|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|||||
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||
Acceptance Of Source Reduction Through New Residents Outreach |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Site | # of Mowings |
# of Weeks |
Reduction % |
| Lakeview Avenue Ctr Divider | 5 | 12 | 58.34% |
| Dey Mansion | 6 | 12 | 50.00% |
| Garrett Mountain | 5 | 12 | 58.34% |
| Lambert Castle | 5 | 12 | 58.34% |
| Nike Site | 5 | 12 | 58.34% |
| Camp Hope | 3 | 12 | 75.00% |
| W. Paterson Municipal Complex | 6 | 12 | 50.00%* |
| Vital Signs, Inc. | 4 | 12 | 66.67% |
| 4 Homeowners | 21 | 12 | 56.30% |
* Note: includes one mowing needed to cut dandelion seed heads.
In June the shag or practice field and the Tintle Park area adjacent to the Passaic County Golf Course were added to the treated areas and both were mowed four (4) times in nine (9) weeks for a mowing reduction of 55.6 percent. The fairway and greens on the Passaic County Golf Course that were treated were mowed approximately every other day as is the normal maintenance practice, but it took less time since there were less clippings to cut, a fifty (50) percent reduction in overall mowing time.
SPECIAL PROBLEMS WITH WEEDS
While PrimoR was highly effective on the turf grasses at the test sites, the product had no effect on weeds. During the May applications, the visual effect of a slowed grass growth was overpowered by these weeds. Broad-leaved weeds (dandelions, broad and narrow leafed plantain, chickweed, etc.) that grow and flower during this Spring period were prominent. At least one site was mowed strictly for weeds.
Because of this problem a weed killer was incorporated into the application for the appropriate sites in June. This proved to be quite successful, but the maximum benefit in future years would be its use in the May and even better with the Fall treatments, to kill the weeds before they can grow and flower in the Spring.
Overall Tonnage and Cost Savings
Although the research project did not cover an entire grass growing season, some projections on savings could be made.
A previous study done by the Passaic County Office of Recycling and Solid Waste Programs determined that a 5,000 square foot lawn area produced one (1) ton of grass clippings over the entire growing season. Using this overall grass production rate, as well as the fact that a typical lawn area will be mowed an average of twenty five (25) times during a growing season, an average amount per mowing can be determined to be 80 pounds.
2,000 pounds grass clippings / 25 mowings = 80 pounds per mowing
The three (3) applications of PrimoR reduced the number of mowings from twelve (12), a normal schedule of one mowing per week, to five (5) in almost all the test cases. This indicates an average savings of just under 60% (58.34%).
At an estimated 80 pounds per mowing, the conservative estimated savings for the growing season alone is 560 pounds of grass clippings.
In a similar vein, another study using Passaic County residential sector cooperators, following the Grass - Cut It and Leave It lawn care program, reported that they mowed their lawn areas an extra 5- 6 times during the peak growing seasons in order to always cut the top one (1) inch of grass. Use of a growth regulator would not only eliminate these extra mowings but would reduce the overall mowing schedule.
Any time a mowing can be eliminated or done in a shorter period of time, a number of savings can be realized: an employees' time can be diverted to another task, wear and tear on equipment is reduced, emission and noise pollution is cut down and the most important, the amount of grass clippings are reduced.
Vital Signs, one of the corporate facilities in our demonstration project, had an outside landscape contractor maintain its property, including mowing slightly less than an acre of grass weekly. With mowings down by 50 percent, the company saved half of the $500.00 a month usually paid to the landscaper. This translated into a net saving of $2,700.00 for the entire growing season including the cost and professional application of the chemical.
For County and Municipal governments who do their grass mowing with in-house personnel, our research showed that an employee's lawn care time can be cut in half and although an actual dollar savings is not realized, that time saved can be used to perform other tasks. With most governmental agencies down-sizing, this extra time is like money in the bank.
Although strictly not a financial matter, the safety of workers is a major concern. Mowing of a center divider (Lakeview Avenue) with two lanes of traffic in each direction, steep sloping areas (Lambert Castle), Garret Mountain and West Paterson Municipal Complex) or shag fields (practice driving golf balls) are all areas which present hazards to maintenance workers.
PRODUCT APPLICATION NOTES
Soil moisture is a critical factor when applying PrimoR. Low moisture levels (when the grass begins to show drought stress) is not a desirable time to make an application. Temporary yellowing can result although the grass soon begins to green up when soil moisture levels increase.
Concern over product use on annual bluegrass noted at the County Golf Course led to the addition of chelated iron to avoid any potential yellowing.
