Daylight Harvesting

What is it?

One of the more common automation systems that is often used in schools is daylight harvesting. This approach to reducing electric light when daylight is available also has the benefit of reducing energy. Typical daylight harvesting systems use photosensors to detect the amount of daylight coming in through windows or on surfaces and adjust artificial lighting accordingly. While manual lighting and shading systems exist, automated systems ensure that the light levels meet minimum illuminance levels throughout the day coupled with occupancy sensors, only providing light when it is needed. Daylight systems can be integrated into automatic shading and building automation systems for enhanced control. 

How big an investment are Daylight Management Systems?

The control systems cost on average $0.55-0.75 per square foot of building area. This cost includes dimmable ballasts, fixtures, and controls. Additional costs will be incurred to include shading devices and integrate with building automation systems.

What are the sustainable benefits?

School districts spend between 20-25% of their energy costs on lighting1. Optimal daylight is typically between noon and 4pm which is the same time when other building systems are being maximized. By utilizing daylight harvesting systems, schools can decrease total energy costs by up to one-third, including reductions in demand charges as well as cooling loads in addition to the lighting reductions2. Further savings can be achieved by coupling daylight harvesting with building automation systems for integrated control with HVAC systems.

Several studies have demonstrated the benefits to student performance through natural daylight. The Heschong Mahone group found that students working in the most natural light had increases of 20% in math and 26% in reading assessments, compared to students working in limited daylight. In addition, learning rates were 21% better in classrooms with the most daylight compared to those with none3. 

Daylighting strategies that are enhanced by shading and other building features such as light shelves that can also help to reduce glare. Direct sun penetration into classrooms, especially through unshaded east or south facing windows, is associated with negative student performance, likely causing both glare and thermal discomfort4. Sources of glare have been shown to negatively impact student learning, especially math, where instruction often takes places on the front teaching wall. By adding blinds or curtains, teachers also have more control of distractions which can impact student performance3.

1 XcelEnergy - Guide to Energy Conservation and Savings for K12 Schools

2 Ander, G. (2011, August). Daylighting. Whole Building Design Guide

3 Heschong Mahone Group - Windows and Offices: a Study of Office Worker Perofmance and the Indoor Environment

4 2017. Schools for Health: Foundations for Student Success. Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health.

Green Building Certifications

What is it?

Green building certifications provide a pathway for building owners to gain recognition of the emphasis on environmental management in their design. The development of Green Building Certifications began in the early 2000s with the launch of the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) rating system developed by the US Green Building Council. At the time, there were few practitioners focused purely on designing buildings that balanced resource utilization and the impact on the environment. 

The LEED rating system has seen exponential growth. While it had a slow start, by 2009, 2,200 commercial projects had been certified, a number that has grown to 32,500 in 2017, and 80,000 projects overall1. Over the past few years, new rating systems and certifications focusing on specific types of buildings and specialties have emerged, including those focused on health, school buildings, and the residential sector. 

For educational facilities, the two most common rating systems for schools are LEED and CHPS (Collaborative for High Performance Schools). These certifications both provide a rubric for implementing practices into the building design and construction that is then verified by a third party review. Strategies are awarded a point value from a list of possible categories which could include: water, energy, transportation, operations & maintenance, and landscaping. Depending on the number of strategies implemented, the building can earn a certification and recognition for the team’s efforts.

How big an Investment is the certification?

The value in certification goes beyond the plaque or certificate received after construction is completed. Critics often cite the high cost of administering certificates, but the value proposition must be broadened to include the real changes in your building that have measurable impacts. The costs to certify a building up to 250,000 square feet to LEED standards are approximately $15,000 in administrative fees alone. The additional cost for design and construction can reach up to 10% of the project budget, but in many cases the cost is the same as a traditional building. CHPS has two levels of review:

• CHPS designed-  registration valued at $900  
• CHPS verified- $900 with an additional $4,000-$11,000 in certification costs (depending on size)

However, various studies have demonstrated that the additional costs bring value to the owners and occupants of the building. The most important factor is reduction in energy use which equates to reduced operations costs. New construction built according to the LEED standard has been shown to reduce energy by 15% on average with a 13% reduction for existing buildings over five years2. LEED buildings were determined to have increased asset value as much as 5% for new construction based on assessments3. Other studies indicate tenants were also willing to pay a higher price for LEED certified buildings. 

