Currently, lawns are fertilized with a processed sewage waste chemical called HouActinite.  Each year, 17 tons of lawn fertilizer are purchased by the University and spread on the grounds here.  This fertilizer costs $4140 each year (Ron Smith, interview).  Treatment of sewage waste in the production of this fertilizer, as well as transportation to the campus, generate some environmental impact.   The nitrogen-phosphorous-potassium composition of this fertilizer is 9-3-6 (Ron Smith, interview).

Proposed Action

• Centralized Composting - This only requires the purchase of a single large system and allows all of the composting to be controlled in one place.  It also requires the use of one large spot on campus (already identified and photographed behind Central Kitchen.)  It does keep high transportation due to moving the waste material across campus to the composting system.
• Decentralized Composting - This requires the purchase of many smaller composting units and spreads out the composting across campus.  This only requires several small spots on campus (already identified and photographed behind each college kitchen).  This plan is able to cut down on transportation since the material is hauled to the nearest composting station, instead of to a single location.
• Off-campus Composting - This requires no purchase and no space on campus, but does require a higher operational fee, as well as needing to buy the compost back from the company.  It also adds even more transportation to the already high transportation impact.

Neither the centralized nor the decentralized engineered systems have reported any significant problems with odor, rodent, or insect problems.  Only the vermicomposting system, if not sealed tightly or if other directions are not followed, such as if meat scraps are thrown in, may there be any odor or pest problems.  The current system only involves mulching mowers, a de facto compost pile at the parking lot behind the new Butcher Hall, and moderate to significant expenditures per year, as seen from the proposed savings in the total savings row in the second table above.

The costs and specs of the different plans are based on quotes from BioResource Management and Beaver River Vermicomposting (BioResource Management Page and Beaver River Page 1997).  The costs saved per year are based on the replacement of mulch and HouActinite fertilizer with compost (but not deep root fertilizer) as well alleviating the need to pay disposal costs for wood, paper, and food.  There may even be the potential to sell surplus compost or donate it to a local benefit.  In the decentralized systems there is also the potential to save fuel and labor due to the decreased transportation afforded by dropping off yardwaste at the nearest bin.

The different composting methods are described as follows:

• Windrows - These are large piles of composting materials that are piled up, occasionally turned and allowed to decompose.  It requires a tilling machine or lots of labor to accomplish, as well as lots of land to hold the piles.
• Passive - This method uses a large pile of composting material that has pipes imbedded in it to provide aeration and remove the need for tilling.  This still requires a lot of space to use.
• Engineered system - This is a sealed, self-regulating system that automatically regulates the various pertinent factors of composting (like temperature, moisture and oxygen levels).  These also usually have biofilters to remove odors from the exhaust air.  These are usually more compact and compost at an accelerated rate due optimizing the conditions.
• Vermicomposting - This is using worms to compost for you.  This requires that you keep the conditions in the composting bin favorable or else the worms will die off and new worms must be purchased (and good composting worms are expensive).
• Biodigesters - This method uses anaerobic composting to produce methane as well as rich compost.  The methane can then be collected, cleaned, and used for fuel purposes.  This has great potential if coupled with Rice's cogen plant.
• Wooden bins - This is a cheaper option of composting based on "back-yard" composting.  The conditions of the compost must be regulated and manual tilling is sometimes necessary.
• Off-campus composting company - This option produces even more transportation impact than before the inaction of composting.  It also requires the payment of the company to take our raw materials, and further payment to get the finished compost back from them.

As determined by Ron Smith, Head of Groundskeeping, Area 1 is the most heavily maintained area (including Founders Court, the President's House and Jones and Brown Colleges) while Area 5, the perimeter, is the least heavily maintained area.  Area 2 - Academic Quad; Area 3 - Engineering Quad and the Rice Prairie; Area 4 - Main residential colleges and the playing fields behind Wiess and Hanszen College.

The 2 orange areas, maintained by the Athletic Department's own grounds crew, are the only ones not maintained by the grounds maintenance department.  Areas 1-4 all require 2 maintenance workers while Area 5 is handled by 1 employee.  There are 3 workers for the intramural playing fields, 2 arborists for all the shrubs and hedges, 2 mowers for the lawns, 1 chemical specialist to apply the pesticide and fertilizer, 2 furniture/other movers, 2 for solid waste removal, and 1 for recycling pick-up.  In total, there are approximately 17-22 grounds maintenance workers employed by Rice year round with more added for special events such as Commencement.

Campus Debris Flow:  All leaves, wood chips, shrubs, food and other solid wastes go around the Inner Loop towards Central Kitchen.  Leaves and wood chips presently end up at the lot behind new Butcher Hall near Entrance 13 in Area 3 (see orange rectangle).

Back to Exterior Spaces Page

Back to Bake 302 Page