Project Conclusions
The Passaic County Office of Recycling and Solid Waste Programs sees the handling of grass clippings not just as a major source of compost product for home use, but also as a very important component of the County's overall source reduction efforts.
The Passaic County Yard Waste Management Programs and Research Projects were run under the direction and oversight of Professor Bruce Van Duyne, Rutgers University Senior Agricultural Agent, who's work continued with the Passaic County Office of Recycling and Solid Waste Management even after his retirement from over thirty years of service to residents and businesses in the State of New Jersey.
The following study was completed in the Fall of 1993:
Project Plan
Since yard waste accounts for approximately 20% of the County's waste stream, this area was seen as an excellent area for promoting source reduction techniques. Using the look of the original Grass - Cut It and Leave It logo, as well as the concept that the logo is the program message, similar logos were developed to encourage brush chipping and leaf composting.
During workshop sessions held in the Fall of 1992, volunteer cooperators were secured to measure the amount of leaves diverted from municipal collection by distributing uniform sized compost units made of recycled corrugated cardboard to 100 residents. Reports of program data were collected by the County and compiled in an effort to compare the results with the Seattle, Washington backyard composting project.
At the mid-year point, sixty (60) cooperators received a 150-gallon biodegradable, 100% recycled and 100% recyclable composters made by the Delvin & Taylor Company along with an instruction guide and a comprehensive book on backyard composting. As a reward to those who completed the research project, each cooperator received a 12 cubic foot Toro Yardcycler Composter.
Each cooperator was asked to weigh all their yard wastes by type and to report the information on a quarterly basis. This portion of the program was scheduled to run for an entire calendar year in order to include the various seasonal yard debris normally generated.
Project Results
Preparations for Fall of 1992 included an agreement with Toro Corporation to become a program sponsor, making 15 mulching mowers available for give-a-ways at various County-sponsored outreach events.
Most of the programs efforts concentrated on review of program materials, gathering research data from similar backyard composting projects in other parts of the country and data evaluation for the County backyard composting cooperators project.
Of the sixty (60) cooperators that originally agreed to weigh their yard waste for a full year, forty four (44) completed the project and received Toro composters to encourage continued composting.
The greatest amounts of yard waste by weight reported as composted were grass (64%) and leaves (26%). Other waste types reported were brush, weeds, spent flowers and vegetable plants, and prunings (each at 2%). Evaluating the reported yard waste by volume would obviously show leaves as the major material composted.
| Amount and Percentage of Yard Waste Composted | |||
Material |
Pounds |
Percent |
Avg. lbs/yd. |
| Grass | 60,241 | 64% | 1,369 |
| Leaves | 24,552 | 26% | 558 |
| Veg./Fls. | 2,298 | 2% | 52 |
| Evergreens | 2,601 | 2% | 59 |
| Brush | 1,605 | 2% | 36 |
| Weeds | 1,173 | 1% | 27 |
| Other (twigs, sawdust, etc.) | 2,083 | 2% | 47 |
| Total | 94,553 | 99% | 2,148 |
Ninety percent (90%) of the yard wastes composted by weight in this program were reported as leaves and grass, with grass being almost two-thirds of the total weight.1
If the demonstration project had been calculated by volume rather than weight, the results would have been just the opposite with leaves occupying a much greater space. It is important to keep in mind that 100 pounds of leaves will produce 20 pounds of compost, whereas 100 pounds of grass only produces 5 pounds of compost.
The forty four (44) cooperators cared for a total of 6.55 acres or 275,233 square feet of property and reported an average of 2,148 pounds of yard waste.
Based on calculations that eliminated non-yard waste producing areas such as driveways and sidewalks a 1,000 square foot area produced an average of 444 pounds of yard waste.
These results differed greatly from the Seattle, Washington compost research project which reported that approximately 207 pounds of yard waste materials were composted for every 1,000 square feet of yard area. This difference can be attributed to the fact that the Seattle area consists primarily of coniferous varieties of trees while the Passaic County area has an abundance of old growth deciduous trees.
It should be pointed out that since leaves have been banned from landfills and transfer stations in New Jersey for a number of years, County-wide solid waste data would not have provided information on the impact of the outreach program. Municipalities were asked to track the impact on their leaf collections and composting programs, but review of this data, both on a weekly and monthly basis, showed little program impact.
Not including staff time, the year 3 program costs totaled slightly over $5,000 for the purchase of composters and program literature.
