Briefing on Ecotourism and Sustainability in CSU Hospitality Management Campuses

Briefing on Ecotourism and Sustainability in CSU Hospitality Management Campuses Prepared by the CSU Hospitality Management Education Initiative (HMEI) Http://www.calstate.edu/hospitality

Andrew Hale Feinstein, Ph.D. Director CSU Hospitality Management Education Dean and James A. Collins Distinguished Chair The Collins College of Hospitality Management at Cal Poly Pomona 909.869.3464 andyf@csupomona.edu

Lisa McPheron Program Manager CSU Hospitality Management Education Initiative 909.869.3151 lcmcpheron@csupomona.edu

Erin Mascho Program Coordinator CSU Hospitality Management Education Initiative 909.869.3136 ecmascho@csupomona.edu

... .... ..... .... ..... .... .... ... ..

Table of Contents Introduction – 1 Definitions – 2 Center for Surf Research – 3 Ecotourism at CSU Hospitality Management Campuses – 7 Sustainability at CSU Hospitality Management Campuses – 9 Ecotourism and Sustainability at CSU (non-hospitality) – 11 CSU-Generated Research – 16 Current Research – 18 Further Reading – 25 Appendix

... .... ..... .... ..... .... .... ... ..

Introduction

The CSU Hospitality Management Education Initiative (HMEI) developed the Briefing on Ecotourism and Sustainability in CSU Hospitality Management Campuses to provide a comprehensive summary of the work being done in these important areas. CSU hospitality management programs are committed to training students to be stewards of the environment and the community. This briefing outlines the curriculum, initiatives, research and activities that CSU hospitality management programs and the CSU in general are undertaking to ensure the economic, social and environmental well-being of tourism destinations around the world, particularly in California. This briefing contains information gathered from faculty interviews, course outlines, the CSU website, academic journals and hospitality industry publications.

HMEI works with key hospitality leaders and 14 CSU campuses to prepare students for meaningful careers in one of California’s largest industries. Together these campuses award approximately 95 percent of hospitality management degrees in California. As the state’s main source for hospitality management graduates, the CSU plays an important role in shaping the future of the hospitality industry’s sustainability efforts.

Hospitality operations such as hotels and restaurants are major consumers of energy and natural resources. In fact, restaurants use about five-to-seven times more energy per square foot than other commercial buildings. Many quick-service restaurants may use up to 10 times more energy per square foot than other commercial buildings. Energy costs at hotels are typically between four and six percent of revenue. The hospitality industry has important work to do to become more sustainable and CSU graduates are leading the way.

1|Page

... .... ..... .... ..... .... .... ... ..

Definitions

Ecotourism Ecotourism, or sustainable tourism, is tourism that does not deplete economic, social and environmental resources. The ultimate goal is to provide high-quality experiences for visitors, strengthen host communities and cultures, and develop tourism-related livelihoods while preserving the surrounding environments (California Sustainable Tourism Handbook, 2009).

Sustainability The concept of sustainability centers on a balance of society, economy and environment. This is often referred to as the “three pillars” of sustainability (United Nations 2005 World Summit on Social Development, 2005). Sustainability has become increasingly important as the world’s population continues to grow while natural resources are being depleted. A general definition of sustainability emerged from a 1987 United Nations report that described sustainable development as “meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987).

Cal Poly Pomona has a one-acre culinary garden

Center for Surf Research at SDSU

Cal Poly San Luis Obispo had one of the first ecotourism courses in the country

2|Page

... .... ..... .... ..... .... .... ... ..

Center for Surf Research San Diego State University

Introduction: Each of the 14 CSU hospitality management campuses serves the unique hospitality needs of its community. For example, Sonoma State University had the first wine business degree in the United States and San Jose State University has a strong conference and event management degree emphasis.

San Diego State University, in the heart of one of the world’s top surf destination, has become a leader in ecotourism and surf tourism. The following is a description of the university’s recently developed Center for Surf Research and the impact it is having on ecotourism education and implementation.

About The Center for Surf Research is a non-profit research and teaching center housed in San Diego State University’s Sustainable Tourism Program under the L. Robert Payne School of Hospitality and Tourism Management. The CSR provides leadership in the struggle for sustainability in surf tourism by: shaping responsible global citizens through life-changing experiential learning opportunities for students and the wider community; creating and disseminating specialized knowledge to governments, the surf industry, tourism developers, destination communities, nonprofits, and tourists; by developing a sustainable surf tourism certification program, and by inspiring and driving active stakeholder engagement with the social and economic development of destination communities, sustainable use of their resources, and conservation of their critical environments. The CSR is directed

by Dr. Jess Ponting, an Australian surfer and researcher who has the world’s first Ph.D. in sustainable surf tourism management.

The Need for Surf and Ecotourism Research Surfers travel the globe in pursuit of that perfect swell. Surf tourism is a top revenue generator for nations from Papua New Guinea to Liberia, which sometimes have remote and undeveloped beach communities. Even China has created a Minister for Extreme Sports to capitalize on the booming business. Yet there is little concrete data on how big the surf tourism market has become or exactly how much money it generates.

One of the goals of the Center for Surf Research is to connect the different facets of the surf industry to help governments in developing countries understand the surf crowd and to develop plans to handle the crowds. With no planning, many poor, remote communities discovered by surf explorers in the 1960s got caught up in what Dr. Ponting calls “the race to the bottom” with locals expanding their homes and

3|Page

offering cheap accommodations, but with little infrastructure to handle the mounting sewage and trash, which seeped into pristine marine environments.

As a result, “surf slums” sprang up in paradise. Ponting points to some traditional Muslim villages in Indonesia that found themselves dealing with big-city problems brought in by the outsiders, including illegal drug use and prostitution.

On the other hand, there are places like Papua New Guinea, a model that has a national surf management plan limiting the number of surfers in popular spots and taxing them to help pay for sewage treatment, water systems and schools. Papua New Guinea also requires surfers to pay for a local surf guide, creating jobs for its people instead of merely playing host to foreign travel companies.

Projects

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

1. The Center for Surf Research (CSR) has scheduled summits to bring together surfers, environmental organizations, tourism businesses and the small but growing wave of scholars studying surf economics.

2. The CSR developed a sustainable surf tourism certification program that is now changing the way resorts operate in Costa Rica, Maldives, Mexico, Fiji and Indonesia. The program will certify surf hotels that ensure their operations do not pollute and that invest money back into the local communities where they are located.

There is a growing tide of philanthropy among surfers wanting to help the places they visit.

SPY Optics has joined forces with CSR to create the SPY Optic Award for Study Abroad, a formal scholarship fund that will help as many as 10 CSR students develop, study and implement sustainable development programs for surf tourism each year.

The CSR is in talks with Conservation International to investigate the possibility of a partnership to dovetail National Surf Reserve declarations with a broader push for Marine Protected Areas in some surfing areas. Uluwatu in Bali is the focus of current talks.

The CSR staged two conferences attended by more than 500 people that brought the surf industry, the public and academe together to discuss sustainability and surf tourism. A third, titled “The Future of Sustainable Surf Development” is scheduled for September 2013.

Thirty student volunteers were involved in research projects designed to promote sustainability in surf tourism in Fiji, Maldives, Indonesia, Costa Rica, Mexico, Samoa, Spain and Australia. The projects included travel to most of these countries for the students.

A system of study abroad opportunities, which leverages students’ passion for surfing and/or coastal and marine environments, is being developed to create powerful learning environments for sustainable tourism curricula.

In partnership with Conservation International Indonesia, the CSR started a program to develop a national surfing reserve and marine protected area around Bali’s Bukit Peninsula.

4|Page

9. In addition to being the most prolific publisher of sustainable surf tourism material in the world, the CSR developed a partnership with the University of Plymouth to publish an edited book titled “Sustainable Stoke: Transitions to Sustainability in the Surfing World” with contributions from industry, the non-profit sector, academics, and top professional athletes.

10. The CSR’s Certification Program Coordinator and San Diego State University alumnus, Carl Kish, aims to contribute toward sustainable living practices in small surf tourism communities with the “Innovative Biodiesel Project.” Carl has partnered with biodiesel expert Ryan King to create the world’s first small-scale biodiesel production plant that is closed-loop (zero waste), energy independent (off-grid), and has a net carbon-negative impact. Carl created a campaign for the project on IndieGogo, a crowd funding website, to finance the research, testing and construction of the biodiesel system in the surf community of Nosara, Costa Rica. This is all part of Safari Surf’s new sustainability campaign — Sustainable Swell.

Once the model is developed and tested, the blueprints and instructions for production will be released online for free to amplify the potential global reach of this inexpensive, locally appropriate, sustainable energy solution.

“This project has the potential to change everything,” said Ponting. “All around the world, remote communities and surf resorts rely on polluting, diesel-powered generators for energy.

What Carl and Ryan are working on could provide a carbon negative alternative that actually removes waste from the environment. Best of all, they plan on giving the technology away for free once they have developed it! This is just one of those immensely cool projects that people should support. It could be a game changer.”

Having a fuel source that is independent from imported resources and power could potentially be a lifesaver during times when access to Nosara is limited, such as during seasonal floods or natural disasters. Nosara’s situation resembles that of most small surf tourism communities around the world, some more extreme than others, where access to basic resources like electricity is limited.

Partners SPY Optics – Sky Optics is a fashion and eyewear company founded in 1990 devoted to athletics such as surfing, snowboarding, skiing, bicycling and motorcycle riding.

SurfAid International -- SurfAid, in partnership with communities and government, works to prevent disease, suffering and death through educational programs and health promotion that aim to change poor health behaviors and reduce the risk from natural disasters.

Waves for Development-- WAVES creates life-enriching experiences in coastal communities through education programs that develop youth into healthy and empowered adults and Surf Voluntourism programs that engage travelers and transform their views of the world and themselves.

5|Page

Project Wave of Optimism -- Project WOO commits to work in the area of critical overlap between surf tourism presence and host community efforts to improve their quality of life. iJourney Green -- iJourneyGreen is a 501(c)3 non-profit organization supporting sustainable travel by funding local projects and community endeavors around the world. Through the purchase of Travel Credits™, traveling gurus and business operators alike can give back to the regions they visit by supporting local organizations working to improve the social and cultural livelihoods of communities across the globe. Its mission is to allow travelers to make a deeper connection and lasting impact with the places and people they visit, ensuring that environments and cultures of all types are protected and visited in a sustainable manner.

Surf Resource Network –The Surf Resource Network recognizes high quality surf as a valuable natural resource, which can be leveraged to provide means for community development. Its mission is to support local economies by partnering with organizations working to create positive outcomes for developing communities in surf rich regions.

Conservation International -- Through science, policy and field work, Conservation International is applying smart solutions to protect the resources that we all depend on. They help communities, countries and societies protect tropical forests, lush grasslands, rivers, wetlands, abundant lakes and the sea.

Association of Surfing Professionals’ World Championship Tourism -- The association raises funds for sustainability projects related to world championship tour venues in Hawaii, the US mainland, and Fiji which has been viewed by millions via webcast.

For more information visit: http://csr.sdsu.edu/

6|Page

... .... ..... .... ..... .... .... ... ..

Examples of Ecotourism at CSU Hospitality Management Campuses

Introduction: One billion tourists, the most on record, traveled internationally in 2012, according to the World Tourism Organization. The growth in travel demands that governments and hospitality operators adopt measures and practices to sustain the viability of the destinations. Many HMEI campuses are leaders in ecotourism education and implementation. These are examples of some of their undertakings.

Chico  In the course RECR 47, Ecotourism, students investigate and analyze the concept of “ecotourism.” Ecotourism is first defined and then studied for its potential benefits and pitfalls.

The contexts of natural resources, cultural complexities, socio-economic capacities and institutional structures are discussed. Case studies from around the globe are analyzed.

East Bay  The course 4550, Global Tourism, creates in-depth discussions about tourism across the globe.

Emphasis is placed on environmental, economic, social and cultural impacts of tourism, with a specific focus on sustainable tourism. The host-guest-place relationship is an essential part of this course.  Through its sustainability program, CSU East Bay and its food service provider, ARAMARK, work to promote environmental stewardship programs and policies related to food service, conservation and waste stream management.

Monterey Bay  The hospitality department is in the process of developing an Ecotourism and Adventure Tourism degree track.

Pomona  The U.S. State Department hosted Dean Andy Feinstein of The Collins College of Hospitality Management on a five-day trip to the country of Georgia this past winter. Feinstein’s trip was part of the State Department’s efforts to help Georgia grow its tourism economy. Feinstein spoke at numerous hotels, tourism organizations, restaurants and universities about the economic impact of travel and tourism in California. In his dual role as the California State University director of hospitality management education, Feinstein spoke to several groups about the 14 California State University campuses that offer hospitality programs. Highlights of the trip included: giving a master class at Batumi State University; visiting the Tbilisi National Department of Tourism, and being interviewed by local media. Collins College Alumnus David Harrison, who taught hospitality management courses at BSU through the Peace Corps, was instrumental in facilitating this trip through the U.S. Embassy in Tbilisi. Appendix i  In 2010, Dr. Jane Zhang took four Collins College students to Mexico to work with a resort to develop an ecotourism marketing plan. Appendix ii

7|Page



The Collins College offers three undergraduate courses in tourism and one at the master’s level that each touch on the topic of ecotourism.

San Luis Obispo  Cal Poly developed one of the first ecotourism courses in the country in 1996.  Cal Poly is one of the original five institutions to offer the International Ecotourism Society, University Certificate in Sustainable Tourism. Others are: North Carolina State University, the University of Utah, West Virginia University and the University of Minnesota.  Students in the Sustainable Travel and Tourism Planning course worked with the San Luis Obispo County Tourism Business Improvement District to develop a Highway 101 loop trail. The project’s focus is on ecotourism and agritourism resources and attractions within San Luis Obispo County.  In 2012, students created a catalog of agritourism activities on farms that were oriented toward sustainable development, as well as examples of sustainable design, construction and visitor management tools.  The department was contracted to plan The International Ecotourism Society, Ecotourism and Sustainable Tourism Conference, Hilton Head Island, South Carolina, 2011.  Cal Poly, SLO faculty are currently investigating the feasibility of proposing a research center that would focus on research, education, consulting, and training. If the center becomes a reality, areas of focus could include: wine tourism; ecotourism; sustainable tourism; outdoor recreation; coastal- and water-based tourism, and culinary tourism.

San Diego  In addition to the Surf Research Institute, SDSU has a program that focuses on ecotourism in Turkey. Dr. Vinod Sasidharan will lead a student group to rural Turkey this summer in cooperation with Bogazici University in Istanbul. SDSU students along with Bogazici’s students will look at an area of rural Turkey and explore ways to improve ecotourism in the region.

San Francisco  The course RPT 605, Ecotourism Principles and Practices, explores nature-based, low-impact tourism to preserve the environment and local communities. The course includes: an assessment of adverse and beneficial tourism impacts on global environment, indigenous cultures and economy; studies of the ecotourism market including providers, eco-resorts, community settings and regulators, and exploration of the balance between promoting versus limiting ecotourism.