What are the sustainable benefits?

There are a multitude of benefits to pursuing certifications. The school district benefits from reduced operating costs because of the energy efficiency provisions. K-12 schools that are LEED certified for Existing Buildings claim energy savings that are 36% better than the average school4. Some projects are able to recover the additional costs of certification, recouping taxpayer money, by returning the savings in energy use year over year. The occupants also benefit from the greener space. The attributes of LEED which enhance learning include, removal of toxic materials, controlled exposure to dust and pollen, increased access to daylight and outdoor views, and access to thermal controls with higher levels of comfort. The school itself also serves as a teaching tool for students to learn about how the school was designed with the environment in mind and can be a catalyst for students to live their lives more sustainably by embodying the same principles. 

1 LEED by the Numbers: 16 Years of Steady Growth

2 World Green Building Trends: Business Benefits Driving New and Retrofit Market Opportunities in Over 60 Countries

3 The Business Case for Green Building

4 Green School Facts

Healthy Buildings

What is it?

A healthy building is designed to facilitate and measure the health and wellness of its occupants. Recent studies demonstrate the negative effects of health as a result of prolonged time spent indoors. Spending long amounts of time sitting in an office is now analogous to smoking cigarettes.

Updates to the LEED rating system and the release of wellness specific rating systems mark this trend. The WELL Building Standard launched in 2014 by Delos and more recently Fitwel from the Center for Active Design, provide an enhanced set of criteria for including health into building design and operations. The LEED rating system has also includes more stringent criteria for building materials, including more rigid building product and disclosures of material ingredients.

Health is particularly important in school buildings given the connection to establishing healthy behaviors at a young age and the impact on academic achievement. 

How big an Investment are healthy buildings?

Like many sustainable design features, implementing healthy features into building design has varying costs depending on the measure. More simplistic solutions, like promoting activity by exposing stairwells and making them more enticing for users, do not typically add costs to a project. Similarly, specifying materials that have lower toxicity or providing healthy food options are relatively low-cost. Several strategies such as water filtration, daylighting with access to views, and thermal control should be included as best practices in design. Strategies such as increasing ventilation come with a larger cost due to the increase in size of mechanical equipment required. Pursuing healthy building certifications have varying costs. Fitwel has a relatively low price with project registration and certification totaling a maximum of $7,000. Certification through the WELL Building standard starts at $22,500 for new and existing buildings that are 50,000 square feet or less and increases in price with building size. These costs include the certification only and do not include the cost of implementing the measures or consulting.

What are the sustainable benefits?

Several studies have demonstrated the benefits of healthy buildings on student performance. Most recently, the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health published a study called “Schools for Health: Foundations for Student Success” SchoolsforHealth. The research provides overwhelming evidence that student health, thinking, and function are improved by increased ventilation, moderate humidity levels, daylight and views to the outdoors, balanced acoustics, and reduced dusts, pests, mold, and moisture.  Past research also tied healthy buildings to employee retention and reduced absenteeism, as well as increased value. By including healthy design principles in a project, we can ensure that both students and faculty function peak performance. 

Commissioning

What is it?

One of the fundamental ways to ensure that a building is operating as designed is a process called commissioning. Commissioning in its most simple form is ensuring that the building systems, including mechanical, electrical, and envelope, are properly installed and tested to achieve optimal performance per the specifications and owner’s requirements1. Ideally the commissioning process should begin in early design to develop the scope, budget, plans, and schedule. Existing buildings can also benefit from this process, called retro-commissioning, utilizing an assessment of utility bills and operational procedures, and diagnostic testing. The most comprehensive approach includes both training for building operators so that they can continue to maintain optimized performance as well as documentation of the process.

