A Material Flow Analysis for Defining Utrecht University’s Zero-Waste Goals

Abstract

As the European Union and the Dutch government are moving towards a circular economy, Utrecht University (UU) has set a goal of becoming a zero-waste organization by 2030. Circularity is often contextualized using the R-ladder, which provides a hierarchy for waste management. UU’s current definition of zero-waste requires materials to be processed at a level of recycling or higher. Since the understanding of current waste streams remained vague, this study investigated the university’s waste flows, how they are processed, and recycled material yields as well as potential mitigation solutions. A material flow analysis (MFA), a commonly used tool for evaluating the performance of the existing waste systems, was conducted to investigate waste management at UU. Two scopes were used: a narrower scope examining the sources of waste at the university and a boarder scope incorporating downstream processing. The MFA looked at solid waste categories collected by waste handlers in the year 2022. Potential mitigation ideas were then collected via stakeholder interviews and desk research. The largest problematic waste streams were residual and hazardous waste. Residual waste originated from a variety of buildings while hazardous waste was generated by faculties of Geosciences, Sciences, and Veterinary Medicine. These natural science faculties created more waste per person than other faculties and had more varied waste streams. The expanded scope showed a 12.9% increase in waste sent to incineration and revealed recycled material yields of 43.6% and 75.7% for waste sent to composting/anaerobic digestion and sorting/recycling, respectively. Waste mitigation ideas identified included the elimination of single use items, increasing waste separation, focusing on circular procurement, and collaborating with external parties to identify novel mitigation ideas. The additional material loss identified in the expanded scope suggests the importance of considering downstream processing when establishing a zero-waste goal. Prioritizing R-ladder ambitions at higher levels is suggested to avoid downstream losses. Limitations to the study include the snapshot nature of the MFA, data uncertainties, and a constantly changing regulatory environment. Special attention was drawn to the data gap on exact waste stream composition and insufficient communication regarding UU’s waste policies. The research demonstrated the barriers and opportunities for UU to become zero-waste. Some of the university’s essential functions generate waste for which there are currently no alternatives. Further research into the composition of waste streams, monitoring of waste management using the expanded scope, and aiming at higher R-level strategies is recommended.