San Jose  The course HRTM 157, Sustainable Recreation and Ecotourism, examines cultural, ethical, environmental and social science issues, and uses applied research methods to achieve competence in making programmatic and resource management decisions for recreational and tourism purposes.

8|Page

... .... ..... .... ..... .... .... ... ..

Examples of Sustainability at CSU Hospitality Management Campuses

Introduction: Many HMEI campuses intertwine sustainability into their curriculum and physical plant operations. It is also a popular research topic among faculty. These are examples of some of those sustainable practices and research.

Pomona  The Collins College of Hospitality Management is pursuing LEED Gold certification in a $10 million building expansion currently under way.  The Collins College launched a summer research program in 2012 that provided stipends for 12 faculty members, six of whom chose topics related to sustainability. Dr. Sandra Kapoor and Belinda Lopez calculated what it would cost for the student-run The Restaurant at Kellogg Ranch to serve only sustainable food. Dr. Myong Jae Lee and Chef Scott Rudolph chose to examine the environmental impact of the college with an emphasis on the culinary laboratories and The Restaurant at Kellogg Ranch. Lee and Rudolph analyzed the food, water consumable, energy and waste systems. Their results will help the college develop sustainable strategies. Dr. Ben Dewald and Barbara Jean Bruin researched consumer attitudes towards “green” restaurants. In essence, they explored whether “green” practices in restaurants impact consumers’ purchasing decisions.

Appendix iii  An environmental audit of The Collins College was conducted in 2012 by faculty, staff and graduate students from Cal Poly Pomona’s John T. Lyle Center for Regenerative Studies. The audit looked at a number of key areas including: electricity; natural gas; water consumption, and waste generated. Appendix iv  Collins magazine, a biannual publication, reviewed green trends in restaurants in 2011 and is printed on FSC certified paper. Appendix v  Collins College student Kirk Bullock interned at the National Restaurant Association in 2009 and 2010. He helped develop content for Conserve, a sustainability guide and website for restaurants.  The College of Agriculture and The Collins College partnered to cultivate and maintain a oneacre culinary garden. The garden produces vegetables, fruits and herbs that are incorporated into the seasonal menu at The Restaurant at Kellogg Ranch, a student-run restaurant. Appendix vi San Diego  The L. Robert Payne School of Hospitality and Tourism Management offers a bachelor’s degree in Sustainable Tourism Management. In addition, elements of sustainability are incorporated into all of the various emphasis areas of the degrees offered in the school. The school offers a master’s degree that allows students to incorporate a sustainable tourism element into their degree.

9|Page



SDSU is working with Friends of Balboa Park to optimize water use within the San Diego landmark. This nonprofit is developing a program to optimize water use in the park by 2020.

That means not only reducing water consumption, but also minimizing the impacts of water use on other natural resources in Balboa Park, such as air, energy and soil.  SDSU faculty and students have embarked on a project to help achieve environmental sustainability for the San Diego landmark.  SDSU Professor, Dr. Jess Ponting and Dr. Sandra Sun-Ah Ponting co-created the California Sustainable Tourism Handbook. Appendix vii San Luis Obispo  The course RPTA 313, Sustainability in Recreation, Parks, and Tourism, investigates the tourism industry from a sustainable tourism perspective. Ecotourism, agritourism, rural tourism, sustainable tourism development, and adventure travel are explored with an emphasis on tourism that sustains social, cultural, heritage, and natural environments while generating economic development. This course will be required of all students in the major beginning in the 2013-14 curriculum.  The course RPTA 314, Sustainable Travel and Tourism Planning, examines the planning and development of tourism destinations, agencies, and services from a sustainable development perspective. Emphasis is on: the economic, social and environmental impacts of tourism; examination of alternative forms of tourism; sustainable tourism; travel research, and planning models. This course is required of all tourism planning and management students.  The course RPTA 413, Tourism and Protected Area Management, explores the practices of tourism and recreation management in protected areas. It includes: history and principles of protected areas; social, cultural, economic, and environmental benefits of and risks to protected areas and communities; environmental stewardship in tourism, and recreation management worldwide.  This year, students created a marketing plan for different levels of tourism visitation for local farms with the goal of helping tourists answer the following questions: “Where does my food come from? Who does my food come from?” The overall goal of the marketing project was to enhance their relationship with their food systems in their hometowns.  Dr. Jerusha Greenwood is exploring the development of a sustainable tourism concept inventory as a pedagogical tool for sustainable tourism classes in a partnership with Dr. Kelly Bricker, chair of the International Ecotourism Society.  In 2010, the Recreation, Tourism, and Hospitality faculty hosted a sustainability panel in San Francisco.  The department was contracted to contribute to planning of the Visit California, 2011 California Sustainable Tourism Summit.

San Jose  The course HRTM 156, Principles of Sustainable Travel and Tourism, examines travel and tourism as they relate to tourist motivations, hospitality and destination management. The impact of tourism on the physical, cultural and economic environment is also covered.

Sonoma  The university offers a course in sustainability as part of its MBA degree.  Dr. Armand Gilinsky published a sustainability case study in print and video on Frog’s Leap winery, a pioneer in this arena.

10 | P a g e

... .... ..... .... ..... .... .... ... ..

Examples of Ecotourism and Sustainability (Non-Hospitality)

Introduction: The California State University is committed to reducing its ecological impact on the community and to preparing the next generation of “green” professionals. These are examples of the university’s institutional practices, courses, applied research and community involvement that serve the ecological and economic viability of the state.

Bakersfield  CSU Bakersfield completed a campus wide lighting retrofit.  CSU Bakersfield replaced an inefficient 650-ton chiller with a new, very efficient 800-ton chiller, which provides greater capacity with less energy.

Channel Islands  CSU Channel Islands has found ways to reduce campus electricity consumption by 24 percent since 2008 by taking steps that include: switching to high-efficiency light bulbs in interior and exterior spaces; installing classroom occupancy sensors, daylight sensors and lighting controls, and improving heating, ventilation and air systems. These actions translate to $245,300 in energy savings from 2008-2009 through 2010-2011.  CSU Channel Islands reduced water use by 28 percent in the last two years. 97 percent of the campus is now irrigated with reclaimed water.  Between 2008 and 2012, students from CSU Channel Islands traveled to the Gulf Coast in efforts to restore what was once a hub of culture, entertainment, food and travel before hurricane Katrina and the Gulf Coast oil spill. This program was possible due to incredible CSU faculty including Assistant Professor Sean Anderson, who has worked for years on wetland restoration and research on Louisiana’s Gulf Coast. For the past five years, their restoration efforts and research have focused on the bottomland hardwood forest in Plaquemines Parish. The students spent half their days working on wetland restoration and half on building sustainable food systems and community food gardens in and around New Orleans.

Chico  CSU Chico is one of the seven founding members of the American College and University President’s Climate Commitment to reduce global warming.  The campus is home to the oldest student-run recycling program in the CSU.  The Institute for Sustainable Development at CSU Chico and Associated Students of CSU Chico will host their eighth annual This Way to Sustainability Conference in March 2013. It is the largest student-run sustainability conference in the country.  The Division of Business and Finance is phasing out gasoline-powered vehicles and replacing them with electric vehicles. CSU, Chico has increased the percentage of electric vehicles in the fleet from 20 percent in 2007 to 31 percent in 2011.

Dominguez Hills  The master’s program in Environmental Science prepares professionals in government, planning, education, research, journalism, law and academia to address and solve environmental challenges. The program emphasizes environmental problems and opportunities in an urban setting.

11 | P a g e

East Bay  CSU East Bay’s Recreation and Wellness Center is a LEED Gold-equivalent certified building.

Fresno  Fresno State has an organic farm plot. Approved by California Certified Organic Farmers (CCOF) in May 2008, the farm is approximately 0.8 acres and is used as an educational tool for students in the agricultural sciences.

Fullerton  The campus’s newest student housing complex is the first in California awarded the LEED Platinum certification by the U.S. Green Building Council.  CSU Fullerton has a series of three solar installations. The systems combine to produce 1.6megawatt hours of power annually throughout their 25-year lifespan – the equivalent of reducing 26,422 tons of greenhouse gas emissions or eliminating 5,181 passenger vehicles from the road.  Campus exterior lighting design standards include the latest LED parking lot and garage lighting and integrated occupancy based dimming controls.

Humboldt  The Ecotourism Management and Planning Certificate Program at Humboldt State University is a year-long program for those interested in the concept and practice of sustainable, ecologybased tourism. Students learn about global and national trends in tourism including principles of ecology-based tourism, the role of ecotourism in community development and sustainable architectural and site designs.  Humboldt State University built the first building in the CSU system to be LEED Gold certified for its eco-friendly features. The Behavioral and Social Sciences Building has rainwater collection, sustainably harvested wood, native-plant landscaping, and more.  Students have a history of working for the environment. The student-run eco-demonstration house on campus is one of the nation’s oldest, and students recently voted for a new fee to fund student-led energy projects on campus.  Humboldt State students pay $10 per semester to the HSU Energy Independence Fund for energy efficiency projects on campus. The savings are paid back to the fund and reinvested in energy projects.

Long Beach  CSU Long Beach maintains one of the largest fleets of electric vehicles in higher education, and recharges the vehicles from solar power.

Los Angeles  The concept of sustainable energy research, as realized by the Center for Energy and Sustainability at Cal State Los Angeles, involves a multidisciplinary effort to address issues of making existing energy technologies more efficient while pursuing emerging alternate energy technologies that are not reliant on fossil fuels. The center conducts transformative research to promote energy diversity, efficiency and sustainability while training diverse and talented engineers and scientists to catalyze change in this field. They also engage policymakers, schools, and the public to ensure that the technological advances are robust, widely understood and adopted.

Maritime Academy  The California Maritime Academy’s Simulation Center is a $7.2 million facility that provides students ship navigation training in a variety of situations without the environmental impact of operating an actual vessel.

12 | P a g e

Monterey Bay  In 2012, CSU Monterey Bay was awarded a 10-year, $32 million NASA grant to continue research, which includes: wildfire monitoring; agricultural water management; flood forecasting, and crop yield predictions. It will support 20, full-time research scientists and five to 10 student researchers each year. Scientists will study changes in ecosystems, climate and biodiversity, and will develop products to help land managers, agricultural producers and water managers throughout the U.S. Northridge  CSU Northridge MBA students carried out an assessment of the feasibility of introducing a bicycle-sharing program on campus. A student group has now formed a bicycle co-operative and is hoping to bring a bicycle maintenance and rental facility to the campus.

Pomona  The President’s Climate Task Force fulfills an ongoing, university wide plan to reduce Cal Poly Pomona’s impact on the environment. It has developed an approach for achieving climate neutrality that favors local action to improve efficiency and change behavior over offset projects or strategies. In reviewing emission trends, modeling projected emissions, and assessing the impact of various reduction strategies, it concluded that 2030 was an ambitious, but realistic timeline for achieving climate neutrality of campus operations. The vision plan estimates that emissions can be reduced by 65 percent over our projected “business as usual” level by 2030 through local action.  The Cal Poly Pomona Campus Shuttle Mobile Phone Program provides students with the opportunity to see the five Bronco Express routes, view bus status in real time and receive estimated arrival time for their route via text message and video displays at most stops. These displays are solar powered and audio enabled for low-vision students.  The campus is home to the Lyle Center for Regenerative Studies. The center’s mission is to advance our understanding of environmental sustainability through education, research, demonstration and outreach. The center researches and demonstrates a wide array of regenerative strategies, including low-energy architecture, energy production technology, water treatment, organic agriculture, ecological restoration and sustainable community development.

Sacramento  Supported by awards totaling nearly $1 million, the Smart Grid Center at Sacramento State engages in product testing of automated metering infrastructure and develops practical field solutions for large-scale integration of Smart Grid technologies.  The WELL, CSU Sacramento’s recreation and wellness center, and the American River Courtyard, a suite-style residence hall, have both received LEED Gold certification.

San Bernardino  CSU San Bernardino’s new Health Sciences building at its Palm Desert campus was designed and constructed to minimize energy required for cooling, and surrounding xeriscaping minimizes the need for irrigation. Success in energy efficiency, water conservation, and other sustainability features resulted in LEED for New Construction Gold certification for the Health Sciences building.

San Diego  The new student-funded Aztec Center Student Union at San Diego State University is on track to become a LEED Platinum certified building. Sustainable features include: a vegetated roof; solar panels; day lighting; radiant floor system; ground heat exchanger; sunshades; underground storm water tank, and the re-use of demolished building materials.

13 | P a g e

San Francisco  New compost and recycling bins were installed at 120 locations throughout campus to provide disposal for compost, recycling and waste materials. Since the new bins were introduced in September 2012, the campus has doubled its composting rate and increased the recycling rate by 10 percent.  The campus hosted EcoFest in April 2012. The event included workshops, educational carnival games, and vendors in an effort to promote sustainable living to students, faculty, staff, alumni and the local community.

San José  Working to build the number of green jobs, San José State University is a founding partner of the Environmental Business Cluster that assists start-up companies that make environmental products or provide environmental services. The cluster has graduated more than 75 companies, and 80 percent of the clients are clean and renewable energy companies. The technologies adopted by these companies solve serious environmental problems and reduce reliance on non-renewable energy sources. The cluster also provides technology commercialization assistance to federal and state grant-funded research scientists.

San Marcos  As a part of the Environmental Studies major capstone course students integrate coursework from throughout their major to understand the conceptual and practical challenges of environmental and natural resource management including: forests; water; habitat preservation; land use; and ecotourism, as well as environmental arts and humanities. In particular, the capstone challenges students to apply concepts from their coursework to original research projects.  CSU San Marcos Social Behavioral Sciences Building, which opened in August 2011, earned a LEED Silver certification.

San Luis Obispo  At Cal Poly San Luis Obispo, the recently completed Poly Canyon Village provides housing for 2,700 students and earned a LEED Gold certification. The design includes: low volatile organic compounds material; energy efficient buildings; reduced water use; water-efficient landscaping; use of recycled content; 90 percent diversion from the landfill of construction waste, and more.  The new Center for Science and Mathematics will employ chilled beam systems for space temperature control in laboratories and conference rooms.

Sonoma  Sonoma State students joined with Slow Food USA to bring to campus a vision for a future food system that is based on the principles of high quality and taste, environmental sustainability, and social justice - in essence, a food system that is good, clean and fair.

Stanislaus  The geography discipline at CSU Stanislaus bridges the liberal arts and sciences. Students who complete the program are prepared to advance to graduate school or to enter the work world where they are likely to find jobs in urban and regional planning, climatology, transportation, resource management, natural hazards, ecotourism and international business.  The M.S. in Ecology and Sustainability program provides students with the knowledge and skills for careers in fields that contribute solutions to environmental and sustainability issues.

California in particular, has an urgent need for professionals with deep ecological insight who can manage systems to ensure the long-term sustainability of human and ecosystem health. The M.S. in Ecology and Sustainability is a thesis-based, two- to three-year degree program with two 14 | P a g e



possible concentrations: (1) Ecological Conservation, and (2) Ecological Economics. Students study and conduct field and laboratory research in a variety of systems, including nearby habitats such as wetlands, grasslands, rivers, oak forests, and marine ecosystems, as well as in agricultural lands, urban areas, restored ecosystems, and social/economic systems.