A home owner can now determine the potential yard waste generated simply by determining the square footage of his yard (subtracting the house, driveway, sidewalk, etc.) and multiplying that by 444 pounds (the above mentioned average).2
Notes:
1. This should not be totally surprising, since grass is 85 % water when cut while leaves are brown with a low percentage of moisture.
2. It should be kept in mind that a yard that is predominantly grass with few trees will be different than one with large shade trees, a vegetable garden plus a lawn.
ADDITIONAL DATA
Even though food waste is not usually considered to be yard waste, twenty-seven (27) of the cooperators composted some or all of their fruit and vegetable scraps, coffee grinds, tea bags and egg shells in with their yard waste. A total of 3,781 pounds were reported as composted (an average of 140 pounds per participating cooperator). The range was between 18 pounds all the way to 334 pounds.
On the final survey, only one of the cooperators reported any odor or rodent problem with the food waste. Food waste having a C:N ratio of 15:1, hastens the decomposition of leaves and other brown debris by supplying extra nitrogen to the leaves which have a ratio of 60:1. In addition, five (5) of the respondents buried some of their kitchen wastes in unused areas of their flower or vegetable garden.
Project Conclusions
The Passaic County Office of Recycling and Solid Waste Programs sees yard waste composting not just as a major source of compost product for home use, but also as an important component of the County's overall source reduction efforts.
The Passaic County Yard Waste Management Programs and Research Projects were run under the direction and oversight of Professor Bruce Van Duyne, Rutgers University Senior Agricultural Agent, who's work continued with the Passaic County Office of Recycling and Solid Waste Management even after his retirement from over thirty years of service to residents and businesses in the State of New Jersey.
The following study was completed in the February of 1995:
Project Plan
Passaic County has made a strong commitment to a revised waste management plan. Source reduction, reducing or eliminating waste before it's generated, is now the first step in solid waste management. Since yard waste accounts for approximately 20% of the County's waste stream, this area was seen as an excellent starting point for promoting source reduction techniques.
During 1992 Rinds & Peels - Compost It With Worms was developed and refined to be the focus of the outreach efforts during the Winter of 1993. Kitchen wastes (fruit and vegetable scraps, coffee grounds, tea bags and egg shells) can be successfully composted, mixed with leaves and other yard waste debris or incorporated into an unused portion of a flower or vegetable garden. However, there are situations and times of the year when outdoor composting may not be possible.
Apartment dwellers may not have any access to backyard composting facilities. Also, residents need a means to compost food waste during the colder winter months. Additionally, some people are physically unable or are just unwilling to go outside continuously to dispose of their kitchen scraps.
Red worms eat their weight in food scraps every day and the vermapost they create makes an excellent potting mix.
Many of the program materials were developed as a cooperative effort of the Passaic County Office of Recycling and Solid Waste Programs and the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and Energy's Office of Recycling. Additional information was obtained from biologist Mary Appelhof's excellent publication "Worms Eat My Garbage". Most of the project costs were funded by State grants. Materials developed for distribution included an instruction sheet for making a worm farm, as well as a ruler and game sheet featuring "Wiggles the Worm".
A total of one hundred twenty-three (123) cooperators volunteered to compost a portion of their kitchen scraps in 5 gallon pails for a nine (9) month period. Eighty-one (81) cooperators completed at least three (3) months of the program.
Each cooperator was given a mixture of shredded newspaper, leaf compost and approximately seventy-five (75) red worms; an instruction sheet on the proper care of the worms as well as their known likes and dislikes as far as food was concerned; and a reporting form to record food waste on a weekly basis. This form asked the cooperators to weigh or measure their food waste weekly and to report their results to us on a quarterly basis.
Project Results - Phase I Research
From the data submitted by the eighty-one (81) cooperators an average generation was calculated.
A total of 1,705 pounds of food waste were composted in a period of 1,653 weeks giving an average of just over (1) pound per week.
It should be noted that several "vegetarian" families produced almost six (6) pounds of food waste per week. These figures confirm our own offices' experience. Our experimental 5 gallon containers handled approximately one (1) pound of food waste per week. Any additional food waste brought on odor and fruit fly problems.
To facilitate record keeping, the cooperators reported their results in a manner most convenient to them, either weight (pounds or ounces) or volume (cup, pint or quart).
All data, as reported, was converted to weight, based on the following conversions:
VOLUME = WEIGHT
Cooperators were encouraged to experiment with various types of food wastes with the exception of milk, yogurt, meat and meat by- products, cheese, etc. These foods are not acceptable as food for red worms, since the worms do not have the ability to digest protein.