How Big an Investment is Commissioning?

The cost to hire a commissioning agent depends on the size and scope of the project. Hiring a commissioning agent early on in design ensures that the most value is achieved from the process. According to the General Services Administration, total building commissioning costs range from 0.5% to 2.25% of total construction costs, depending on the size, type, and complexity of the project.  Projects can see costs closer to 3% if full commissioning, including the envelope, is performed. According to the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, the normalized median cost was $1.16 per square foot for new buildings and $0.30 per square foot for existing buildings.

What are the sustainable benefits?

The commissioning process has a number of benefits beyond meeting the owner’s requirements for design of a project. Buildings that are commissioned have lower costs and during construction and fewer change orders. Throughout the life of the building, their equipment functionality is improved, extending the life of equipment. Commissioning saves on average 13% in energy costs with paybacks in approximately 4 years for new construction and 16% for existing buildings with payback in 1 year2.

There are also co-benefits including increased valuation in the building as well as results stemming from increased training by building operators. This results in increased comfort of the occupants, indoor air quality, water efficiency, and safety and security. 

1 2016. The Whole Building Design Guide. “Building Commissioning.”[1] https://www.wbdg.org/building-commissioning

2 Evan Mills, Building Commissioning: A Golden Opportunity for Reducing Energy Costs and Greenhouse Gas Emissions, July 21, 2009, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, http://cx.lbl.gov/documents/2009-assessment/LBNL-Cx-Cost-Benefit.pdf

Creating Sustainable Students

Discussions on sustainable design in recent years have been focused on rating systems and certifications; however, a sustainable building can be so much more. When it comes to schools, sustainability must go beyond design and create institutions that provide students, faculty, staff, and community members with a space that celebrates learning and collaboration while fostering ethical relationships between people and the natural systems that support them. Classrooms have the potential to be living laboratories that produce sustainable students with minimal or no cost increase using a focus on high-value design.

The school building should serve as a canvas for student learning and exploration, while raising awareness about how the built environment and earth systems work together1. Imagine a classroom that not only provides a place for direct learning from teachers, but also allows students to explore concepts like electricity and solar energy using actual systems installed in the school. Displays demonstrating energy demand and use by using real-time data coupled with lessons on how energy works, help students to be more prepared for the 21st century workforce. Similarly, hands on activities connect students with a greater purpose, such as creating community gardens on school grounds by planting and harvesting crops that can then be used in local food kitchens, benefit students by providing new skills and also help the community through enhanced cohesion and food supply. By including sustainability in curriculum and programming, students adopt a global and social perspective.

Sustainable design creates student innovators who embody the principles of sustainability through programming, curriculum development, and active design. Students spend an estimated 16,000 hours inside a school building before they reach college. Designers have the ability to create environments that stimulate learning and provide improved health and activity during these precious hours, while conserving energy. A recent report published by Harvard demonstrates that students benefit from increased levels of lighting and indoor air quality, thermal comfort, and views and access to green space from reduced absenteeism to increased test scores2.

Benefits of health-optimized learning environments:

Performance-based design ensures conservation is considered as soon as pen hits paper. Traditional energy modeling requires building improvements in later stages that then compete for priority. Early modeling of energy allows for flexibility and innovation by analyzing the impacts of various design scenarios and learning from each one. The continuous improvement process allows both the designer and the building to raise the bar of performance and track it over time. The result is schools that save on operation and maintenance costs. According to a report by American Institute of Architects and The U.S. Green Building Council, sustainable schools can achieve indirect savings of almost $70 per square foot with $12/sf going directly back into the school in the way of energy savings, lowered water costs, improved teacher retention and lowered health costs3.

