase II of the project also began to address several questions: Do EPS shipping containers have an inherent value that can generate a long-term revenue stream in order to reduce the cost of these collection programs? Can a robust lifecycle assessment help to better evaluate the environmental impacts of different EPS end-of-life scenarios?
Because the grant had an end date of August 2016 and work still remained, we requested a no-cost extension to continue the work of Phase II into the 2016-2017 academic year. This report gives our progress through September 2016.
Progress Summary:
- In the first year of Phase II, we named our project "Boxable," designed a logo, and produced an EPS recycling and reuse program implementation manual. This document is freely available to programs at other universities. See Appendix A.
- By designing and putting into practice better collection protocols, our Boxable team increased the efficiency of the EPS collection system on campus. Collection costs were reduced by more than 50% in the first year of Phase II. This was accomplished by changing the method of collection, aggregating the material on site rather than at a central location. These operating costs have remained largely unchanged in the second year of Phase II, with minor expenses for signage and repairs to collection cages.
- These collection programs will continue through the 2016/17 academic year. As of October 2016, EPS is collected from 22 sites on campus. We also have several new requests from buildings to be included in the collection program, including potential high-volume locations such as the Wisconsin Institutes for Medical Research (WIMR). The collection team honors special pickup requests on occasion as they are able, but in general the demand on campus for EPS recycling is outpacing our collection resources.
- In collecting about ten bags (1-2 cubic yards) of EPS from campus buildings each week, we are diverting approximately a semi-truck full of EPS each month from the landfill. The EPS currently is going to Uniek, a local polystyrene recycling company in Waunakee, about 10 miles from Madison.
- Starting in 2013, we began conversations with Promega, a biotech company close to Madison. Our hope was that Promega would reuse the EPS boxes if they were returned to them. We began the takeback program in fall 2015, and Promega picked up about 100 boxes that we collected on campus. However, we learned shortly thereafter that Promega was recycling these boxes rather than reusing them, so we stopped this practice. We also learned in 2015 that Promega had discontinued their mail-back box reuse program.
- In 2015, we identified SimaPro as the LCA software appropriate for this project. SimaPro is a highly technical and extensive LCA software used in industry and academia for conducting robust LCAs. In February of 2016 we purchased the SimaPro software license with P3 grant funding. While learning to use SimaPro without formal training is a slow process, we are making progress toward producing a robust LCA that compares EPS end-of-life scenarios for recycling, reuse, and landfill. See Appendix B.
- As part of this grant, we are collaborating with Washington University and the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC) to assist these institutions in the development of their own EPS collection programs. We were not able to purchase capital equipment for them (a densifier) under the terms of this grant; nonetheless, the collaborations have proved to be useful:
- The UIUC program is successfully operating. See Appendix C.
This report was prepared by Marco Tjioe, a graduate student and research assistant in physics at UIUC. He has been our primary contact for the past year and is supervising several student interns, all listed in his report.
- The Washington program is also successfully operating. The General Service Manager for the Physical Plant reports that there are five pickup locations on the School of Medicine campus that are collected on a weekly basis. Their collection of EPS fills a 40-yard dumpster every two weeks, which is then hauled to a recycling center in Earth City and densified. Washington also reports that their biggest challenge currently relates to hauling costs. They pay $200 for each haul, whereas a trip to the landfill costs $75. They are currently willing to pay the excess fees to keep EPS out of the landfill, but the cost-effectiveness of recycling is a persistent challenge for them. They are currently weighing other options, including purchasing a small densifier so they can recycle EPS on campus.
We are able to support their efforts through the purchase of supplies that they request to outfit their collection sites. They are using our "blueprint" in setting up their programs, learning from us through our successes and setbacks.
Future Activities:
At UW-Madison, we are well on the way to creating a robust EPS recycling and reuse system. Even so, we've encountered unexpected obstacles, including those due to our own campus protocols. As might be expected, our work is raising questions as quickly as it answers them.
At present, one of the pressing questions is how to conduct a life cycle assessment that can be used to guide future decisions. Those on our campus want to know actual costs as well as environmental costs before they decide to permanently allocate resources to an EPS recycling and reuse program. We expect that the use of SimaPro will aid us in this analysis.
We are testing the extent to which our findings are scalable to universities across the country. In 2016, we hope to finish implementing EPS recycling programs at our two partner universities and obtain data from these universities so we can evaluate their performance and outcomes. We have also been contacted by the Sustainability Programs Coordinator at Emory University who was eager to speak with us about Boxable and how a similar collection operation might be implemented at her institution. Upon speaking with our graduate student advisor, she asked to reference Boxable at a panel discussion she had organized at the International Institute for Sustainable Laboratories (I2SL) conference in Kansas City. Between the successful implementation of sister programs at UIUC and Washington and the interest shown by other institutions, we feel there are encouraging signals about both the scalability and widespread implementation of these kinds of programs at institutions of higher education.
Assurances: Assurance that research misconduct has not occurred during the reporting period. EPA defines research misconduct as fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results [65 FR 76262. I], or ordering, advising or suggesting that subordinates engage in research misconduct.
Journal Articles:
No journal articles submitted with this report: View all 3 publications for this projectSupplemental Keywords:
reuse, recycling, expanded polystyrene, insulated shipping containers, biotech, campus initiativesRelevant Websites:
Progress and Final Reports:
Original AbstractP3 Phase I:
Exchange Network for Expanded Polystyrene Bio-Shipping Containers | Final ReportThe perspectives, information and conclusions conveyed in research project abstracts, progress reports, final reports, journal abstracts and journal publications convey the viewpoints of the principal investigator and may not represent the views and policies of ORD and EPA. Conclusions drawn by the principal investigators have not been reviewed by the Agency.