Some of the food items which the cooperators reported as being successfully fed during the project included small pieces of bread, rolls, cookies, cold (dry) cereal, plant materials (daffodil bulbs, rose petals, house plant clippings), cut up corn husks and uncooked pasta.
Outdoor Use Results
A few of the cooperators had excessive amounts of food waste and decided to mix the materials with their yard wastes in an outdoor composter.
A total of three hundred twenty (320) pounds of food waste was composted in a seventy-eight (78) week period, averaging just over four (4) pounds per week.
This figure compares favorably with published figures that a family of four (4) will produce three (3) to four (4) pounds of compostable food waste per week. The Winter 1993 Backyard Composting Study showed an average of one hundred and forty (140) pounds per year was composted in backyard operations. This averages almost three (3) pounds per household per week.
Tonnage Data Comparisons
Even though composting of food waste does not produce a large amount of compost in comparison to leaves and grass, the material is nutrient rich from the worm castings and is an excellent material for potting plants or starting seeds.
The following chart shows the dramatic differences in compost production:
WEIGHT YARD WASTE =COMPOST PRODUCED
Compost Use
Our office has experimented with seeds started in a variety of commercial as well as home mixes of soil/compost. Those seeds started in food waste compost developed in a manner equal to and in most cases superior to the commercial and home mixes.
Fifty-two (52) cooperators responding to the final survey, saying that they planned to continue food waste composting indoors, outdoors or in combination. Additionally, excess worms were either incorporated into their compost pile or buried in a flower or vegetable garden.
The success of this portion of the program continues to draw attention to the rest of the program components.
Project Results - Phase II Research
One of the comments most frequently made by the cooperators was the fact that they had more food waste than they could compost in a 5 gallon pail. Based on this, as well as the fact that there is very little information in existing literature on the amount of food waste that can be composted in a home setting, the demonstration project was expanded to secure additional data. The Passaic County Office of Recycling and Solid Waste Programs purchased forty (40) Worm-A-Way brand composters and distributed them to cooperators, most of whom were involved in the Phase I project. With these larger twelve (12) gallon containers, designed with an aeration system, cooperators were again asked to monitor food waste consumption, record this on a weekly basis and send in their reports quarterly.
This phase of the program also ran for a nine (9) month period. Originally scheduled to begin in early January of 1994, the severe winter prevented access to the humus needed to set up the compost units since the outdoor compost pile was frozen solid. The actual distribution took place in mid-March, after the thaw.
As in Phase I of the project, the forty (40) cooperators tracked their food waste on a weekly basis. Again, cooperators were encouraged to experiment with alternative plant origin foods, while reminded not to use meat or other animal related products.
A total of sixteen hundred twenty two (1,622) pounds of food waste were composted in a cumulative period of nine hundred forty (940) weeks, yielding an average of 1.73 pounds per week.
A very interesting and perhaps more meaningful trend can be seen when the various time periods are compared to each other.
The average food waste disposed of per week gradually increased during the test period, from 1.35 to 2.00 lbs. These reports are probably due to the fact that the red worms began to increase in number, enabling more food to be consumed.
A number of the cooperators reported having an excess number of worms. These cooperators started another container for themselves, gave the worms to another person to start a composter, or put the extra worms in their outdoor compost pile.
Outdoor Use
Nine (9) of the cooperators reported having an excess of food waste, beyond what their "Worm-A-Way" container could hold.
The nine (9) cooperators composted four hundred and forty eight (448) pounds of food waste in a cumulative one hundred and seven (107) week period, averaging slightly over four (4) pounds per week.
These figures confirm two (2) previous studies conducted by the Passaic County Office of Recycling and Solid Waste Programs regarding the amount of compost produced by an average family.
Combining both Phase I and Phase II data, slightly over one (1) ton of food waste was composted.
The comments of the cooperators indicated that the project involved very little work and was generally fun to do. None reported any odors or other related problems. Most importantly, the weight and volume of trash which would normally have been disposed of in the traditional manner was reduced.
Tonnage Data Comparisons
Food waste composting with red worms does not produce a large amount of compost in comparison to leaves and grass. This fact may actually be beneficial for apartment dwellers and residents with limited space. Even though short on quantity, the material obtained is nutrient rich from the worm castings and is an excellent material for potting plants and starting seeds.
The following chart shows the dramatic differences in compost production:
WEIGHT YARD WASTE =COMPOST PRODUCED
Project Conclusions
The Passaic County Office of Recycling and Solid Waste Programs sees food waste composting not just as a major source of compost product for home use, but also as a very important component of the County's overall source reduction efforts.