1 2017. NMC/CoSN Horizon Report > 2017 K–12 Edition. https://cdn.nmc.org/media/2017-nmc-cosn-horizon-report-k12-EN.pdf

2 2017. Schools for Health: Foundations for Student Success. Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. http://schools.forhealth.org/

3 2004. High-Performance Schools: Affordable Green Design for K-12 Schools. 

Farm in a Box

What is it?
Sustainability goes beyond sustainable design, working to create opportunities where students embody the principles of conservation and environmental awareness. There are a number of ways that sustainability can brought into teaching and learning that also have practical, real-life applications.

One such approach is the concept of a ‘farm-in-a-box,’ a compact container that contains all of the elements to grow plants and food. The farm can be created within a used shipping container and uses hydroponic technology, which is a way of growing plants without soil. This approach also complements active learning and interdisciplinary approaches to learning. A Farm-in-a-Box solution represents the latest in agricultural technology and can be used to teach curriculum ranging from biology to horticulture to computer science. In urban environments this technology exposes students to science of growing their own food, an abstract concept for many, if not most. In rural environments this technology trains students how to interact with the agricultural technologies of the future and could be used to complement other kinds of farming activities.

Many communities suffer from food injustice issues, such as food deserts, where there is a lack of healthy, affordable, fresh food in the community. Additionally, the space required by these systems is significantly less than traditional farming and therefore makes more economic sense. Depending on the location, the farm in a box allows for plants to be grown in areas where they would otherwise be infeasible due to the local climate. Now plants that thrive in hot, humid climates could theoretically be grown anywhere, even in dry, arid climates.

How big an Investment are Indoor Plants?
The cost of creating a school garden can vary widely. A traditional farm-in-a-box will range from $50,000-$80,000 depending on the manufacturer and materials used. However, similar objectives can be achieved with smaller scale projects such as planter beds and indoor hydroponic or aeroponic growing racks for minimal costs. The more sophisticated versions have added costs due to technology such as solar pv to power the grow systems, battery storage systems for backup, water pumps, basic farming tools, sensors and wifi connectivity. There may also be additional ongoing costs for the seedlings as well as the nutrients required for the plants to grow.

What are the benefits to instruction?
One of the obvious benefits of the farm in a box concept is local food production. In addition to providing fresh, healthy food, the students can connect with the broader community by donating the food directly to local food pantries or selling using a co-op or CSA (Community Supported Agriculture) method which could help pay for the materials. Local volunteers such as community members and parents can also be utilized to support these efforts. There are also benefits of workforce training such as technology, agriculture/farming, and project management.

The students will also have the benefit of eating healthy foods which can improve their own health and provide further success in the class. A recent report1 demonstrated that significant improvements in student performance were found when plants were present, compared with classes without plants (increases between 10-14%) and recommend that indoor plants be a standard installation for school classrooms. Trials found that classroom plants consistently led to improvement in spelling, mathematics, and science performance.

Additionally, planting and growing can be used as a hands on tool for lessons in science, on the various organisms, plant anatomy, earth science, as well as mathematics and even art. The food products produced can be used in other classes such as home economics or cooking, preparing a new wave of chefs who utilize local foods. The long-term nature of growing can also provide students with a sense of responsibility for the growth and care of the plants and a reason to never give up.

1 Daly, et al. “Plants in the Classroom Can Improve Student Performance.” 2010. 

Resilient Communities

Resiliency is defined as the capacity of a system to survive, adapt and grow when faced with stresses and shocks. Communities facing risk of natural disasters and other weather-related risks look to build resiliently when managing and preparing for related impacts. Beyond the human element of survival, there is a financial case for resilience. According to the United Nations, every dollar spent reducing vulnerability to disasters saves approximately seven dollars in economic losses.

Cities face various risks from event-driven natural shocks, such as hurricanes, tornadoes and earthquakes, as well as chronic stresses, including nuisance flooding, drought and heat waves. While traditional approaches are primarily reactionary efforts through emergency response, resilience focuses on efforts that allow communities to continue thriving by minimizing the risks of these major stresses in advance.

