Corporate Waste Research

Report
DRAFT
Prepared For



Prepared By




May 22, 2014

Table of Contents
Slide Number
General Research Project Notes 3
Participation Rates and Data Analysis 8
Executive Summary 13
Detailed Findings 16
Monthly Generated and Diverted Waste 17
Recycling Activities 24
Association Scorecards 33
2
GENERAL RESEARCH PROJECT
NOTES
3
Project Background
• The City of Dallas, home to more than 1.2 million residents, generates a
total of 2.2 million tons of solid waste each year from residents,
businesses, industries, and governmental facilities.
− The majority of this waste is buried in landfills. Landfill space is
becoming increasingly limited, and more than 85% of waste can be
diverted from landfills to other reusable sources.
• As the waste industry evolves to include more waste diversion tools and
opportunities, so too is the City of Dallas.
− The City has implemented the Local Solid Waste Management Plan.
The first phase of the Plan aims to increase the amount of waste
diverted by Dallas businesses through education and voluntary
programs.
− The goal is to have 40% diversion by 2020, 60% diversion by 2030,
and zero waste by 2040.
• The City of Dallas partnered with Decision Analyst to conduct an Internet
survey within the commercial sector in Dallas to gauge and track waste
practices.

4
Research Objectives
• The primary objective of this research is to track levels of waste
generation and diversion among commercial businesses (including
office buildings, apartments, and hotels) over time.
− This tracking data will quantify the behavioral changes as a result
of outreach.
• Additional research objectives include:
− Understanding how diversion rates vary by:
 Type of property
 Facility size
− Identifying barriers to diverting waste.
− Tracking survey participation rates in total and by industry.


5
Research Methodology
Kick-off
meeting
Survey
development
Online survey
programming
Recruitment
and online
data collection
Data analysis Report writing
Presentation
of results
6
The research will occur in two waves.
Wave 1
• Status: Completed
• Purpose: To collect benchmark waste
diversion data
• Conducted December 2013 through
February 2014
Wave 2
• Status: To occur in January/February
2015
• Purpose: To assess the success of
programs/pilot projects implemented in
2014
Wave 1 Steps
Survey review
Online survey
programming
edits
Recruitment
and online
data collection
Data analysis Report writing
Presentation
of results
Wave 2 Steps
Sample Sources and Recruitment
• The City of Dallas and Decision Analyst worked closely with three local
commercial-property organizations to recruit appropriate properties for
survey participation.

7
Building Owners and
Managers
Association Dallas
(BOMA)
Apartment
Association of
Greater Dallas
(AAGD)
Hotel Association of
North Texas
(Hotels)
• These three associations prepared lists of potential respondents, sent
email invitations, and followed up with reminder emails as needed.
• Sanitation Services also sent email reminders to the properties.
• During the last two weeks of data collection, phone call reminders to each
property were used to boost participation. This process was managed by
Decision Analyst.
PARTICIPATION RATES AND
DATA ANALYSIS
8
Survey Participation Rates
• Data collection occurred December 16, 2013 through February 7, 2014.
• Each respondent was able to enter waste management information for up to
three properties. (This is the reason that the actual number of properties in
the report is higher than the number of surveys completed [reported below].)

9
Number of surveys completed = 44
Number of survey invitations sent = 209
BOMA
Response Rate
21%
Number of surveys completed = 160
Number of survey invitations sent = 673
AAGD
Response Rate
24%
Number of surveys completed = 24
Number of survey invitations sent = 173
Hotels
Response Rate
14%
22% Overall Response Rate
Outlier Analysis
• An outlier analysis was performed to identify any properties whose data was
outside of the norm.
• Generated waste and diverted waste numbers were compared to property
characteristics such as square footage, number of units, and number of
tenants. If a property’s generated or diverted waste numbers were either too
high or too low considering the property size, then the property was flagged
as an outlier and omitted from analysis.

10
Number of Properties That Were
Identified as Outliers
BOMA 19
AAGD 16
Hotels 1
Data Analysis by Property Size
• Properties were also categorized by size for analysis.
• Definitions for small, medium, and large properties differed by property type.



11
Definition of Property Size
Number of Properties
Included in Results
BOMA
Small property 0 to 249,999 property square feet 12
Midsized property 250,000 to 999,999 property square feet 17
Large property 1,000,000+ property square feet 9
AAGD
Small property 0 to 199 units 53
Midsized property 200 to 399 units 72
Large property 400+ units 32
Hotels
Small property 0 to 150 hotel rooms 7
Midsized property 151 to 500 hotel rooms 11
Large property 501+ hotel rooms 5
Analysis Notes
• All reported data is aggregated across respondents and properties to ensure
anonymity.
− Thus, the data reported are averages across the groups.
• Sample sizes for some analytic subgroups are small and should be
interpreted with caution.