The University Student Union Eco Warriors is a student volunteer program at Stanislaus that provides sustainability focused programs and events. The Eco Warriors provide education and entertainment to students about the importance of living a sustainable lifestyle and the effect it will have on our environment. The programs focus on educating students, staff, faculty and the community at large about sustainability initiatives on environmental management and human consumption to improve the quality of life not only for the present, but also for the future.

For more information on sustainability across the CSU visit: http://www.calstate.edu/cpdc/sustainability/

15 | P a g e

... .... ..... .... ..... .... .... ... ..

Samples of CSU-Generated Research in Ecotourism & Sustainability

Introduction: Many HMEI faculty members are conducting ecotourism and sustainability research.

These are examples of their publications and contributions to academia.

Bloyer, J.M., Gustke, L., & Leung, Y. (2003). Indicators for Sustainable Tourism Development: Crossing the Divide from Definitions to Actions. In Pineda, F. D. & Brebbia, C.A. (Eds) The Sustainable World: Sustainable Tourism (pp. 109-115).

Dewald, B. & Bruin, B. (in progress). Consumer Attitudes Toward “Green” Restaurants. To be submitted to the Cornell Hospitality Quarterly.

Gilinsky, A. 2012. Frog’s Leap Winery in 2011 - The Sustainability Agenda (case + video). Case Research Journal 32: 145 - 165.

Greenwood, J.B., Brothers, G.L., & Henderson, K.A. (2008). Don’t Sink the Boat! The Plimsoll Model of Tourism Sustainability. Leisure Studies Newsletter, (80), 31-34.

Hendricks, W.W., Stockton, T., Correll, D., Greenwood, J.B. (2010). California Sustainable Tourism Marketing Handbook. Report prepared for the California Travel and Tourism Commission.

Kline, C., Greenwood, J.B. & Hao, H. (in progress). Gauging Travelers’ Purchasing and Consumption Habits of Sustainably Raised Animal Products. To be submitted to the Journal of Sustainable Tourism.

Kline, C., Greenwood, J.B, Shah, N. & Green, E. (in progress). Foodies Are Not All Alike! Exploring a Market Segmentation Scale for Foodies. To be submitted to the Journal of Travel Research.

Lee, M., Rudolph, S. & Feinstein, A. (in progress). Environmentally Sustainable Practices in Hospitality Higher Education: A Case of a Hospitality Program and Its Laboratory. To be submitted to the Cornell Hospitality Quarterly.

Soule, K., & Hendricks, W. W. (submitted for second review). Mt. San Jacinto State Park wilderness visitor attributes, preferences and perceptions. Submission to the International Journal of Wilderness.

Wearing, S., Cynn, S., Ponting, J., & McDonald, M. (2002). Converting Environmental Concern into Ecotourism Purchases: A Qualitative Evaluation of International Backpackers in Australia. Journal of Ecotourism, 1(2/3), 133-148.

16 | P a g e

Virden, R. J., & Budruk, M. (2011). Sustainability: Reflections on the Challenges of Providing Sustainable Leisure Opportunities in a World and Era of Scarce Resources. Journal of Park & Recreation Administration, 29(3), 1-10.

Wearing, S., Wearing, M., & McDonald, M. (2010). Understanding Local Power and Interactional Processes in Sustainable Tourism: Exploring Village-Tour Operator Relations on the Kokoda Track, Papua New Guinea. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 18(1), 61-76. doi:10.1080/09669580903071995 Wearing, S. , McDonald, M. , & Ponting, J. (2005). Building a Decommodified Research Paradigm in Tourism: The contribution of NGOs. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 13(5), 424.

Conference Proceedings: Bloyer, J.M., Gustke, L., & Leung, Y. (2003). Indicators for Sustainable Tourism Development: Crossing the Divide from Definitions to Actions. International Conference on Sustainable Tourism, Segovia, Spain, July 7 – 9, 2004.

Kline, C. & Bloyer, J.M. (2005, September). How Universities Can Apply a Multidisciplinary Approach to Ecotourism Planning and Development: A Case Study from North Carolina. 2005 Biennial Conference on Ecotourism in the United States. Bar Harbor, Maine.

17 | P a g e

... .... ..... .... ..... ....

Samples of Current Research in Ecotourism .... ... ..

Introduction: This is a summary of current research in the field of ecotourism. Given the multidisciplinary nature of ecotourism, a cross-section of research topics are included.

The Third Criterion of Ecotourism: Are Ecotourists More Concerned about Sustainability than Other Tourists?

Beaumont, N. (2011). The Third Criterion of Ecotourism: Are Ecotourists More Concerned about Sustainability than Other Tourists? Journal of Ecotourism, 10(2), 135-148. doi:10.1080/14724049.2011.555554 Abstract: Ecotourism can be defined by three core criteria: nature, learning and sustainability. The ecotourist market has been segmented by the nature and learning criteria only. It has been assumed that ecotourists are environmentally concerned and therefore sustainability is a factor in their decisionmaking. However, little empirical research has confirmed this assumption. This study surveyed 243 respondents participating in an ecotourism experience in Australia. It identified ecotourists according to the nature and learning criteria as per previous segmentation studies. Pro-environmental attitudes were measured as an indication of their support for sustainability. Results revealed no significant differences in pro-environmental attitudes between those identified as ecotourists and those considered nonecotourists. While demand exists for nature and learning experiences, compliance with the sustainability criterion seems to be no more a factor in ecotourist decision-making than for mainstream tourists.

Implications are that market segmentation research should consider all relevant criteria when segmenting a market for a particular product to ensure supply matches demand. However, demand for certain products can be created by innovative marketing practices. This would enable the ecotourism industry to respond to the market’s demand for nature and learning, but also influence the behavior and structure of the market with regard to sustainability.

The Role of Certification in International Ecotourism Operators’ Internet Promotion of Education Bustam, T. D., Buta, N., & Stein, T. V. (2012). The Role of Certification in International Ecotourism Operators’ Internet Promotion of Education. Journal of Ecotourism, 11(2), 85-101. doi:10.1080/14724049.2012.683005 Abstract: Ecotourism is a growing international tourism trend with unique demands on natural, cultural, and human resources. To ensure that operations are managed sustainably across environmental, sociocultural, and economic dimensions, operating standards are implemented through ecotourism certification programs. This study examined international ecotourism operators’ internet promotion of educational offerings, viewed as interpretive products, and interpretive sustainability practices. The 18 | P a g e

primary focus was to understand differences in internet promotion of educational offerings between certified and non-certified operators. Stratified systematic sampling techniques rendered sampling of 29.9 percent (227/759) of the population. Data were analyzed using domain analysis and logistic regression. The results revealed that certified and non-certified operators promote and practice education in the delivery of their ecotourism services. However, divergences existed between certified and non-certified operators with non-certified operators portraying clearer messages of education in their internet promotion. These findings led to the question of why differences exist between these groups’ internet promotion of education as well as what are the merits of ecotourism certification agencies’ requirements for marketing standards of education. Understanding the role of education in certification marketing is critical to ensuring sustainability of ecotourism operators as well as in establishing a shared philosophy between operators, visitors, and residents.

Interpretive Layering in Nature-Based Tourism: a Simple Approach for Complex Attractions Coghlan, A., & Kim, A. (2012). Interpretive Layering in Nature-Based Tourism: A Simple Approach for Complex Attractions. Journal of Ecotourism, 11(3), 173-187. doi:10.1080/14724049.2012.712135 Abstract: This paper considers the role of interpretive layering, that is, combining multiple sources of interpretation in order to repeat the interpretive message, in nature-based tourism. We explore interpretive layering at an attraction (the Great Barrier Reef (GBR)) that presents several challenges to tourists and operators. The GBR, Australia, represents an extraordinary site where tourists typically have limited previous experience with the physical conditions. Tourists are encouraged to shape their experience by choosing from a multitude of activities offered, and where focused interpretive activities are more difficult due to the (underwater) nature of the attraction. Using 775 visitors surveys distributed on the return trip from the reef, we analyzed the relationship between the number of interpretive types used and changes in visitors’ knowledge levels, attitudes and behavioral intentions.

The results highlight the important additive effects of a variety of interpretive sources on visitors’ understanding of this attraction. We propose that interpretive layering may be particularly relevant to attractions that are harder to accommodate within visitors’ existing frames of reference and might also be usefully applied in (post-Fordist) tourism that is characterized by a trend away from packaged mass tourism, toward products that favor flexibility, individuality, hybridity and activity.

Ecotourism Potential and Ecotour Offer in Russia Drozdov, A., & Basanets, L. (2010). Ecotourism Potential and Ecotour Offer in Russia. Journal of Tourism Challenges & Trends, 3(1), 45-56.

Abstract: Ecotourism has developed fairly spontaneously and irregularly in Russia. Some territories experience heavy pressure; while others, quite interesting as well, are not visited by tourists. An evaluation of ecotourism development potential was accomplished for every administrative region of 19 | P a g e

the Russian Federation. Adjacent regions with similar ecotourism potential were combined into ecotourism regions. Thirty ecotourism regions can be delineated in the territory of Russia. They are shown on a map of l:30 M scale. The factors that specify the separation of these regions are described.

The ecotourism potential of the regions is compared with the offer of eco tours on the Internet.

Coincidence and convergence are marked out and construed; recommendations are made on further development of ecotourism.

Community-Based Ecotourism to Meet the New Tourist’s Expectations: An Exploratory Study Fiorello, A., & Bo, D. (2012). Community-Based Ecotourism to Meet the New Tourist’s Expectations: An Exploratory Study. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 21(7), 758-778. doi:10.1080/19368623.2012.624293 Abstract: Tourism is destructive toward host communities and their natural environment. However, the general attitude of society toward the environment is changing and, consequently, people are developing an appreciation for the value of responsible travel. Alternative forms of tourism have been conceived, such as ecotourism, and are viewed as a means to meet the expectations of the new tourists.

Ecotourism is a method to satisfy the concern of new tourists for environmental conservation but it neglects one of the key factors of sustainable tourism today: the host communities. Community-based ecotourism aims at environmental conservation but it is also a way to empower communities, by allowing them a degree of control over tourism projects and their impacts. This article reveals the varying degrees of empowerment of host communities provided by community-based ecotourism through a metastudy analysis of six case studies of tourism projects. Not all contemporary tourism projects take local populations into consideration thus the six case studies are nonrandom selections for the purpose of representing the concept embodied in the thesis and showing its appropriateness with the new tourists’ expectations.

Ecotourism Development in China: Prospects for Expanded Roles for Non-Governmental Organizations Hao, Z., Lassoie, J. P., & Wolf, S. A. (2011). Ecotourism development in China: prospects for expanded roles for non-governmental organizations. Journal of Ecotourism, 10(1), 46-63. doi:10.1080/14724041003686813 Abstract: China’s flourishing economy is contributing to rapid development throughout the country, but prosperity is not evenly distributed and rural communities are experiencing social and ecological problems. Ecotourism has the potential to foster both local economic development and environmental conservation. Capacity to promote and deliver ecotourism services is, however, poorly developed at present, particularly at the level of rural communities. We assess such capacity through an institutional analysis, focusing on interactions among public agencies, businesses, and civil society actors. Specifically, we study the roles and potential of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) as an emerging class of development actors within China’s civil society. We present a case study of an ecotourism 20 | P a g e

demonstration project in the Laojunshan area of northwestern Yunnan Province in western China. A review of project documents and field interviews supported analysis of Strengths, Weakness, Opportunities, and Threats that the relevant actors perceive as constraining and enabling the ecotourism enterprise. NGOs served unique coordination functions across institutional sectors and mobilized critical resources for conservation and development. Recommendations for NGOs engaged in ecotourism in China include investment in training programs with local people and community-based organizations, facilitating collaborations between businesses and communities, working directly with businesses, and promoting cooperatives.

Environmental Training for Tourism Professionals JOVIČIĆ, D. (2010). Environmental Training for Tourism Professionals. Tourism & Hospitality Management, 940-949.

Abstract: Tourism activity, more than other economic sectors, uses environmental resources as main inputs into its “production function”. The ecological balance sheet of tourism clearly shows that all tourism development produces a risk for the environment in terms of direct impact (destruction of ecosystems) or indirect impact through the disturbance of natural cycles. That is why, during the last 1015 years, many relevant international institutions and experts have been strongly devoted to discussion on the issues related to environmental training for tourism professionals. In this context, various documents, recommendations and guidelines have been prepared, advocating that tourism professionals should receive environmental education and training. The aim of this paper is to make a brief synthesis of such ideas and suggestions, making the base for a training program for tourism operators, providing them with the optimal information and with practical tools for developing tourism, which respects the environment. The several modules of such a training program should also provide tourism professionals with an adequate understanding of the different dimensions of the environment and of the complex mechanisms linking the environment to the human element. This will ensure a common language and will facilitate the subsequent dialogue between tourism professionals and environmental experts.

Endangered Areas in Central America and Implications for Sustainable Tourism Development Lema, J., Agrusa, J., Lazanski, T., Juvan, E., & Lesjak, M. (2010). Endangered Areas in Central America and Implications for Sustainable Tourism Development. Journal of Tourism Challenges & Trends, 3(1), 57-64.

Abstract: This paper examines the benefits of ecotourism in the Maya Rain Forest of Central America to promote sustainable tourism development. Central America is currently in the primary stages of tourism development and has an abundance of natural resources and cultural history, which is advantageous to an ecotourism marketing position. For ecotourism to be successful in the Maya Rain Forest, two significant factors need to be implemented. The first is the use of the Bottom-Up Approach when 21 | P a g e

involving the local residents, so they will have input on how the area is to be presented to the tourists.

The second factor is to have those who visit the area pay a fee that is designated for the local population. By having both of these factors implemented and demonstrating the benefits of these factors to the local population, the area has the potential to gain the full support of the local population, which is critical to the sustainability of the Maya Rain Forest as an ecotourism destination.

A Case Study on the Effect Evaluation of Ecotourism Environmental Education *Chinese Li, W. (2012). A Case Study on the Effect Evaluation of Ecotourism Environmental Education. (English).

Tourism Tribune, 27(12), 80-87. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1002-5006.2012.12.011 Abstract: Effect evaluation of environmental education has become an important and challenging theme in ecotourism research, and the result is of value both practically and theoretically. An experimental comparison research was conducted in this thesis with the samples divided into two groups: compared group and experimental group with the latter being exerted pre-designed environmental education intervention. Then, the closely related published research results--�the indexes, approaches and model of effect evaluation on environmental education in ecotourism� were applied to measure and evaluate the effect of environmental education in the case study zone.

Supply-side perspectives on ecotourism in Northern Thailand Nick, K., & Kittinoot, C. (2010). Supply-side perspectives on ecotourism in Northern Thailand.

International Journal of Tourism Research, 12(5), 627-641.