The impact of Hurricane Katrina and Superstorm Sandy demonstrated the need for more holistic, resilient systems thinking. Though we can’t plan for every eventuality, cities must assess vulnerabilities and understand the potential risks we face, knowing they may change over time.

Preventive measures can be taken to immediately reduce exposure by increasing absorptive capacity, such as flood proofing buildings or creating emergency response plans. Resiliency goes beyond reactionary tactics by incorporating strategies that both help to prevent impacts and prepare for the future.

Examples of resilient strategies that have multiple benefits include hardening infrastructure through a microgrid that runs on renewable energy and allows continuous operation when the grid shuts down; utilizing green infrastructure to absorb stormwater and reduce the heat island effect; and weatherization that increases protection from the elements and reduces energy use.

Individual buildings can also incorporate resilience into their design and operations. Using a school as an example, shocks and stresses depend on location but potential risks include flooding, hurricanes, extreme heat and sea-level rise. If a school is located in a coastal community that is susceptible to flooding, the building itself may suffer direct physical damage from the water, as well as indirect impacts if the students and faculty are unable to get to the building because of flooded roads.

By encouraging green infrastructure and building in areas with bike and pedestrian routes, we can ensure accessibility, while also improving the water and air quality. The same school may also want to consider a solution that involves backup power generation, such as battery storage or a microgrid. In addition to reducing dependency on the grid, these measures have the benefit of increasing energy efficiency and reducing operational costs over time.

On a broader level, buildings can be viewed as hubs within their communities. Research demonstrates that close-knit neighborhoods are more likely to survive a stress such as a hurricane or storm because of their eagerness to come together and utilize highly-secure community structures. Educational facilities can serve as a portal for such activity, allowing people to congregate whether or not there is a storm, serving as a refuge when homes may be impacted and providing necessary heating, cooling and shelter. In addition, schools can provide backup power when necessary to help charge electronic devices, which are critical to communication during a major event.

As we look to the future, resiliency will be a critical lens for designing buildings and communities that flourish in the face of new challenges. If we consider approaches that have multiple benefits, we have the potential for both a sustainable and more resilient world.

Performance Based Modeling

According to the EIA, buildings consume nearly 50% of the energy generated in the U.S. and produce 44% of the carbon emissions[1]. Certifications and codes help to drive reductions in the built environment, but as we look to meeting the energy needs of the future, designers can take a leadership role in doing our part for the industry.

Reducing energy use in our buildings can be done in a number of ways, but taking a critical look at the beginning of design allows for maximized impacts. Previously energy modeling was a skill that was reserved for engineers, and often involved complex details and a substantial amount of time. As an alternative, performance based models, where conservation targets are considered as soon as pen hits paper, is gaining popularity.

Building orientation and massing provide important opportunities for reducing energy in early design decisions. While designers often use rules of thumb, modeling allows you to see the direct impacts of adding shading devices or increasing the amount of glazing on a façade. It also becomes a component of the integrative design process, ensuring synergies between building systems are optimized.

Traditional energy modeling requires building improvements in later stages that then compete for priority. Early modeling of energy allows for flexibility and innovation by analyzing the impacts of various design scenarios and learning from each one. Taking it a step further, the process can be enhanced when coupled with benchmarking or Measurement and Verification once a building is completed, allowing the owner to ensure that the building is performing as designed. The analyses can also assist in maximizing daylighting by identifying over and under-lit spaces and priorities the type of shading and glazing needs for each façade. According to recent studies by Harvard School of Public Health, daylight has significant impact in the thinking and performance of students. There is a significant correlation between daylight in classrooms and student performance, particularly in material ready assessments as well as increased alertness and physical activity.