12
Sample Size Strength of Statistical Analysis
N = 100+ Strong
N = 50-100 Moderate, should be interpreted with mild caution
N = <50
Weak, should be interpreted with extreme caution and
should be treated as directional in nature
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
13
Executive Summary of Findings:
Waste Diversion
• The average monthly diversion rate among commercial properties in Dallas
was 9%. However, diversion rates varied greatly by property type and
property size.
− Office buildings had the highest diversion rate (21%).
− Apartment buildings and hotels had similar diversion rates (6% and 10%,
respectively).
− For BOMA and AAGD, the larger the property, the higher the diversion
rate. This trend, however, did not occur among hotels.
− Note: Diversion Rate = Diverted Waste Tons / Generated Waste Tons
 The numbers reported above are averages. The average diversion
rate among all properties surveyed was 9%. Calculating the average
of the individual associations’ diversion rates (21%, 6%, and 10%)
does not equal the grand average of 9% because the number of
surveyed properties from each association differed. For instance,
since more BOMA properties completed the survey than Hotel
properties, the Hotel property diversion rates are underrepresented in
the overall average compared to BOMA property diversion rates.
14
Executive Summary of Findings:
Recycling Activities
• Roughly half of all properties surveyed recycle (48%).
− Recycling was highest among office properties (84%) and lowest among
multifamily properties (37%).
− The top reasons for not recycling included not having enough space, and
property owners/managers not requesting it.
• Forty percent of office properties offered paper shredding programs.
• Fewer properties (14%-17%) composted/mulched landscaping waste.
− Composting/Mulching rates were higher among BOMA properties (32-37%)
than AAGD (11-15%) or Hotel (9-13%) properties.
• Twenty percent of all properties recycled specialty items, the most popular being
batteries, light bulbs, and electronics.
• Not surprisingly, hotels were the most likely properties to recycle organics (22%).
• Twenty-one percent of properties surveyed have waste diversion goals or timelines
in place.
− Hotels were most likely to have goals or timelines in place (44%).
15
DETAILED FINDINGS
16
Monthly Generated and Diverted
Waste
17
Average Monthly Generated Waste Per Property
18
Base: N = 218 Total Properties, with n = 38 BOMA, n = 157 AAGD, and n = 23 Hotels
28.26
27.23
27.68
33.91
20.00
30.00
40.00
50.00
Wave 1
(January 2014)
Wave 2
(January 2015)
All
Properties
BOMA
AAGD
Hotels
T
o
n
s

(Tons) Mean (Average) Range Median (Midpoint Response)
All Properties 28.26 1.00 - 279.77 19.29
BOMA 27.23 4.00 - 168.96 18.70
AAGD 27.68 1.00 - 128.52 20.16
Hotels 33.91 1.89 - 279.77 15.77
Generated Waste = Trash/Waste + Recycles + Organics
Average Monthly Generated Waste Per Property
By Property Size
19
27.23
9.88
21.38
61.43
0.00
20.00
40.00
60.00
80.00
100.00
Wave 1
(January 2014)
Wave 2
(January 2015)
BOMA by Property Size
T
o
n
s

33.91
11.88
27.68
78.48
0.00
20.00
40.00
60.00
80.00
100.00
Wave 1
(January 2014)
Wave 2
(January 2015)
Hotels by Property Size
T
o
n
s

27.68
12.11
27.01
54.94
0.00
20.00
40.00
60.00
80.00
100.00
Wave 1
(January 2014)
Wave 2
(January 2015)
AAGD by Property Size
T
o
n
s

All Association Properties
Small Properties
Midsized Properties
Large Properties
Base: N = 218 Total Properties, with n = 38 BOMA, n = 157 AAGD, and n = 23 Hotels
Average Monthly Diverted Waste Per Property
20
T
o
n
s

(Tons) Mean (Average) Range
Median
(Midpoint Response, Excluding 0)
All Properties 2.18 0.00 – 42.03 1.64
BOMA 5.48 0.00 – 29.31 4.18
AAGD 1.29 0.00 – 42.03 1.10
Hotels 2.77 0.00 – 13.77 3.11
2.18
5.48
1.29
2.77
0.00
10.00
20.00
Wave 1
(January 2014)
Wave 2
(January 2015)
All
Properties
BOMA
AAGD
Hotels
Diverted Waste = Recycles + Organics
Base: N = 218 Total Properties, with n = 38 BOMA, n = 157 AAGD, and n = 23 Hotels
Average Monthly Diverted Waste Per Property
By Property Size
21
5.48
1.10
3.48
15.08
0.00
10.00
20.00
Wave 1
(January 2014)
Wave 2
(January 2015)
BOMA by Property Size
T
o
n
s