Abstract: This study provides a supply-side perspective on ecotourism by exploring the ways in which travel agents and tour operators in Chiang Mai, Thailand conceptualize, prioritize and furnish ecotourism. Although travel agents and tour operators serve as crucial intermediaries between tourists and destinations, the ecotourism literature has largely ignored the ways in which retailers and suppliers of tourism experience approach and define ecotourism. Using quantitative data gathered from 300 travel agents and tour operators, this paper illustrates that the conceptualization of ecotourism among agents and operators in Chiang Mai is expansive, flexible and, in some ways, internally contradictory.

An Exploration of a Mini-Guide Program: Training Local Children in Sea Turtle Conservation and Ecotourism in Brazil.

Pegas, F., Coghlan, A., & Rocha, V. (2012). An exploration of a mini-guide program: Training local children in sea turtle conservation and ecotourism in Brazil. Journal of Ecotourism, 11(1), 48-55. doi:10.1080/14724049.2011.631710

22 | P a g e

Abstract: This study explores the mini-guide program delivered by the Brazilian Sea Turtle Conservation Program (Tartarugas Marinhas or TAMAR) in the fishing community of Praia do Forte, Bahia, Brazil.

Established in 1995, this program lasts one year, training local children, aged 10–14 years, in guiding skills and learning about sea turtles and marine ecosystems. The children also receive a monthly stipend.

In-depth, semi-structured interviews with 77 local community members were conducted during nine months of ethnographic research to assess perceptions about the program. The interviews also included seven former students, who provided an evaluation of the program from their perspective. The results indicate communitywide support for the program, with locals focusing not only on greater environmental awareness of the children (or Tamarzinhos, as they are called), but also on the personal development as a result of participation. Former Tamarzinhos themselves agree with this assessment and demonstrate knowledge gain and positive behavior about conservation of marine species, new aspirations toward higher education, greater training and skill acquisition. As such, long-term environmental programs such as the mini-guide program at TAMAR can promote socio-economic and environmental changes that last throughout the youth and adult lives of the children.

Volunteer Tourism: Its Role in Creating Conservation Awareness Rattan, J. K., Eagles, P. J., & Mair, H. L. (2012). Volunteer tourism: its role in creating conservation awareness. Journal of Ecotourism, 11(1), 1-15. doi:10.1080/14724049.2011.604129 Abstract: This paper explores the perceptions of the impact that volunteer tourism has on the conservation awareness of non-volunteer tourists at the Elephant Nature Park (ENP) in Chiang Mai, Thailand. The ENP is a privately owned sanctuary that rehabilitates injured and abused elephants and relies on tourism and volunteer tourism for its upkeep. Data for this study were obtained through the use of self-administered questionnaires administered to 200 participants during both their pre-visit and post-visit at the ENP. Results showed that after spending time at the park, visitors’ awareness about volunteer tourism increased. Participants felt that volunteer tourism increases awareness about conservation issues and volunteering, makes a considerable contribution to conservation, and brings necessary funding to conservation projects. Furthermore, non-volunteer tourists also expressed an interest in volunteering at the ENP, volunteering at home, and donating money to animal conservation organizations. The model of volunteer tourism utilized by the ENP was thus shown to be an effective tool for creating awareness about domestic elephant conservation issues in non-volunteer tourists.

Relationships among Resident Participation in Nature and Heritage Tourism Activities, Place Attachment, and Sustainability in three Hudson River Valley Communities Schuster, R. M., Sullivan, L. E., Kuehn, D. M., & Morais, D. B. (2011). Relationships among Resident Participation in Nature and Heritage Tourism Activities, Place Attachment, and Sustainability in three Hudson River Valley Communities. Journal of Park & Recreation Administration, 29(3), 5569.

23 | P a g e

Abstract: Many rural coastal communities face challenges in retaining stable local economies and have come to depend on tourism as the basis for economic viability. Local residents often see nature-based recreational opportunities and the local character marketed to tourists as attributes that support attractive and livable communities. This research investigates the relationships among resident engagement with local, nature-based and heritage resources, length of residency, place attachment, and support for local tourism in three Hudson River Valley, New York communities. Based on the findings of this research, the following five points are posited about sustainability generally and specific to the studies communities. (1) Place identity is a more effective longitudinal indicator of sustainability than place dependence. (2) Place attachment did predict tourism support. (3) The cultural activities factor was the only individual, statistically significant activity predictor of place attachment. (4) Cold Spring Village residents may perceive the current level of tourism to be sufficient. Specifically, there may be a tourism development saturation point that is being reached. And finally, (5) tangible amenities were not a prominent concern for residents recommending the communities to potential visitors.

Improving Quality of Ecotourism through Advancing Education and Training of Greek Eco-Tour Guides: The Role of Training in Environmental Interpretation Skanavis, C., & Giannoulis, C. (2010). Improving Quality of Ecotourism through Advancing Education and Training of Greek Eco-Tour Guides: The Role of Training in Environmental Interpretation.

Tourismos, 5(2), 49-68.

Abstract: Environmental interpretation in Greece is in its infancy as an academic field. There are no nature guides or specific conservation objectives, and there is no professional training for non-formal environmental educators and/or interpreters. The purpose of this paper is to reveal the necessity of integrating environmental interpretation in training of Greek Ecotour guides. The focus is on developing abilities which could enable Greek Ecotour guides to communicate and interpret the significance of the environment, promote minimal impact practices, ensure the sustainability of the natural and cultural environment, and motivate visiting tourists to evaluate the quality of life in relation to larger ecological or cultural concerns. The rationale underpinning this objective is that by providing accurate and effective interpretation of ecotourism sites as well as monitoring and modeling environmental responsible behavior, the outcome will be to promote positive impacts of tourism and alleviate negative ones. Local community will be encouraged to participate in environmental management of ecotourism settings. Furthermore, connecting ecotourism commitment to economic and employment benefits to local communities stresses that training local people to be interpretive guides, helps achieve not only ecological sustainability but also economic sustainability. Once trained, guides may encourage conservation action among both tourists and the local community.

24 | P a g e

... .... ..... .... ..... .... .... ... ..

Further Reading

The CSU Hospitality Management Education Initiative www.calstate.edu/hospitality California Higher Education Sustainability Conference www.cahigheredusustainability.org The California State University Commitment to Sustainability www.calstate.edu/cpdc/sustainability Green Hotel Association www.greenhotels.com Green Restaurant Association www.dinegreen.com The International Ecotourism Society www.ecotourism.org The National Restaurant Association ConSERVE www.conserve.restaurant.org Sustainable Travel International sustainabletravel.org US Travel Association – Travel Green www.travelgreen.org Visit California www.industry.visitcalifornia.com World Tourism Organization - Sustainable Development of Tourism www.sdt.unwto.org/en

25 | P a g e

... .... .... . .... ...... . .. .... ... ..

Appendix i. “On an Education Mission,” Collins magazine, Spring 2012 ii. “Restoring to More,” Collins magazine, Fall 2010 iii. “College Launches Research Program,” Collins magazine, Fall 2012 iv. Environmental Impact Inventory v. “ Going Green for Good,” Collins magazine, Fall 2011 vi. “Culinary Garden Springs to Life, Offers Menu Inspiration,” Polycentric vii. California Sustainable Tourism Handbook

Resorting

to More

Professor and students lend research and ideas to a spiritual resort in Mexico

D

14

r. Jane Zhang and four Collins College students have taken Cal Poly Pomona’s learnby-doing to heart by traveling to Mexico in aims of helping a spiritual resort earn a bigger stake in the $100 billion global wellness tourism industry.

Through demographic research, studying advertising options and building a potential client database, Zhang and her students have formed a plan to help the Sterra Hotel Spa build its client base with marketing.

Zhang was brought into the project through Eddie Hodges of Strategic Business Partnerships, Inc., who sought out her expertise to develop a plan to improve the resort’s marketing. The Sterra Hotel Spa is a secluded but posh resort in the state of Hidalgo, northeast of Mexico City. It holds traditional celebrations for the equinoxes and solstices and offers a variety of natural healing treatments. Hodges knew people willing to go to Sterra might be into meditation and yoga, which are offered. But those are personal practices that extend beyond one demographic group or organization making potential customers difficult to target.

On the advice of a colleague in Mexico, he started looking for colleges with four-year hospitality programs and met Zhang.

A hotel developer and researcher of destination marketing, Zhang drove home the point that resorts at exclusive and remote locations need to target specific market segments and to adopt a selective marketing approach. Hodges liked her approach and

B y S o nja B jellan d

awarded Zhang a $16,200 research grant to conduct special group marketing research. Seeing an opportunity to bring theory into practice, she assigned two research assistants and her 40 marketing students to develop plans to help the resort.

“If they can market this hotel, which is located ‘in the middle of nowhere,’ they are able to market anything in the world,” Zhang said. Studying spiritual tourism on an academic level helps students and marketers better understand customers in this growing industry, she added.

Divided into eight teams, classmates researched a variety of potential markets for spiritual tourism such as wellness, corporate and cancer survivors. The students also knew nothing about such resorts and found little about Sterra on the Internet. Students Diego Godoy, Anthony Liu, Tatiana Noguera and Kristina Petrossian decided they could only find out by going there. They paid for their own airfare and Sterra resort covered their expenses at the hotel.

“We wanted to do our best, to make this effective and not just a blind report,” Petrossian said.

At the hotel, Petrossian and Noguera spent three full days taking in every massage, treatment and ceremony the resort offered. Petrossian said it made a strong impression on her and inspired her to believe in what they were trying to sell. The 25-year-old college senior lives by her smartphone and works at Disneyland’s Splash Mountain and canoes. She experienced some

At a Glance Dr. Jane Zhang and her students had these recommendations for the Sterra Resort and Spa: • Build a social media presence on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube • Sponsor spiritual travel conferences attended by tour operators and travel agencies •W ork with the International Ecotourism Society and its network in the industry

©2010 iStockphoto/AnatolyTiplyashin

Dr. Jane Zhang visits with people in the community near the hotel.

• Partner with specialty travel agencies •T arget the Southern California market with online and print advertising

surprise when she learned that Sterra does not have cell phone service and only one corner of the lobby allows Wi-Fi. The mystical mountains, fireflies and stars created an unfamiliar calm for her. It broke her workaholic cycle. Since returning, she takes more time to look at the trees on the side of the freeway and listen to birds. Life is now less about smartphones, websites and mapping out her future, Petrossian said. It is about how she can affect the world. “I still use my planner but I’m not as compulsive about it,” she said.

Zhang’s students became close with the people who worked at the resort during their trip. They respected the camaraderie they saw among the employees. They understood that if the resort flourishes, it will help the surrounding community flourish by creating more jobs. That understanding coupled with the coursework gave them the tools to execute the marketing research and develop proposals.

“The classes help because they not only teach you the lingo and technicalities, but a greater understanding of what you are representing and how it is directly correlated to other people on a personal level compared to on a business level,” Petrossian said.

She and Noguera wrote about their experiences for the class and gave a presentation when they returned. Their inspiration was enough for the rest of the class to feel a stake in the project. Zhang watched as the students took ownership of their plans and ideas blossomed. The class looked at social networking opportunities and personal sales starting with a database of 1,000 potential clients.

Hearing about the students’ trips and learning what people took

away from the resort gave Hodges a sense of how he needed to market the resort. “If someone is looking to have that experience and that life change, this is the place for them,” he said. “It’s not about a spring break vacation.”

The students compiled their research and prepared their ideas. Zhang put together a detailed marketing plan for Sterra’s top management team to execute in this fall. In August, Hodges and Petrossian presented the plan to the hotel in Mexico. The recommendations proposed to Sterra included operational changes such as purchasing a vehicle that could transport guests as well as marketing suggestions such as partnering with travel agencies specializing in ecotourism and sponsoring spiritual tourism conferences.

Working with universities and students, Hodges said, should be considered by more small- and medium-sized businesses. Hodges hopes to continue working with Zhang who wants to take this research beyond a class exercise. She has since applied for and received a follow-up grant for $5,000 from The Collins College.

Her research will explore tourists’ psychological needs concerning nature-based tourism in underdeveloped regions.

“I like having the fresh ideas. The passion and the blank canvases they bring are helpful,” Hodges said.

15

Faculty & Staff notes

College Launches Research Program New initiative creates scholarship and collaboration

By Sonja Bje ll and to examine the environmental impact of the college with an emphasis on the laboratories and the RKR. Their project adds to a body of research started by the Environmental Impact Inventory conducted last year by a team from the Lyle Center of Regenerative Studies.

Lee and Rudolph are analyzing food, energy, water consumable and waste systems. Their results are intended to help the college develop sustainable strategies that other laboratories and schools could follow. Lee said this is a hot topic in hospitality and tourism, and between his research skills and Rudolph’s resources they have been a good fit.

Results of the research will be published in the spring edition of Collins magazine. The three other summer research projects are:

Fall 2012

Some of the research will shine a light on sustainability issues at the college that reflect what restaurants and hotels are facing worldwide. For example, Dr. Sandra Kapoor and Belinda Lopez are calculating what it would cost for the Restaurant at Kellogg Ranch to serve only sustainable food. Kapoor said the effort has brought her literature review expertise together with Lopez’s strength using spreadsheets and understanding data. So far, they have learned about ways to acquire local beef and the difficulties restaurants face in navigating the agriculture industry.

“People are finding others, who really compliment their skills,” Kapoor said.

Chef/Instructor Scott Rudolph is also studying in his own backyard, so to speak.

He teamed up with Dr. Myong Jae (MJ) Lee

Collins | |

Twelve faculty members created a new definition of summer fun – research.

The Collins College launched a summer research program that awarded stipends to faculty members, who collaborated on a project with a colleague. The research topics ranged from sustainability to wine region travel trends to the impacts of a study abroad program. Each project will add to the body of knowledge about hospitality and will keep faculty abreast of important changes in the field and academia, said Dean Andy Feinstein.

“By creating new knowledge, faculty maintain their currency in the industry,” he said. “I’m hoping for six refereed journal articles in the next year and the forging of new relationships among faculty.”

An audit conducted in 2011 by Dr. Donald Hoyt, the former associate vice president for research at Cal Poly Pomona, found that a wealth of expertise among faculty was underutilized and that there was a lack of collaboration regarding scholarship. Feinstein responded by incentivizing research and offered $5,000 stipends to faculty.

The research pairs combine academic acumen with real-world knowledge.

Dr. Don St. Hilaire enjoyed the opportunity to work with Dr. John Self.

They have been colleagues for many years, yet never worked together on research until this program. They are conducting a survey of 33 students before and after they study in Italy to determine what they learned abroad.

“Typically, the many responsibilities of a faculty member with 10 or more years on a college campus, crowd out the time available for collaboration and research,” St. Hilaire said. “Andy’s program creates opportunities for faculty to engage with each other in the research process. Teamwork, the exchange of ideas, tools and techniques, assist in faculty development at all levels.”

j A study on consumer opinions regarding “green” restaurants – Dr. Ben Dewald, Barbara Jean Bruin and Yoon Jung Jang of Florida State University j Research into the appeal, image factors, marketing and strategic partnerships required to make a wine region successful for tourism while also noting stumbling blocks – Drs. Neha Singh and Margie Ferree Jones

Dr. MJ Lee and Scott Rudolph are examining food, energy, water consumable and waste systems at the college. They are one of six faculty teams in the Summer Research Program.

j A study of the effectiveness of teaching culinary arts live compared to online with filmed video – Drs. Jeff Brown and Zhenxing (Eddie) Mao

31

1

Acknowledgements

COLLINS COLLEGE OF HOSPITALITY MANAGEMENT AT CAL POLY POMONA UNIVERSITY

Prepared in support of The Collins College commitment to environmental sustainability.