The continuous improvement process allows both the designer and the building to raise the bar of performance and track it over time. The result is schools that save on operation and maintenance costs. According to a survey from Turner Construction, sustainable schools can achieve direct savings of $12 sq. ft. going directly back into the school in the way of energy savings, lowered water costs, improved teacher retention and lowered health costs all for an increased cost of less than 2% more than conventional schools (approximately $3 per square foot) to make them green[2]. 

[1] U.S. Energy Information Administration (2012).

[2] “2005 Survey of Green Buildings,” Turner Construction. Available at: http:// www.turnerconstruction.com/greenbuildings

Steps to Net Zero

When most people hear the words “net zero” they picture solar panels and wind turbines. In reality, one of the first and arguably most important steps to getting to net zero involves optimizing the building envelope and reducing loads. While adding renewable energy is certainly beneficial, it is only one part of the equation. Many net zero buildings start with a reduction of 60-70% compared to the median building by optimizing the envelope and maximizing energy efficiency. By reducing the amount of power generation required to offset the building’s consumption, the required physical footprint and financial cost of the generation system becomes much more feasible for a wider number of building sites and styles.

There are many definitions of net zero ranging from energy use to cost to carbon emissions. For the purpose of this discussion, we will focus on net zero energy, meaning the total amount of energy consumed by the building on an annual basis is roughly equal to the total amount of renewable energy created on the site. While the number of certified net zero projects around the country is still small (43 verified projects with confirmed and measuring energy data across the country according to the New Buildings Institute, the number will continue to rise as cities and states approve policies that push owners to meet these standards. One such example is California’s Title 24, which will require Net Zero residential buildings by 2020 and commercial buildings by 2030. 

According to NBI, schools continue to be the largest building category to achieve and target net zero (NBI 2016 List of Zero Net Energy Buildings) with California leading the way in number of net zero buildings overall. Buildings consume approximately 40% of the energy use in the United States, and for school districts, the cost of energy is larger than that of salaries and textbooks. By allowing a school district to spend its money on what matters, the opportunity to reduce or offset these energy costs can have a tremendous impact on education. Additionally, the actual building elements that help to achieve net zero can be used as educational tools, helping to create student innovators who embody the principles of sustainability. These elements can be featured in curriculum and programming that teaches about conservation, energy, health, and collaboration. In Higher Education and Career and Technical Education (CTE) there are linkages between net zero and STEM education and workforce development, as sustainability is increasingly important in a number of career pathways including automotive technology (electric), renewable energy, and landscaping.

Examples of ways that a building can start to achieve the first step of net zero by reducing their loads include:

Orientation/Massing

• Orient the building so that the longer wall exposures faces North and South
• Create a compact design, both in plan and volume with reduced perimeter wall surface area
• Utilize existing trees and natural features to provide shading and windbreaks

Building Envelope

• Increase R-values of walls and roof assembly to provide an efficient building envelope.
• Utilize reflective (white or light-colored) materials for roof and hardscape to reduce cooling loads
• Specify energy-efficient windows with low U-values and Solar Heat Gain Coefficient (SHGC) and reduce the amount of glazing

Daylight and Lighting Reduction

• Configure the building to allow maximum daylight without overheating or creating glare (exterior shading devices, louvres, and light shelves can be used)
• Reduce lighting levels in classrooms and add occupancy sensors and dimmable multi-level switching
• Consider the use of skylights and solar tubes to add natural daylight to interior spaces

Heating/Cooling

• Groups of classrooms should be zoned for Heating and Cooling
• High efficiencyheating and cooling equipment coupled with controls and sensors for conserving and monitoring energy use and energy recovery

Technology and Plug Use Reduction

• Implement wireless computer technology and use Energy Star appliances to reduce plug load and aid in the efficiency and performance of the building.

Operations and Maintenance

• Enable control systems that will monitor and control every electrical device throughout the building
• Provide Occupancy and motion sensors, as well as CO2 monitoring, to maintain an optimum learning environment and reduce the system's power demands.
• Schedule operations to determine areas that require continuous heating, cooling, and lighting at what times of the day, week and year.