2.77
1.97
2.49
4.52
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
Wave 1
(January 2014)
Wave 2
(January 2015)
Hotels by Property Size
T
o
n
s

1.29
0.45
0.89
3.59
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
Wave 1
(January 2014)
Wave 2
(January 2015)
AAGD by Property Size
T
o
n
s

All Association Properties
Small Properties
Midsized Properties
Large Properties
Base: N = 218 Total Properties, with n = 38 BOMA, n = 157 AAGD, and n = 23 Hotels
Average Monthly Diversion Rate Per Property
22
9%
21%
6%
10%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
Wave 1
(January 2014)
Wave 2
(January 2015)
All
Properties
BOMA
AAGD
Hotels
Diversion Rate = Diverted Waste Tons / Generated Waste Tons
Base: N = 218 Total Properties, with n = 38 BOMA, n = 157 AAGD, and n = 23 Hotels
Average Monthly Diversion Rate Per Property
By Property Size
23
21%
11%
23%
29%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
Wave 1
(January 2014)
Wave 2
(January 2015)
BOMA by Property Size
6%
5%
6%
8%
0%
5%
10%
Wave 1
(January 2014)
Wave 2
(January 2015)
AAGD by Property Size
10%
12%
7%
11%
0%
10%
20%
Wave 1
(January 2014)
Wave 2
(January 2015)
Hotels by Property Size
All Association Properties
Small Properties
Midsized Properties
Large Properties
Base: N = 218 Total Properties, with n = 38 BOMA, n = 157 AAGD, and n = 23 Hotels
Recycling Activities
24
Properties That Recycle
25
48%
Total Properties
Surveyed That Recycle
84%
37%
61%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Wave 1 (January 2014) Wave 2 (January 2015)
BOMA
AAGD
Hotels
Base: N = 218 Total Properties, n = 38 BOMA, n = 157 AAGD, and n = 23 Hotels
Q5. What type(s) of recycle container(s), if any, do you have at this location?
(Did not select Recycle collection is not offered at this property nor This property recycles specialty items only.)
Specialty Items That Are Recycled
26
12%
11%
9%
7%
5%
6%
5%
4% 4%
1%
1% 0 1%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Wave 1 (January 2014) Wave 2 (January 2015)
Base: N = 218 Total Properties (n = 44 recycle specialty items)
Q17b. What specialty recycling items are collected at this property?
Note: This question was asked only of the properties that indicated specialty recycling is available. Percentages are reported
among the total sample to show what percentage of all properties surveyed recycle these items.
20%
Total Properties Surveyed That
Recycle Specialty Items
Properties That Recycle Organics
27
6%
Total Properties Surveyed
That Recycle Organics
Base: N = 218 Total Properties, n = 38 BOMA, n = 157 AAGD, and n = 23 Hotels
Q6. What type(s) of organics container(s) do you have at this location?
(Did not select Organics collection is not offered at this property.)
3.60
Average Number of Organic Tons
Recycled Per Month Among Those
That Participate
3%
5%
22%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
Wave 1 (January 2014) Wave 2 (January 2015)
BOMA
AAGD
Hotels
Paper Shredding
28
Base: N = 38 BOMA Properties
Q7a. Does this property offer a shredding program to tenants?
Q17a. How many pounds or tons are removed from shredded paper containers at this property monthly?