_____________________________________________________________

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT INVENTORY

Prepared January, 2012 by:

Acknowledgement……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….1

1.0 Executive Summary…………………..……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………2 1.1 Inventory Results 1.2 Key Findings and Recommendations 1.3 Conclusions 2.0 Introduction.………………….…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..………….8 2.1 Hospitality and Food Service Impact on the Environment 2.2Impact of Educational Institutions and the University Presidents’ Climate Commitment 2.3 Collins College as a Leader 3.0 Inventory Process…………………..………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…………………………10 3.1 Introduction 3.2 Method 3.3 Greenhouse Gas Emissions 3.4 Global Warming Potential (GWP) 3.5 Carbon Dioxide Equivalent (eCO2) 3.6 Boundaries 4.0 Inventory Results………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….15 5.0 Food……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..17 5.1 Introduction 5.2 Boundaries 5.3 Data Collection and Methods 5.4 Findings 5.5 Recommendations 5.6 Data Supplier 6.0 Energy………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….28 6.1 Introduction 6.2 Boundaries 6.3 Data Collection and Method 6.4 Findings 6.5 Recommendations 6.6 Data Supplier 7.0 Water………………………………….……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….34 7.1 Introduction 7.2 Boundaries 7.3 Data Collection and Modeling 7.4 Findings 7.5 Recommendations 7.6 Data Supplier 8.0 Consumables……………………………………..…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………40 8.1 Introduction 8.2 Boundaries 8.3 Data Collection and Method 8.4 Findings 9.0 Solid Waste………………………….……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….45 9.1 Introduction 9.2 Boundaries 9.3 Data Collection and Method 9.4 Findings 9.5 Recommendations 9.6 Data Suppliers

9.7 Reference and Notes 10.0 Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….50 Appendix A Assumptions & Resources Appendix B Food Energy Water Consumables Waste

1

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

CONTRIBUTING AUTHORS Debbie Scheider, Lyle Center for Regenerative Studies Elektra Grant, Regenerative Studies Graduate Student Cristina Halstead, Regenerative Studies Graduate Student Kate Redman, Regenerative Studies Graduate Student Lindsey Stuvick, Regenerative Studies Graduate Student Dr. Kyle D. Brown, Director, Lyle Center for Regenerative Studies

RESEARCH ASSISTANT Sara LaFia, Urban Planning Undergraduate Student

The authors wish to thank all those named in this report, who contributed invaluable time and information for this inventory. Specifically, we wish to thank Dr. Andrew Feinstein for this project opportunity and the wonderful staff at The Collins College for their continued assistance. In particular, we would like to thank Jenesie Hardyman, Chitra Perera and Barbara Jean Bruin for their patience with our numerous queries and their persistence with providing data. Support for this study was provided by a grant from The Collins College.

2

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report inventories the environmental impact of The Collins College of Hospitality Management at Cal Poly Pomona University. We examine the operations of the college, including the two academic/administrative buildings (Academic) and the Restaurant at Kellogg Ranch (RKR). We analyze five specific systems based on their relevance to the hospitality industry and their integrated nature with restaurant operations. These systems are: food, energy, water, consumables, and waste. The specific impact of RKR operations are highlighted, offering the opportunity for the college to develop sustainable strategies for restaurant operations, which may serve as a model for industry. The report includes recommendations designed to improve data collection and initiate steps toward actions designed to reduce environmental impact.

This study uses Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions as an indicator of environmental impact. Greenhouse gases contribute to global climate change and result primarily from the release of carbon and nitrogenbased gases associated with fossil fuel burning. As such they are an important measure of impact in terms of the current most pressing environmental crisis, and an indicator of resource consumption in general. We utilize two life cycle analysis (LCA) calculators, Carnegie Mellon EIO-LCA and Bon Appetit’s PLCA - Eat Low Carbon Calculator, to

analyze impact and calculate resulting GHG emissions, represented in units of equivalent carbon dioxide (eCO2). College invoices, recipes and economic data provided by the college staff provided information for the academic year July 1, 2010 – June 30, 2011 and for the purposes of this inventory the food and consumables were based on economic activity during that academic year.

Energy, Water and Waste sectors were analyzed using an academic year model generated based on multiple field audits.

1.1 INVENTORY RESULTS The environmental impact assessment revealed that the college produces an estimated 766 MT eCO2 annually. Collectively, these GHG emissions were nearly evenly divided between the academic spaces of the college, and RKR, reporting 347 MT eCO2 (45%) and 420 MT eCO2 (55% ) respectively.

Emissions due to natural gas and electricity use were the largest contributors with 591 MT eCO2 or 77% of the annual greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Food purchases produced 110 MT eCO2, or 14% of annual emissions. The Waste and Consumables sectors each represented only 4% of the annual GHG emissions; and Water, with less than 4 MT eCO2 annually, represented less than 1% of the emissions.

(See Table 1.1 and Figure 1.1)

Table 1.1 The Collins College Annual GHG Emissions in Metric Tons of Carbon Dioxide (MT eCO2)

3

Academic Year 2011/12 SECTOR

Annual MT eCO2 ACADEMIC

RKR

TOTAL

Food

12.0

97.7

109.7

Water

1.0

2.7

3.7

Waste

10.8

22.9

33.7

Energy

307.0

284.0

591.0

Consumables

16.1

12.6

28.7

TOTAL

346.9

419.9

766.8

800.0 700.0 600.0 500.0 400.0 300.0 200.0 100.0 0.0 RKR

Food 97.7

Water 2.7

Waste 22.9

Energy 284.0

Consum.

12.6

Total 419.9

ACADEMIC

12.0

1.0

10.8

307.0

16.1

346.9

Figure 1.1 Annual GHG Emissions by Sector (MT eCO2)

4

1.2 KEY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOOD Key Findings

1.

The college emits approximately 110 MT eCO2 annually from food purchases, based on 2010-11 fiscal year. RKR represents 89% of those emissions, with 98 MT eCO2 annually, and the academic space represents 11% with 12 MT eCO2 annually. We expect the production of the food, not transportation or processing, to be the largest contributor to these GHG emissions.

2.

The menu items at RKR with the highest emissions were beef-based plates, with Prime Rib and Flat Iron Steak producing over 10,000 grams eCO2 per plate. Based on impact-by-plate and total plates sold per year, collectively, Prime Rib, Flat Iron Steak and French Dip emit more than 17 MT eCO2 annually. The RKR burger generates less than half of the emissions of the flatiron steak or prime rib, because it uses a smaller portion and a different cut of meat.

3.

In addition to beef, other high impact items include those with large amounts of dairy from cows, such as the vegetable lasagna. High impact items have eCO2 values ranging from 2,422 to 12,447 grams per plate.

4.

Mid-range items include dishes based on other meats, such as chicken, turkey, lamb, pork and fish; the eCO 2 values of this group range from 790 to 1675 grams per plate.

5.

Items with the lowest impact per plate include soups, desserts, salads, and vegetarian entrĂŠes, with eCO 2 values ranging from 176 to 497 grams per plate. The lowest impact items specifically were the Chocolate Torte, Lentil Soup, Petite Caesar and Strawberry Shortcake 176g, 184g, 199g and 239g eCO2 respectively. All of these items are vegetarian, and contain little-to-no dairy products.

6.

The menu items within the “Mains� category had by far the highest emissions. Our analysis shows that this is primarily due to the beef ingredient as opposed the influence of side dishes or other ingredients on the plate.

Mains with other proteins or vegetarian options had significantly lower emissions per plate.

7.

The menu items within the sandwich category had significantly fewer emissions as compared to Mains. However the same protein trend repeats itself, with the beef ingredient producing higher emissions as opposed to other proteins or vegetarian options.

8.

Our analysis of the four desserts shows that the ice-cream sandwich had by far the highest emissions. We attribute this to the impacts of dairy.

9.

The items that generate the most profit per ton of emissions are the apple crisp, chicken and ravioli. These items could be considered high income-low impact. The items that generate the least profit relative to emissions are the RKR burger, the prime rib and the flatiron steak.

Recommendations 1.

2.

3.

4.

Work with vendors to develop a more information rich relationship; this includes: a better understanding of food sourcing, purchasing options available to the college, and environmental impacts attributed to specific suppliers.

Examine the supply chain for sources of high emissions, environmental impacts and inefficiencies; subsequently develop policies for alternative sourcing for individual items.

Explore opportunities for new menu items that are marketable and profitable. Incorporate customer input, market research, and industry innovations into menu development.

Develop an action plan to address issues presented in this section and to guide future purchasing and operations.

5

ENERGY Key Findings

1.

The energy consumption of the college is 10,008 MMBtu annually. This total is nearly evenly divided between academic space and RKR, with 5,444 MMBtu (54%) and 4,564 MMBtu (46%) respectively. This translates to annual GHG emission from direct energy usage of 592 MT eCO2. Again this total was nearly evenly divided between academic space and RKR, with 307.5 MT eCO2 (52%) and 284.5 MT eCO2 (48%) respectively.

Research suggests restaurants are three times as energy intensive as other commercial buildings. Our analysis did not reveal the same intensity differentiation between academic buildings and RKR. We assume this to be a result of the limited operating restaurant hours in RKR, as well as the presence of food prep labs in the academic space.

The use of natural gas for kitchen equipment within the college (academic labs and RKR) represents the largest share of total GHG emissions at 47% (33% from the laboratory kitchen and 14% from RKR kitchen).

2.

3.

Recommendations

1.

Develop a process for accurately measuring annual energy consumption across the college, and maintain records of all equipment to better understand specific equipment annual consumption. Functional metering or sub-metering of spaces would be effective in measuring future conservation strategies.

Develop an action plan for reducing energy consumption through procedural and behavioral change. The high proportion of emissions associated with lab and kitchen activity suggest that best management practices could be effective in reducing consumption while still fulfilling the college mission.

Develop a strategy for continuing to improve energy efficiency through technology upgrades, particularly in the laboratory and RKR kitchen. This strategy should consider cost effectiveness of improvements through an analysis of equipment life, cost, and projected energy savings.

2.

3.

WATER Key Findings 1.

The college (79, 79A, 79B, and the Garden) uses an estimated 2,664,857 gallons of water each year, with 967,714 gallons, or 36%, being potable water. RKR consumes 63% of the potable water, with the remaining 27% consumed in academic spaces.

Estimated GHG emissions for overall water service for the college are 3.66 MT eCO2; 2.02 MT eCO2 derive from potable water; treatment of wastewater amounts to 0.59 MT eCO2, and 1.04 MT eCO2 come from reclaimed use

2.

Recommendations 1.

2.

3.

4.

Incorporate technologies which would expand metering capabilities, particularly over a prolonged period for more accurate data collection.

Examine behavior-related water loss; this will help identify high water use practices/stations and nature of the consumption.

Develop better strategies to evaluate water use and anticipated food production in the garden at RKR. Develop an action plan to reduce high water use through planning, behavior, and technology

6

CONSUMABLES Key Findings 1.

2.

The annual emissions of all college consumables included in the study was nearly 29 MT eCO2.

Consumables associated with academic space in the college accounted for approximately 56% while 44% was emitted by the RKR operations Paper and food related disposables were the highest emitting product types emitting 44% and 41% respectively.

Chemical products represented only 15% of the annual emissions from consumables.

3.

Recommendations 1.

2.

3.

Work with vendors, buyers and service providers to improve data collection methods to more accurately and efficiently track purchasing, with the goal of saving money and reducing emissions.

Work with students, staff and faculty to develop methods to utilize technology to reduce the need for paper within the college.

Research behaviors of consumer market and food service staff to develop options for reducing food related consumable use.

WASTE Key Findings

1.

2.

3.

4.

Over the course of the 2010 to 2011 fiscal year, the college’s waste stream generated 33.7 MT eCO2 emissions. RKR is responsible for 22.9 metric tons of emissions and the academic portion of the college is responsible for the remaining 10.8 metric tons.

The degradation of paper and organic matter in landfills contributes 88% of the college’s total GHG impact from waste.

This is due to both the high volume of these materials in the waste stream and the comparatively high environmental impact generated by these materials when in landfill conditions.

Current efforts to divert a portion of the college’s waste stream to recycling and composting has reduced the waste’s potential impact by 37%. By diverting all recyclable and compostable waste from landfills, the college could reduce its current waste-related impact by 102%, resulting in negative net emissions. These negative net emissions are due to the production of compost and recyclables which would avoid emissions that would have been produced by other farming or manufacturing processes.

Based on the total estimated users of the college over the previous fiscal year, approximately 1.5 kilograms of waste is generated per building user every year; this figure can serve as a baseline against which to measure waste reduction in the future.

Recommendations

1.

2.

3.

Develop a plan for improved data collection and consistent monitoring in order to best identify opportunities for reducing impacts related to waste. Data collection should focus on waste minimization strategies.

Investigate opportunities to change behavior related to waste generation, including the actions of students, staff, and customers. Behavioral change should target reuse and recycling strategies.

Explore available technologies for minimizing waste generation, as well as available technologies for treating and managing unavoidable waste. Adoption of new technology should target waste minimization and recovery strategies.

7

1.3 CONCLUSION This report reveals the environmental impact of present activities at The Collins College. It includes recommendations designed to improve data collection and initiate steps toward actions designed to reduce environmental impact. The college is encouraged to consider each of these recommendations as the basis for taking tangible action toward their stated obligation to protect the environment. This tangible action should address college operations through the development of a sustainability action plan, the integration of sustainability into curricula, and communication of the college’s commitment to students, supporters and the broader public.

8

2.0 INTRODUCTION 2.1 HOSPITALITY AND FOOD SERVICE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT The impact of the hospitality industry on environmental issues, such as climate change, is significant. The lodging and food service industries are significant consumers of fossil fuels, water, and other finite natural resources which present challenges to creating an environmentally sustainable future, and signal a significant contribution to climate change through the release of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. In addition, the food service industry is highly integrated with our global food system. This system includes the growing, harvesting, processing, packaging, distribution, marketing, consumption, and disposal of food product. The food system is responsible for a significant amount of GHG emissions. As a result, the term “foodprint” was coined to represent an individual’s or organization’s GHG emissions from the food they consume, including all parts of the 1 food system.

According to a 2006 report by the UN Food and Agriculture Association, the global food system is estimated to contribute 40% of worldwide GHG 2 emissions. By comparison, all the world's cars, trains, planes and boats combined account for a total of 13% of GHG emissions. This has major implications for food-related industries.

A significant portion of the food system in the United States is attributed to restaurants. According to the National Restaurant Association, the industry was estimated to have $604 billion in sales in 2011. Furthermore, the industry has a 49% share of the U.S. food dollar and 42% of consumer spending 3 is at food service establishments. Based on the

1

Cool Foods Campaign, What’s Your Foodprint, http://coolfoodscampaign.org/whats_your_foodprint/; What’s Your Carbon Foodprint?. http://www.whatsyourcarbonfoodprint.org/ 2

World Future Council, http://www.worldfuturecouncil.org/2328.html 3

National Restaurant Association 2011 Forecast, www.restaurant.org; U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2010, www.bls.gov

amount of economic activity in the industry, there is also a significant impact on the environment.

