UCLA is determined not to waste anything – especially time.
The university has set the ambitious goal of having zero waste to landfills by 2020, and is banking on its students and faculty to help contribute. The effort is part of a broader campaign by the University of California for each campus to generate less trash.
The Zero Waste to landfill campaign is run by a committee whose job includes managing and recycling university waste. It has done things such as installing trash cans for students to properly dispose of compostable, recyclable and landfill items. It also has partnered with student organizations to serve leftover food to students in need when dining halls close.
Despite all the new initiatives, the way these programs are implemented seems more like indulging a fad. Students are presented with great ideas for how to help the environment, but they aren’t given any follow-up.
UCLA and the committee already have the resources they need to successfully reach the goal of zero waste by 2020. However, if they’re truly serious about getting more students on board, they need to work on making existing programs more effective. Otherwise, their hard work will become the waste they’re avoiding.
One of the program’s initiatives is to use only compostable materials at restaurants on the Hill, which helps Bruins create less waste. At the beginning of fall quarter, students with meal plans received blue reusable water bottles in order to replace, or at the very least, decrease their use of compostable drinking cups.
But needless to say, the bottles’ effectiveness has been watered down.
Students not only have difficulty fitting the canisters in their dorm sinks to wash them, but they’re also not incentivized to use them because they already have their own water bottles.
Erin Fabris, UCLA’s sustainability manager, said students’ use of the blue water bottles is low, between 5% and 15%, varying by dining restaurant.
So not only was this program a flop, but the university also indirectly generated emissions to create bottles that students aren’t using.
Even newer initiatives show lack of forethought. Hedrick Hall, for example, is piloting a system where all trash cans in the women’s restrooms are replaced with compost bins. This is instead of having bins for both compost and waste, which other dorms have. But many women have complained that not all materials they dispose of in the bathroom are compostable.
A lot of UCLA’s programs are like this: They start with amazing ideas, but fail in execution. This lack of organization discourages students from truly adopting zero-waste practices.
The committee may not have failed in its goal yet, but the odds of reaching zero waste to landfill by 2020 seem slim if things continue the way they have been. And it’s not even clear whether this messaging will continue past 2020.
Kikei Wong, UCLA’s Zero Waste coordinator, said there are a lot of factors, such as varying dumpster weights, that need to be considered when determining how close each UC is to achieving the goal of zero waste.
“On average, the diversion rate for the campus hovers around 65%, give or take 5%,” Wong said. “This goal is a UC systemwide policy target that is reported to the regents – it has not been determined what will happen if campuses are unable to achieve it.”
But UCLA can make small changes to generate less waste. It could replace paper towels with hand dryers, for instance. It could also add more water-filling stations around campus so students won’t need to buy plastic water bottles.
The university also can think big. Coffee shops in Amsterdam and other European cities have established systems where customers can purchase their drinks in reusable cups they can take anywhere. During their next visit, customers can return their cups to be cleaned and receive their drinks in cups that already have been washed.
Instead, UCLA’s focus is on making inadequate changes that are primarily for show.
Certainly, the initiatives have had some effect. Remy Escher, a first-year pre-public affairs student, said everything UCLA does for the environment is a refreshing change compared to her home in Rhode Island.
“In Rhode Island, we just threw away everything,” Escher said. “I think it’s cool UCLA has all these environmental initiatives, but they could do more to be environmentally conscious.”
The university, like all others, brags about how great it is. But it’s not about the overall perception people have of UCLA – it’s about the university’s approach to smaller environmental issues that could eventually have bigger impacts on the future of students and staff.
It’s not that UCLA isn’t doing enough, but that its tactics could be applied more efficiently. Very few students know the details of its sustainability efforts, and the status quo isn’t enough to get Bruins working cohesively to change their consumer-heavy lifestyles.
And if that trend continues, UCLA will just have a pile of wasted ideas come 2020.