Zero Waste Schools

Reducing the amount of waste we produce and send to landfills is becoming an increasingly pressing issue. The world population is growing by approximately 80 million people each year and the amount of waste we produce is staggering at over 2 billion tons per year. Sourcing and producing new materials, rather than reusing, leads to increased greenhouse gas emissions and public health issues related to air, water, and land pollution. As a result of these enormous pressures, cities around the world are setting zero waste goals, including Dallas, New York, Los Angeles, Vancouver, London, Paris, and Tokyo. While waste management is still poorly understood and waste experts are rarely brought in to consult on design, Architects can play a critical role as designers of the systems that support maintenance operations within buildings.

To meet the challenge, the AIA (American Institute of Architects) has assembled best practices for designing buildings to achieve zero waste. GBCI has also recently launched a new certification called TRUE (Total Resource Use and Efficiency) for facilities which have achieved at least 90% diversion from landfill and incineration. More specific to schools, several entities have created guidelines to help staff and administration achieve zero waste in their facilities. In NYC the Department of Education (DOE) and Department of Sanitation (DSNY) teamed up to create guidelines for diverting all recyclable and compostable waste from 100 schools in five years starting in 2016.

The strategy for achieving zero waste consists of three main tenets:

1 - Reduce the amount of material used;

2 - Reuse materials instead of buying new;

3 - Recycle and separate food scraps and food-soiled paper for composting1.

Materials such as clean paper, cardboard, metal, glass, and plastic can be recycled using traditional methods (separated and baled to be sold to facilities who recycle the material). Food scrap and soiled paper can be brought to regional facilities where it is turned into compost for soil fertilizer or turned into renewable energy. Recycling alone can be a challenge for many facilities, so special attention needs to be paid to create a comprehensive waste reduction program. Best practices for creating a program include:

• Start by creating a culture that includes recycling as the norm by raising consciousness and refining practice.
• Identify a school sustainability coordinator or team leader who is in charge of managing the process.
• Get students involved through an established group or club
• Provide training and education through kickoff events, classroom and staff training with lunchroom monitoring.
• Keep consistent communication through newsletters, waste-free lunch promotions, anniversary celebrations, and assistance in coordinating events2.
• Work with custodial staff to confirm that trash, recycling, and composting remain separated as they are collected from various spaces in the school.
• Establish consistent signage and colors for the bins and place wherever waste bins are located, especially in high-traffic areas such as the cafeteria, kitchen, teacher break rooms, and restrooms.
• A local composting facility will need to be contracted to receive the compost material. For recycling, confirm which items local waste haulers or municipal facilities will accept.
• Alternatively, composting can be done on-site using vermicomposting (worms) or typical backyard residential containers (which often require additional material such as leaves to break down the compost).
• Ensure only organic items are composted: Organics, typically include vegetables and fruit; prepared foods; baked goods; cereal, flour, grains, pasta, and rice; eggs and eggshells; dairy products; nuts, meat, fish, and bones; paper towels and napkins; paper plates Food-Soiled Paper; coffee filters and tea bags; paper bags; paper trays and plant-based compostable trays; paper food boats
• Consider performing a waste audit to determine existing waste streams
• Engage students to come up with new ideas about how to reuse items rather than throw away.

In addition to the more obvious benefits of waste reduction, zero waste programs have tangential benefits. By making connections between our consumption and the waste produced, schools can advance the culture of sustainability throughout the school system. Composting programs can also be tied in to lesson planning around growing healthy food and sustainability using harvest planters or school gardens. The most comprehensive programs can deliver financial, environmental as well as social benefits.

1 https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/dsny/docs/zero-waste-schools-guide-zwsg-accessible.pdf

2https://www.ecocycle.org/files/Zero%20Waste%20A%20Realistic%20Approach%20Sustainability%20Program%20for%20Schools.pdf