Organizations like the National Restaurant Association have begun efforts to provide their members with data and research on sustainable practices. Their own research shows that 57% of adults say that they are more likely to visit a restaurant that offers food that was grown or raised 4 in an organic or environmentally friendly way.

2.2 IMPACT OF EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS AND THE AMERICAN COLLEGE AND UNIVERSITY PRESIDENTS’ CLIMATE COMMITMENT The environmental impact of colleges and universities is also significant. Cal Poly Pomona University (CPP), a campus of approximately 25,000 people, emitted 67,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (eCO2) greenhouse gases in 2009, the result of commuting behavior of students, faculty, and staff, electrical and natural gas consumption in university facilities, fleet vehicle operations, waste and agricultural activities.

In recognition of the impact of institutions of higher education, the American College and University Presidents’ Climate Commitment (ACUPCC) was founded in October 2006 by twelve college and university presidents during the annual meeting of the Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education. The mission of ACUPCC is “to accelerate progress towards climate neutrality and sustainability by empowering the higher education sector to educate students, create solutions, and provide leadership-by-example for the 5 rest of society.” In order to fulfill this mission, the organization provides a framework and support for schools to implement plans for climate 4

National Restaurant Association 2011 Forecast, www.restaurant.org 5 American College and University Presidents’ Climate Commitment, http://www.presidentsclimatecommitment.org/about/missionhistory

9

neutrality. University and college presidents who sign the commitment are pledging “to eliminate their campuses’ net greenhouse gas emissions in a reasonable period of time as determined by each 6 institution.”

President’s Climate Commitment at Cal Poly Pomona CPP includes environmental sustainability as one of its core values – “We recognize our responsibilities to the global community and value the importance of applying and advancing sustainable practices in 7 the classroom and on our campus.” In recognition of this responsibility, President J. Michael Ortiz became one of the charter signatories to the American College and University Presidents’ Climate Commitment in 2007.

CPP released its first Greenhouse Gas Inventory in 2007 and its Climate Action Plan in 2009, becoming the first Cal State school to release such a plan.

Under the framework of the ACUPCC, Cal Poly Pomona inventoried GHG emissions identified by the Kyoto Protocol: carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and sulphur hexafluoride. The inventory covered scope 1, 2, and some scope 3 emissions. Emissions from food, water and the use of consumables are not included in the ACUPCC commitment, and have not been determined for CPP. However, emissions from energy consumption, waste generation, chemical use, and agricultural activities were inventoried.

Scope 1: Direct GHG emissions occurring from sources that are owned or controlled by the institution, including: on-campus stationary combustion of fossil fuels; mobile combustion of fossil fuels by institution owned/controlled vehicles; and fugitive emissions.

Scope 2: Indirect emissions generated in the production of electricity consumed by the institution Scope 3: All other indirect emissions, including those generated from commuting to and from campus, institution air travel, waste disposal, the production of purchased products, and more.

Source: CPP GHG Emissions Inventory Report, 1995-2005, Climate Task Force

6

American College and University Presidents’ Climate Commitment, http://www.presidentsclimatecommitment.org/about/faqs#3 7

Cal Poly Pomona, Mission, Values, Vision and Learning Outcomes of Cal Poly Pomona, http://www.csupomona.edu/mission.php

8

Facilities Planning and Management

2.3 THE COLLINS COLLEGE AS A LEADER The Collins College of Hospitality Management is one of nine colleges at Cal Poly Pomona. Approximately 35 staff and faculty serve nearly 1,000 students annually. The college facilities include three buildings, totaling approximately 40,000 square 8 feet. This includes two academic and administrative buildings with classrooms, computer labs, lecture rooms, and faculty offices. In addition the college has a full service restaurant run by the students, the Restaurant at Kellogg Ranch (RKR).

The college is one of only a few hospitality colleges nationwide and is strategically positioned as the only hospitality management college on the West Coast.

Furthermore, it offers the only hospitality management graduate degree program in California.

With its location in the Los Angeles metropolitan area and its comprehensive curriculum, the college has a unique opportunity to be a leader in promoting sustainability in the industry and on its own campus.

In response to this opportunity, the college has identified an obligation to protect the environment as one of its core values, and integrate sustainability into its strategic plan. College administrators, faculty and staff are critically aware of the need for the hospitality industry to address their impact relative to climate change and to assess the sustainability of their program and operations. Their positions as educators provide an opportunity for them to mentor students in industry practices which limit these impacts, as well as provide them with unique academic experiences that are practical and relevant.

This assessment is an instrument to aide researchers, administrators, faculty, staff and students in determining where the college has been successful in its sustainability efforts and to find new ways in which they can limit their impact on the environment. It provides the data necessary for the college to analyze its current practices and to further implement sustainable practices in all aspects of its operation. The specific impact of RKR operations are highlighted, offering the opportunity to develop sustainable strategies for restaurant operations, which may serve as a model for industry.

10

3.0 INVENTORY PROCESS 3.1 INTRODUCTION The goal of the first phase of this assessment was to inventory resource usage and resulting greenhouse gas emissions. Specifically we sought to determine a baseline of operations through the examination of activities in two academic/administrative buildings, representing academic space at The Collins College, and at the Restaurant at Kellogg Ranch (RKR). Five systems were analyzed: food, energy, water, consumables, and waste. The inventory team included staff and faculty from the Lyle Center, as well as four students from the Master of Science program in Regenerative Studies.

3.2 METHOD Indicators There are several indicators used in sustainability studies. Our research team considered food miles, kilocalories and embodied energy as they have appeared in the literature related to food systems; however these indicators were limited in terms of the overall study of the college and RKR. It was decided that greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions would be an ideal indicator because food, energy, water, consumables, and waste can be translated into this indicator. Also, previous GHG inventories conducted on the CPP campus have produced reports that can be easily referenced and transferred if a common accounting system is maintained.

Foodprint Models Many organizations, including schools, hospitals, and restaurants are realizing the need to assess their operational practices through the lens of environmental sustainability. Clean Air – Cool Planet (CA-CP) is a model that helps organizations measure their carbon footprint, particularly academic institutions. CPP and most of the schools that have signed the ACUPCC Climate Commitment have used their carbon calculator to inventory emissions, but the model does not include foodprint emissions in its calculations.

However, CA-CP has recognized an interest in reporting foodprint emissions. To this end, CA-CP is currently developing a new tool, Charting Emissions from Food Services (CHEFS) to measure the impact of restaurants and institutional dining 8 services . CHEFS is designed to be used by any institution with dining facilities or concessions colleges and universities, businesses, science centers and museums, national parks, hospitals, sports arenas, and convention centers. Twelve universities have worked closely with CA-CP to provide data from their food services to begin populating the developing emissions calculator. CHEFS has recently released an extremely limited, eight-item food calculator as a beta version with no campuses yet reporting emissions derived specifically from their dining or restaurant operations.

Given, that effort toward modeling foodprints are still the early stages of development for colleges and universities, we were required to draw from several life cycle analyses and emissions models, for the purposes of this inventory.

It was determined that this inventory would require an analytical tool capable of examining the multiple phases inherent in three of the sectors: food, waste and consumables. Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) was chosen specifically for these sectors as it is a way “to investigate, estimate, and evaluate the environmental burdens caused by a material, product, process, or service throughout its 9 lifespan.” These “environmental burdens” include the materials and energy resources required to create the product, as well as the wastes and emissions generated during this process. LCA framework uses a “cradle-to-grave” approach, identifying GHG emissions derived from production, processing, distribution and disposal of a certain product. For example, in terms of the food system, LCA considers the growing, harvesting, processing, packaging, distribution, transportation, preparation, consumption, and disposal of food and food-related items. However, despite all of its benefits, food 8

Information about CHEFS including the beta version is available on CHEFS website, www.cleanair-coolplanet.org/chefs.php 9

http://www.eiolca.net/Method/LCA_Primer.html; http://www.gdrc.org/uem/lca/lca-define.html

11

specific LCA models are relatively new and the body of literature developed around these is still developing.

Life Cycle Analysis Calculator A crucial element of this assessment was the evaluation of the available LCA Calculators. There are two fundamental types of LCA models: Process LCA (PLCA) calculators and economic input-output calculators (EIO-LCA). Each of these LCA models has particular strengths which make them useful to certain aspects of this study.

Process LCA Process LCAs (often called product LCAs) are calculators that have been developed to interface with a database that has product related knowledge.

Individual products are researched and the findings are categorized according to their characteristics or product type. PLCAs are useful because they provide data on specific products including their various stages in development, and they are less likely to be aggregated, meaning there is higher product differentiation. In a process-based LCA, the inputs (materials and energy resources) and the outputs (emissions and wastes to the environment) for a given step in producing a specific product are all itemized. Two significant issues arise with processbased LCA methods: establishing a realistic or manageable boundary and avoiding circularity with 10 other products. However, PLCAs related to food products are in their infancy in the United States.

The more robust databases come from Europe, where the methods of food production and distribution can vary widely from that of the US. Economic Input-Output LCA Economic Input-Output LCA (EIO-LCA) calculators are based on economic data, usually derived from a base year. EIO-LCA calculators provide data related to certain commercial and industrial sectors of a specific country’s economy. Information from these calculators is typically aggregated because it is sector and not product based. Also, because EIO-LCA calculators operate with a currency base, a dollar amount must be entered into the calculator to yield results. A benefit of using EIO-LCA calculators is that they are highly generalized, so any expense can easily be included, without needing specific 10

http://www.eiolca.net/Method/LCAapproaches.html

understanding of its purpose or impact. However, EIO-LCA calculators have some significant drawbacks due to their degree of generalization. The calculator assumes all items originate from the same country, which skews results for imported items.

Furthermore, if economic data is obtained from a year other than the base year of the calculator, then the dollar amount must be increased or devalued to the base year; oftentimes this involves using a complicated economic index and tedious calculations. Finally, they are often intended to work on a macro scale, meaning that there may be insufficient detail in the model to allow for important differences at the micro, or product scale.

LCA Research Our research team investigated several LCA calculators, which were subsequently compared and evaluated against an extensive list of attributes. The ideal calculator tool would present GHG emission results in eCO2, provide data for the entire life cycle of the product, from production to disposal, be based primarily on U.S. data, have a low degree of aggregation to allow for sufficient detail, and be affordable. Seven LCA calculators were identified and compared.

Bon Appetit’s Eat Low Carbon (BA-ELC) calculator was ultimately selected for use as a PLCA calculator in this study because it was easy to use, provided a garden to kitchen scope, presented results in eCO 2, and it had a unique feature than none of the other calculators had: it was able to calculate emissions based on individual meals. One drawback to BA-ELC was that the data was from mostly European sources, although it was adjusted to mimic North American values. The data for the model is also somewhat aggregated, and it was difficult to determine which literature was used to populate the model.

In addition to BA-ELC, our research team used a US based EIO-LCA calculator developed by Carnegie Mellon University. The Carnegie Mellon (CM) tool was free, provided details on several GHGs, generated reports based on user inputs, and used only US data.

12

field and site audits. During field and site audits researchers inventoried equipment (make and model information), observed behavior with equipment, queried professional staff regarding typical use of equipment, estimated time equipment used (minutes/hours) and then calculated annual energy/water use based on course/lab times, hours of service and days open a quarter/year. Then, using Clean Air-Cool Planet we calculated environmental impact based on annual energy/water usage. (See Table 3.1) Image 3.1 Recyclables inventoried during the waste audit

Food, Waste and Consumables In choosing the calculators our research team considered both the type of data and the format in which we would receive most of our data from the college. We received several spreadsheets related to purchases and revenue, which was ideal for EIO-LCA calculator. For the purposes of this inventory, the food, consumables and waste sectors utilize the Carnegie Mellon EIO-LCA. College invoices and economic data provided by the college staff, from both the RKR and the Academic areas, (defined herein as all purchases non-RKR related) provided information to determine economic activity.

Appropriate economic index multipliers were applied to preliminary data to correct for year. Carnegie Mellon EIO-LCA was then utilized to determine environmental impact. In addition, this study utilized a second LCA, Bon Appetit’s Eat Low Carbon Calculator to analyze more specific RKR food impacts per plate. (See Table 3.1)

There are several indicators used in sustainability studies. Our research team considered food miles, kilocalories and embodied energy as they have appeared in the literature related to food systems, however they were limited in terms of the overall study of The Collins College and RKR. It was decided that greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions would be an ideal indicator because food, energy, water, consumables, and waste can be translated into this indicator. Also, previous GHG inventories conducted on the CPP campus have produced reports that can be easily referenced and transferred if a common accounting system is maintained.

Energy and Water Ideally, both water and energy usage should easily be calculated via annual usage per building; however these systems are aggregated within the CPP University. Specifically, total energy and water consumption are available at the university level but not at the college level, as not all buildings within CPP are metered. As a result, for the purposes of this study we estimated energy and water using two different methods. First, we utilized a portable meter for a sample time period then estimated annual used based on sampled time period.

Secondarily, we generated our own models based on

Image 3.2 Kitchen facilities inventoried during the energy audit

13

Table 3.1 Methods and Boundaries

Tool

Process

Temporal Boundary

Boundaries

Lifecycle Assessment (LCA)

Carnegie Melon EIOCLA Calculator (CM)

CM utilized economic data from all purchases (including meals/buffets) to calculate total emissions for Academic and RKR

Purchasing data from July 1, 2010 to June 30, 2011

Included: all lab and RKR food purchases (plates and buffets)

Bon Appetit PLCA (BA)

BA utilized RKR lunch and dinner recipes and plate-up info to calculate emissions for selected RKR plates

Purchasing data from July 1, 2010 to June 30, 2011

Excluded: beverages Included: selected lunch and dinner plates Excluded: buffets and beverages Included: electricity; natural gas

Food

Method

Consumables

Water

Energy

Meter

Model Clean Air Cool Planet (CA-CP)

Readings calculated to gain energy consumption (Per campus manager, data is incomplete)

Meter Reading: March to August, 2011 Field observation October-December 2011.