40%
Total BOMA Properties
Surveyed That Shred Paper
% of BOMA Properties That Shred
Small property 17
Midsized property 47
Large property 56
3.51
Average Number of Tons of Paper Shredded
Per Month Among Those That Shred
17%
Properties Surveyed That
Compost/Mulch Grass
Landscaping Waste Diversion
29
Compost/
Mulch
Grass
%
Compost/
Mulch
Leaves
%
Compost/
Mulch
Brush
%
BOMA (Total) 37 32 32
Small property 50 50 50
Midsized property 29 18 18
Large property 33 33 33
AAGD (Total) 14 15 11
Small property 6 8 4
Midsized property 15 17 11
Large property 25 22 22
Hotels (Total) 9 13 9
Small property -- 14 --
Midsized property 9 9 9
Large property 20 20 20
Base: N = 218 Total Properties, n = 38 BOMA, n = 157 AAGD, and n = 23 Hotels
Q7b. Which, if any, of the following types of landscaping waste does this property compost or mulch?
17%
Properties Surveyed That
Compost/Mulch Leaves
14%
Properties Surveyed That
Compost/Mulch Brush
Waste Diversion Plans
30
Base: N = 218 Total Properties, n = 38 BOMA, n = 157 AAGD, and n = 23 Hotels
Q18. Does this property have recycling or waste diversion goals or timelines in place?
21%
Total Properties Surveyed That Have
Waste Diversion Goals and Timelines in
Place
26%
16%
44%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
Wave 1 (January 2014) Wave 2 (January 2015)
BOMA
AAGD
Hotels
Waste Diversion Plans By Property Size
31
Base: N = 218 Total Properties, with n = 38 BOMA, n = 157 AAGD, and n = 23 Hotels
26%
8%
24%
56%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Wave 1
(January 2014)
Wave 2
(January 2015)
BOMA by Property Size
16%
8%
19%
22%
0%
10%
20%
30%
Wave 1
(January 2014)
Wave 2
(January 2015)
AAGD by Property Size
44%
0%
73%
40%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
Wave 1
(January 2014)
Wave 2
(January 2015)
Hotels by Property Size
All Association Properties
Small Properties
Midsized Properties
Large Properties
Properties That Do Not Recycle
32
52%
Total Properties
Surveyed That Do Not
Recycle
BOMA
%
AAGD
%
Hotels
%
Reasons for not recycling
Not enough space 50 39 50
Owners/ Managers have not requested it -- 41 50
Tenants/Guests have not requested it -- 33 17
Equipment/Staff training is too expensive 17 24 17
Tenant/Guest education is too expensive 17 15 17
15%
23%
31%
39%
40%
0% 25% 50% 75% 100%
Tenant/Guest eduation is too expensive
Equipment/Staff training is too expensive
Tenants/Guests have not requested it
Owners/Managers have not requested it
Not enough space
Reasons for Not Recycling
(Properties Could Select Multiple Answers)
Base: N = 105 Properties That Do Not Recycle and Who Were Asked, n = 6 BOMA, n = 93 AAGD, and n = 6 Hotels
Q7c. You mentioned that this property does not offer recycling. For what reasons is recycling not offered?
Association Scorecards
33
BOMA Findings
34
40%
37%
32% 32%
37%
32%
29%
18%
16%
13%
5%
8%
5% 5%
0% 0% 0%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Wave 1 (January 2014) Wave 2 (January 2015)
16% Do Not
Recycle
Top Reason:
Not enough space
(50%)
84% Recycle
Small
Prop.
(58%)
Midsized
Prop.
(94%)
Large
Prop.
(100%)
Number of
Tenants
• Range = 4 to 2,000
• Average = 130
• Median = 27
Number of
Buildings
• Range = 0 to 4
• Average = 1.3
• Median = 1
Square Footage
• Range = 28,000 to 2,000,000
• Average = 566,688
• Median = 307,189
Average Diversion Rate Per Property
21%
January 2014
%
January 2015
Diversion Rate =
Diverted Waste Tons / Generated Waste Tons
26%
Have
Waste
Diversion
Goals
and
Timelines
in Place
AAGD Findings
35
14% 15%
11%
3% 3% 2% 3% 3%
1%
3%
1%
0% 0%
1%
0% 0%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Wave 1 (January 2014) Wave 2 (January 2015)
63% Do Not
Recycle
Reasons Include:
Property
owners/
managers
haven’t
requested
(41%)
Not enough
space
(39%)
37% Recycle
Small
Prop.
(30%)
Midsized
Prop.
(35%)
Large
Prop.
(53%)
Number of Residents
• Range = 0 to 1,600
• Average = 464
• Median = 328
16%
Have
Waste
Diversion
Goals
and
Timelines
in Place
Number of Units
• Range = 1 to 904
• Average = 288
• Median = 248
Average Diversion Rate Per Property
6%
January 2014
%
January 2015
Diversion Rate =
Diverted Waste Tons / Generated Waste Tons
Hotels Findings
36
9%
13%
9%
30% 30%
22% 22%
0%
30%
13% 13%
26%
4%
0% 0%
4%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Wave 1 (January 2014) Wave 2 (January 2015)
39% Do Not
Recycle
Reasons Include:
Property
owners/
managers
haven’t
requested
(50%)
Not enough
space
(50%)
61% Recycle
Small
Prop.
(14%)
Midsized
Prop.
(73%)
Large
Prop.
(100%)
Number of Guests Annually
• Range = 1,500 to 700,000
• Average = 112,886
• Median = 80,000
44%
Have
Waste
Diversion
Goals
and
Timelines
in Place
Number of Hotel Rooms
• Range = 50 to 1,606
• Average = 370
• Median = 248
Average Diversion Rate Per Property
10%
January 2014
%
January 2015
Diversion Rate =
Diverted Waste Tons / Generated Waste Tons