Meter

External temporary meter installed

Created model for annual energy use based on equipment inventory, estimated hours of use, building square footage Sampled water flow for 2 days, 8 hours each; utilized sample to estimate annual use

Field audit Sampling

Model developed specifically for college

Lifecycle Assessment (LCA)

Carnegie Melon EIOCLA Calculator

Field audit

Waste

Field audit

Generated model Literature review of LCA assessments

Created model for annual energy use based on observed water usage, inventoried equipment with water use and estimated hours of use CM utilized economic data from all Academic and RKR purchases (including food related disposables, office supplies and custodial products) to calculate emissions for Academic and RKR

Waste audit data was used to model one full week of Collins operation, utilized sample to estimate annual waste generation

Excluded: no solar, solar thermal

Installed meter on 10/21/11 from 8-4pm and 10/28/11 from 311pm Observed one lunch and one dinner session, 10/14 and 10/21; audit performed 10/28; lab observation 11/14 Purchasing data from July 1, 2010 to June, 2011 (Academic Lab, office and custodial supplies; RKR supplies)

Included: potable and recycled water in the RKR garden

Two audits were conducted in November of 2011; the sample reflects a full seven days of operation for the college and restaurant

Included: trash; recycling; compost; landscape trimmings found in the dumpsters

Excluded: linen laundering water; landscaping water (non-garden) Included: consumables Excluded: goods with potential for use beyond a 3-year period; non-paper office supplies

Excluded: grease; landscape trimmings removed from Collins campus

3.3 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Greenhouse gases (GHGs) are defined by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as, “any gas that absorbs infrared radiation in the atmosphere.�

14

GHGs contribute to the ‘greenhouse effect’ by accumulating in the troposphere (the upper atmosphere) and increasing the overall average temperature of the Earth. Although many GHGs occur naturally in the earth’s atmosphere, it has been confirmed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that the intensification of the presence of many GHGs is due to anthropogenic sources. Hence the goal of several GHG inventories is to determine the source of GHG emissions and develop strategies to mitigate their presence.

3.5 CARBON DIOXIDE EQUIVALENT ( E CO 2 )

3.4 GLOBAL WARMING POTENTIAL (GWP)

3.6 BOUNDARIES

Every GHG varies in its ability to trap heat in the atmosphere. Although some gases may be more numerous than others, other gases produce a greater deleterious effect. This effect is referred to as a gas’s Global Warming Potential (GWP). The IPCC uses carbon dioxide (CO2) as a base to create a weighted scale for other identified GHGs. Methane (CH4) is given a GWP of 23, meaning it is 23 times more effective at trapping heat in the atmosphere than carbon dioxide. All of the GHGs identified by the IPCC have been assigned a GWP; this assists researchers by providing a measurement to determine the potency of a GHG and it allows any GHG to be “presented in terms of equivalent 11 emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2).” This measurement is commonly expressed as eCO2 and it may refer to multiple gases with varying GWPs.

Our goal was to estimate impacts for the college, including the academic spaces and RKR, for a typical academic year. Due to time and data restrictions best estimates were made according to sector specific restrictions. In general, this study examines the college’s data from the 2010-2011 school year.

Food and consumable economic and purchasing data was provided for Fall 2010-Summer 2011. However, data for energy, water and waste result from audits, interviews, and observations that took place in Fall 2011. Resulting estimates were based on extrapolations from this sampling.

According to the IPCC, carbon dioxide is the most important of the GHGs as it is the most prevalent and its recent increase in atmospheric concentration is linked to human activity, such as burning fossil 12 fuels and to a lesser degree changing land use.

Methane (CH4) is another common GHG. Most atmospheric methane can be attributed to enteric fermentation of animals, agriculture practices or decomposition of organic material in landfills. nitrous oxide (N2O) has a GWP of 296 and more than a third of its sources are anthropogenic. Nitrous oxide is often a product of industrial process and farming. Finally, there are other GHGs that are not as common, but have GWPs as high as 22,800, like sulfur hexafluoride (SF6), which is a byproduct of the electronics manufacturing process.

11

http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/glossary.html#G

12

http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/wg1/ar4-wg1spm.pdf

This inventory reports GHG emissions in terms of Metric Tons of Carbon Dioxide Equivalents or MT eCO2. Using the model created by Clean Air – Cool Planet (CA-CP) and utilized within the CPP Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory, this value takes into account the GWP of the individual gases recorded and converts their forcing power into carbon dioxide equivalent values. This reporting is consistent with IPCC guidelines.

For the purposes of this study the college includes two specific spaces: RKR and Academic. RKR includes all purchases related to RKR. Academic impacts are defined as all purchases and activities that are considered outside of RKR or are not restaurant specific. Excluded from this study are transportation, including commuting behavior of students, faculty, staff and restaurant guests, and activities related to the vineyards and related Horsehill Wines.

15

4.0 INVENTORY RESULTS

The environmental impact assessment revealed that the college produces an estimated 766 MT eCO2 annually. Five specific sectors essential to operations of both a college and a restaurant were evaluated in this audit—food, water, waste, energy, and consumables. Collectively, these GHG emissions were nearly evenly divided between the academic spaces of the college, and RKR, reporting 347 MT eCO2 (45%) and 420 MT eCO2 (55%) respectively.

(See Figure 4.1) Due to natural gas and electricity use, energy was the largest producing sector with 591 MT eCO2 or 77% of the annual greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Food purchases produced 110 MT eCO2, or 14% of annual emissions. The Waste and Consumables sectors each represented only 4% of the annual GHG emissions and Water, with less than 4 MT eCO2 annually, represented less than 1% of the emissions. (See Table 4.1) Table 4.1 Total Collins College GHG

2011/12

Annual MT eCO2

Sector

ACADEMIC

RKR

College TOTAL

Food

12.0

97.7

109.7

Water

1.0

2.7

3.7

Waste

10.8

22.9

33.7

Energy

307.0

284.0

591.0

Consumable

16.1

12.6

28.7

TOTAL

346.9

419.9

766.8

RKR 55%

Acad.

45%

Figure 4.1 The Collins College Annual MT eCO2 by Space

As a whole, these GHG emissions were nearly evenly divided between the two college spaces, Academic spaces and RKR, reporting 346 MT eCO2 (45%) and 410 MT eCO2 (55% ) respectively (Fig. 4.1). Energy reflected a 52% to 48% balance between Academic and RKR. This nearly even split failed to reveal the expected energy intensity (energy use per square foot) typical of restaurants. While RKR (Building 79) represents 45% of the overall square footage within the college it consumed 48% of the energy, suggesting energy intensity roughly equitable to the Academic space. This unexpected result is due primarily to the relatively short serving hours of RKR as compared to typical restaurants and, to a lesser degree, non-restaurant square footage (academic labs) may be considered within Building 79.

Image 4.1 Entrance to The Collins College

16

Academic Space

Consum.

4% Water 1%

Food 14%

Waste 4%

Energy 77%

Within the Academic space, Energy represents 89% of the annual emissions, producing 307 MT eCO2 annually with 66% of the emissions resulting from equipment use within the labs. Consumable emissions accounted for only 5% of annual academic emissions, primarily driven by emissions generated from office supplies. Food and Waste, largely due to the degradation of paper and food waste, each represented only 3% of the annual emissions with approximately 12 and 11 MT eCO2 respectively.

Emissions associated with Water, represented less than 1% of GHG emissions within the academic space.

RKR

Figure 4.2 Collins College: Percent MT eCO2 by Sector

350.0 300.0 250.0 200.0

The Energy sector is the highest contributor to RKR emissions with 284 eCO2 or 68% of RKR annual emissions. This is largely due to the energy intensity of kitchen equipment use within RKR. As expected, emissions from food were a greater percentage as compared to the academic space. Emissions from food represented 23% of RKR emissions with approximately 98 MT eCO2. Waste and Consumables collectively represented only 8% of the emissions and Water only 1%.

150.0 100.0 50.0 0.0 ACADEMIC

Food

RKR

ACADEMIC 12.0

RKR 97.7

Water

1.0

2.7

Waste

10.8

22.9

Energy

307.0

284.0

Consumable

16.1

12.6

Figure 4.3 MT eCO2 Sector Comparison by Space

Image 4.2 The Restaurant at Kellogg Ranch, Dining Room

17

5.0 FOOD 5.1 INTRODUCTION Food Impact in the Restaurant Industry The food service industry is highly integrated with our global food system, which is responsible for an estimated 30% of all global greenhouse gas 13 emissions. In the United States, 42% of consumer spending on food is at food service establishments, suggesting the significant environmental footprint of 14 this industry. However this substantial impact also suggests the industry is strategically positioned to effect change.

The food system consists of four components: 1) production - the growing of produce and raising of livestock; 2) processing and distribution - the transformation of raw agricultural products into marketable or “value-added” products, and the delivery to retailing locations; 3) consumption including retail purchasing, preparation and consumption either at home or within restaurants; and 4) food waste. Collectively, the GHG emissions associated with these stages comprise an organization’s carbon “foodprint”.

Traditionally, restaurant operations have focused nearly exclusively on consumption, with little regard to where food comes from or how it is disposed. However, due to the high environmental impact of agricultural production within the US, 83% of all GHG emissions from food occur before it even 15 leaves the farm. Furthermore, only 11% percent of GHG emissions from food are due to the transportation segment as a whole and 4% are attributed to transportation from producers to retailers. This challenges the commonly accepted notion that buying local food to reduce food miles is the most important thing a consumer can do to reduce environmental impact of purchases. In short, research suggests that food service operations’ carbon foodprint is most strongly determined by

their purchasing or sourcing decisions - making food choices in light of production methods - and that sourcing from more sustainable food and beverage options should be the main focus for improving the impact of food service operations.

Restaurants have recently shown interest in sustainability, locally-sourced produce, the slow food movement, and other trends have also resulted in restaurants taking much greater interest in the entire food system. As Baldwin notes, “While a menu typically is not composed solely of local products, eliminating the use of out-of-season foods will reduce their impact and provide fresh ingredients for quality menu items.” The produce garden at RKR already provides chefs, restaurant staff and students access to fresh, local produce with a relatively low carbon foodprint. Another successful practice in sustainable programs has been to scale back on the amount of choices offered and focus more effort on fewer options – an approach which is reflected in the select, seasonal menu offerings at the RKR. Food types and their relative impact on GHG The primary method used to evaluate the environmental impact of the college, including RKR, is the tracking and reporting of greenhouse gas emissions associated with energy, water and purchasing. In keeping with this approach, we estimate the college’s carbon foodprint based on emissions associated with food purchases and their relative impacts. Other food-related concerns such as animal welfare, human health and humane labor practices are also important sustainability issues but beyond the scope of this report.

13

Christopher L. Weber and H. Scott Matthews, “Food-Miles and the Relative Climate Impacts of Food Choices in the United States,” Environmental Science & Technology 42, no.10 (2008): 3508–13.

14

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2010)

15

Christopher L. Weber and H. Scott Matthews, “Food-Miles and the Relative Climate Impacts of Food Choices in the United States,” Environmental Science & Technology 42, no.10 (2008): 3508–13.

Image 5.1 Food Preparation Facilities

18

Food groups vary widely in their relative impact on eCO2 or their emissions per serving. Within the US, between 14% and 22% of eCO2 produced annually is 16 due to the impacts of meat production. Due to methods of production, transportation and waste generated by animals, the amount of energy used per kilogram of meat produced is more than ten 17 times that of plant based products.

Indeed, while red meat comprises just 11% of the 18 caloric intake in the U.S., it is estimated it accounts 19 for a nearly 25% of the nation’s carbon foodprint.

Figure 5.1 describes the results of an extensive full life-cycle analysis of meat, dairy and vegetable 20 proteins. This study uses an LCA that includes emissions before and after the product leaves the farm (including waste disposal) and has been shown to be consistent with other studies.

45.0 40.0

39.2

35.0

kg eCO2

30.0

27.0

25.0 20.0 15.0

13.5

12.1 11.9 10.9

10.0

6.9 6.1 4.8

5.0

2.9 2.7 2.5 2.3 2.2 2.0 2.0 2.0 1.9 1.1 0.9

0.0

Figure 5.1 Emissions/Kg of Food Type

kg of Consumed Food

Image 5.3 Food Preparation

Image 5.2 Food Preparation 18

USDA Economic Research Service, Food Availability Data System

22 16 17

United States Food and Agriculture Organization 2006

Baldwin, Cheryl. Sustainability in the Food Industry. Ames, Iowa: Wiley-Blackwell/IFT Press, 2009. Print.

http://static.ewg.org/reports/2011/meateaters/pdf/report_ewg _meat_eaters_guide_to_health_and_climate_2011.pdf 20

http://static.ewg.org/reports/2011/meateaters/pdf/report_ewg _meat_eaters_guide_to_health_and_climate_2011.pdf

19

The Restaurant at Kellogg Ranch The Restaurant at Kellogg Ranch is a non-profit organization that is essential to the educational experience at The Collins College of Hospitality Management. Students gain hands-on experience by managing and operating this full-service fine dining establishment, which offers primarily seasonal American cuisine. The main dining room of the restaurant seats 100 patrons, while the President’s Dining Room provides space for private parties of up to 30 members. The adjoining beverage lab seats up to 16 and features an espresso bar and selections from the on-site wine cellar. Because the restaurant is run by students, it is open for 7 to 8 weeks per quarter, for a total of 22 weeks out of the year. RKR offers an à la carte lunch four days per week and a prix fixe dinner three nights per week, but often hosts special events in addition to these services.

The lunch menu remains fairly constant over the course of the school year and includes appetizers, sandwiches, salads, meat-based and vegetarian entrées and desserts. The prix fixe dinner includes an appetizer, an entrée and a dessert and the menu is reformulated each quarter. The restaurant frequently offers buffet style lunches and dinners that utilize many of the same dishes as its standard menus; buffets account for 34% of sales and 35% of customers at the restaurant. RKR also offers beverages at all services, including water, soda, coffee, espresso-based drinks, wine and beer. The extensive wine and beer list consists mainly of spirits from west coast vineyards and breweries, including Horsehill Vineyards wine, which is grown on the campus.

Academic Labs Students within the program enroll in quarterly labs that build consecutively. These labs operate high tech facilities located adjacent to the restaurant and prepare the students for professional cooking with multiple fully-equipped prep and cooking stations.

Weekly labs are scheduled throughout the quarter and, while these students are not necessarily serving patrons, their prep and cooking activities require regular food purchasing.

5.2 BOUNDARIES We examined food purchases and meals served for the 2010-11 academic year. Beverages, including

alcohol, have been excluded from this study due to a lack of life cycle assessment data pertaining to liquids.

5.3 DATA COLLECTION AND METHODS The lifecycle assessment (LCA) method was used to analyze all food items offered by RKR and food prepared within the Academic labs during the 201011 fiscal/academic year. Values related to food life cycles were determined using two food-based LCA calculators: Bon Appetit’s Eat Low Carbon Process LCA and Carnegie Mellon’s Economic Input-Output LCA. By using the Bon Appetit and Carnegie Mellon calculators in conjunction, a more complete picture of the overall menu and impact was gained.

The Bon Appetit (BA) model is made for singleserving scale, and thus reveals which dishes or plates have the highest and lowest relative impacts, providing for assessment and potential adjustment of the menu composition. The Carnegie Mellon (CM) calculator is meant for industry-wide assessments where purchases are in the scale of millions of dollars, supplying a more accurate picture of the overall impact from all food purchases made by the restaurant. This means special events, buffets, banquets, and food that went unserved are taken into account. This approach provides a baseline against which to measure improvement and allows for a cumulative assessment of the restaurant’s performance by year.

The findings of the food study are based purchasing invoices and other cost and production data made available to the research team. Additional quantity and cost information was derived from reports generated from Cheftec, a software system frequently used within the restaurant industry to track recipes and menu costing. The RKR staff populated data within the Cheftec system and provided reports for this study. As the methods and tools used for this study are heavily reliant on cost and quantity information; inaccuracies could impact the reliability of LCA calculator results. Distributors’ and vendors’ sourcing and production were not available for this study; however with the food industry’s increased awareness and responsiveness to sustainability issues, distributors are more aware and may be more forthcoming with information that would provide a more complete picture of The Collins College carbon foodprint.

20

Calculator: Bon Appetit’s PLCA Bon Appetit’s Eat Low Carbon tool performs processbased life cycle assessments (PLCA) and assigns an eCO2 value to each plate. The calculator has particular strengths and weaknesses that affect the values it generates. The model employed by the calculator includes all life cycle stages from production to kitchen, but does not include emissions from food waste as it decomposes. These emissions are addressed in the Waste section of this study. However, the model also assumes no waste in the food preparation process – that all food that is purchased actually makes its way onto the plate. In this way, the calculator fails to account for the full foodprint associated with restaurant production.

The food categories provided by the calculator can be highly aggregated, either due to lack of data or lack of variability within a food group. Where data does exist there is an effort to differentiate factors that would significantly affect environmental impact.

For example, though all fruits are grouped together, the user can select whether the fruit is seasonal or tropical; vegetables can be seasonal or grown in a hothouse. For the purposes of this study, it was assumed that all fruits and vegetables are seasonal, possibly creating underestimates for dishes that include tropical or hothouse produce.

For items with higher impacts that are more widely studied, such as meat items, there are more specific choices such as different cuts of beef and farmed versus wild salmon. A lack of data means some categories are too highly aggregated to completely capture the related emissions; for instance, domestic cheese is the only option in the cheese category.

Due to a lack of LCA data, many seasoning ingredients, such as garlic, mustard, salt, pepper and spices are not available as options, so these were not accounted for in the study. Where similar items were available as options, substitutions were chosen based on relative climate impact, such as using chicken breast in the place of duck breast and bacon in the place of prosciutto.

Finally, the data that populates the Bon Appetit model is mostly derived from studies conducted in Europe, though an effort was made to adjust for American users by using U.S. averages for transportation, distance from farm to consumer, and

farming practices. Nevertheless, production, distribution and processing differences between the U.S. and Europe may impact the accuracy of the results.

Calculator: Carnegie Mellon EIO LCA The Carnegie Mellon Economic Input-Output LCA calculator (EIO-LCA) uses economic purchasing data to calculate carbon dioxide equivalents (eCO2) for the overall impact of food items purchased during the study’s time boundary. For purposes of this study, the Carnegie Mellon EIO-LCA calculator was employed to quantify emissions related to food purchases for RKR and HRT 281L. The dollar amount for food purchases was obtained from the college’s records from the 2010-11 fiscal year. Because the Carnegie Mellon calculator is based on 2002 U.S. census data, an adjustment was made to account for inflation. The economic activity over the course of the previous year corresponds to 97.7 metric tons of eCO2 emissions.

Because this model focuses on food purchases, it accounts for food waste in the preparation process.

However, the Carnegie Mellon calculator also has limitations that affect the impact values it generates.

The tool is based on U.S. census data and aggregates by industry, so the dollar amount calculated above was entered under “Food Services and Drinking Places,” which is a Bureau of Labor classification that includes full service restaurants, limited service restaurants, special food services and alcoholic drinking places. The variability between these types of establishments may impact the results generated by the calculator.

Because the model is based on U.S. data and the inflation multiplier is derived from goods produced in the United States, it may not accurately capture the emissions from products sourced from other countries (imported goods). This may create an underestimate of the overall impact from food because it does not capture total transportation or different production methods. The scope of the calculator’s model encompasses all life cycle stages from production, distribution and processing, but does not include kitchen preparation or disposal.

However, the impact of these operations is captured in the energy analysis and waste analysis of this report.

21

Method After identifying limitations in available data and appropriate calculators we determined the best analysis would include both an EIO-LCA and PLCA approach. Academic lab data was available in aggregated form making an EIO-LCA analysis of all lab activities most appropriate. Likewise aggregated economic data was available for all RKR activities, including lunch, dinner and buffets so we used an EIO-LCA analysis of all RKR activities. However, we also wanted to assess the foodprint of specific items

on the RKR menu, and the Bon Appetit PLCA allowed for this analysis. Finally, in an attempt verify our results we sought to analyze a limited number of RKR menu offerings (plates) using both the Bon Appetit PLCA and the EIO-LCA methods. This also allowed for comparison of economic and environmental impact of specific menu items.

However, analysis of specific menu items via EIO-LCA is both data and time intensive. Given study time restrictions and limited data related to specific menu items we studied only a sample of eight plates from RKR with an EIO-LCA calculator. (See Table 1.1)

Table 5.1 Method Scope & Calculator

Scope

Input

Calculator

Result

Purpose

Academic Lab - ALL

$ data from Lab invoices

Carnegie Mellon EIOLCA

Overall Emissions Impact for Labs

Useful for big picture understanding of overall impact

RKR - ALL (Includes all buffets and meals)

$ data from RKR invoices

Carnegie Mellon EIOLCA

Overall Emissions Impact for RKR

Useful for big picture understanding of overall impact

RKR - sample 24 Plates from Menu (most lunch plates and representative dinner plates)

Food specific food portions, determined from recipes and “plate-up” guides

Specific emissions of a plate

Useful for understanding impact per plate and potential menu decisions

Specific emissions of a plate and model $profit/eCO2 per plate

Useful for verification of calculated emissions; can use to understand which items are most profitable w/ least environmental impact

RKR- sample 8 plates from Menu (representative sample)

$ and Food

Bon Appetit PLCA

Carnegie Mellon & Bon Appetit

Academic – Lab Course The Carnegie Mellon EIO-LCA calculator was used to quantify the environmental impact of all food purchased for the Academic lab classes. Limited Academic food purchasing data was obtained from an FY 2010-2011 end-of-year report which aggregated lab expenditures by academic quarter and food type. The U.S. dollar amounts for the total purchases of each food type were input into the Carnegie Mellon calculator. The calculator combined carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions calculations associated with the lab class food purchases, producing results in

metric ton of carbon dioxide equivalents (eCO2). It is important to note that the purchasing data did not seem to reflect all the lab courses within the 20102011 academic year and thus the results may underestimate the emissions impact reported.

RKR Overall Food purchases made by RKR (includes buffets, lunches, dinners and banquets) were included in our life cycle assessment utilizing CM EIO-LCA.

22

24-Plate Sample Nearly every item from the lunch menu and representative entrées from the dinner menu were selected for analysis using BA PLCA. The RKR staff provided the recipes and “plate-up” guides for these 24 menu items, allowing for a analysis of each plate based on its components. The ingredients for each menu item were entered into the BA calculator by selecting the best food category for each ingredient and entering the amount of that ingredient used in the dish. The total impact per plate was calculated by summing the impact of each ingredient in the dish (see appendix for values). The environmental impact of individual dishes is reported in grams of eCO2.

Table 5.2: Selection Rationale for eight plate in-depth analysis using BA and CM calculators.

Flat Iron Steak (dinner)

Theoretically high impact item Representative of red meat dinner entree; compare to prime rib as easily exchangeable item

Prime Rib (dinner)

Star/Cash Cow rating, 39.4% popularity Theoretically high impact item Representative of red meat dinner entree; compare to steak as easily exchangeable item

Sesame Salmon (lunch)

8-Plate Sample Eight of the twenty four plates were selected for a more in-depth analysis comparing above mentioned BA results with an analysis using the EIO-LCA calculator. These plates were selected to provide a cross-section of the entire menu (including lunch and dinner items, as well as starters, entrées, and desserts) as well as both meat-based and vegetarian items. This list also includes menu items with expected low, medium and high climate impacts based on the values calculated with BA. Lastly, an effort was also made to include the restaurant’s signature dishes and most popular items. To that end, though these eight dishes make up only 7% of items offered, they were responsible for 24% of sales over the past fiscal year. These selected plates include: the RKR burger, the asparagus ravioli, the side house salad, the RKR apple crisp, the curry marinated chicken, the flatiron steak, the sesame salmon and the prime rib. (See Table 5.2) Plate emissions were verified using both BA PLCA and the EIO-LCA calculator, and we captured the annual impact related to these eight plates by multiplying total number of plates sold by emissions per plate.

In order to compare the profitability of a particular menu item to its environmental impact, dollars of profit per metric ton of eCO2 emissions was calculated. Because this ratio does not represent overall sales, the average profit for a dish per quarter was also included.

Star/Cash Cow rating, 39.4% popularity

Star rating, 10.3% popularity Theoretically high impact (depending on origin) Representative of seafood entree

RKR Burger (lunch)

Star/Cash Cow rating, 9.8% popularity, signature dish Theoretically high impact Representative of red meat lunch entree

Curry Chicken (lunch)

Star rating, 10.7% popularity Theoretically low impact (for meat) Representative of poultry entree

Asparagus Ravioli (lunch)

Star/Cash Cow rating, 10% popularity Theoretically low impact entrée Representative of vegetarian entree

House Salad, side (lunch)

Star/Cash Cow rating, 30.3% popularity Theoretically low impact Representative of salads and starters

Apple Crisp (lunch/dinner)

Star rating, 38% popularity, signature dish Available at lunch and dinner and popular for takeout (high sales volume) Representative of dessert

23

5.4 FINDINGS Acad.

12 MT eCO2 (11%) Table 5.3 Emissions Calculated per Plate with Bon Appetit Calculator (listed in order of impact per plate)

RKR 98 MT eCO2 (89%)

Figure 5.2 Annual College eCO2 by Space, Total 110 MT eCO2

Overall: Including specific Academic and RKR (using CM EIO-LCA) 1.

The college emits approximately 110 MT eCO2 annually from food purchases, based on 2010-11 fiscal year. RKR represents 89% of those emissions, with 98 MT eCO2 annually, and the Academic space represents 11% with 12 MT eCO2 annually.

We expect that the production of the food, not transportation or processing, to be the largest contributor to these GHG emissions.

(See Figure 5.2)

Image 5.4 Chef Ernie instructing students

Menu Item

Category

eCO2 (g) per plate

Annual MT eCO2 (total plates sold)

Chocolate Torte

Desserts

176

0.037664

Soup of the Week

Starters

184

0.035328

Petite Caesar

Starters

199

0.065869

Strawberry Shortcake

Desserts

239

0.021271

House Salad

Starters

273

0.1638

Apple Crisp

Desserts

288

0.514944

Vegetarian Sandwich

Sandwiches

310

0.04526

Asparagus Ravioli

Entrees

392

0.122696

Caesar Salad

Entree Salads

497

0.164507

Italian Panini

Sandwiches

790

0.06715

Chopped Salad

Entree Salads

924

0.03696

Ice Cream Sandwich

Desserts

948

0.129876

Curry Chicken

Entrees

974

0.095428

Turkey Chili

Starters

997

0.137586

Pato en Mole

Mains

1003

0.124372

Grilled Pork Loin

Entrees

1243

0.359227

Turkado

Sandwiches

1300

0.1417

Lamb Tagine

Mains

1675

0.277967

Salmon

Mains

2381

0.38806877

Mahi Mahi

Mains

2422

2.328022

Vegetable Lasagna

Mains

2515

0.389825

RKR Burger

Sandwiches

5098

1.208226

Beef French Dip

Sandwiches

7999

2.087739

Flat Iron Steak

Mains

10967

3.213331

Prime Rib of Beef

Mains

12447

11.961687

24

24-Plate Analysis (using BA PLCA) 1.

The menu items with the highest emissions were beef-based plates, with Prime Rib and Flat Iron Steak producing over 10,000 grams eCO2 per plate. Based on impact-by-plate and total plates sold per year, collectively, Prime Rib, Flat Iron Steak and French Dip emit more than 17 MT eCO2 annually. The RKR burger generates less than half of the emissions of the flatiron steak or prime rib, because it uses a smaller portion and a different cut of meat. (See Table 5.3 and Figures 5.3 & 5.4)

2.

In addition to beef, other high impact items include those with large amounts of dairy from cows, such as the vegetable lasagna.

High impact items have eCO2 values ranging from 2,422 to 12,447 grams per plate.

Prime Rib of Beef Flat Iron Steak Beef French Dip RKR Burger Vegetable Lasagna Mahi Mahi Salmon Lamb Tagine Turkado Grilled Pork Loin Pato en Mole Turkey Chili Curry Chicken Ice Cream Sandwich Chopped Salad Italian Panini Caesar Salad Asparagus Ravioli Vegetarian Sandwich Apple Crisp House Salad Strawberry Shortcake Petite Caesar Soup of the Week Chocolate Torte

0

2000

4000

6000

Figure 5.3 Emission (eCO2) grams per Plate for 24 Items Using Bon Appetit Calculator

8000

10000

12000

14000

25

3.

Mid-range items include dishes based on other meats, such as chicken, turkey, lamb, pork and fish; the eCO2 values of this group range from 790 to 1675 grams per plate.

4.

Items with the lowest impact per plate include soups, desserts, salads, and vegetarian entrĂŠes, with eCO2 values ranging from 176 to 497 grams per plate.

The lowest impact items specifically at RKR were the Lentil Soup, Chocolate Torte, Petite Caesar and Strawberry Shortcake (insert eCO2 for each). All of these items are vegetarian, and contain little-to-no dairy products.

Prime Rib of Beef Flat Iron Steak Beef French Dip RKR Burger Vegetable Lasagna Mahi Mahi Salmon Lamb Tagine Turkado Grilled Pork Loin Pato en Mole Turkey Chili Curry Chicken Ice Cream Sandwich Chopped Salad Italian Panini Caesar Salad Asparagus Ravioli Vegetarian Sandwich Apple Crisp House Salad Strawberry Shortcake Petite Caesar Soup of the Week Chocolate Torte

0

2

4

Figure 5.4 Annual (MT eCO2) per Plate based on sales

6

8

10

12

26

5.

6.

7.

The menu items within the mains category had by far the highest emissions. Our analysis shows that this is primarily due to the beef ingredient as opposed the influence of side dishes or other ingredients on the plate. Mains with other proteins or vegetarian options had significantly lower emissions per plate. (See Figures 5.5 and 5.6) The menu items within the sandwich category had significantly fewer emissions as compared to mains. However the same protein trend repeats itself, with the beef ingredient producing higher emissions as opposed to other proteins or vegetarian options. (See Figure 5.7) Our analysis of the four desserts shows that the ice-cream sandwich had by far the highest emissions. We attribute this to the impacts of dairy. (See Figure 5.8)

Starters Sandwiches Mains Entrees EntrĂŠe Salads Desserts 0.00

2500.00

5000.00

Figure 5.5 Per Plate Impact by Category (eCO2 g)

Prime Rib of Beef Flat Iron Steak Vegetable Lasagna Mahi Mahi Salmon Lamb Tagine Pato en Mole 0

5000

10000

15000

Figure 5.6 Mains: Impact per Plate (eCO2 g)

Beef French Dip RKR Burger Turkado Italian Panini Vegetarian Sandwich 0

2000 4000 6000 8000 10000

Figure 5.7 Sandwiches: Impact per Plate (eCO2 g)

Ice Cream Sandwich Apple Crisp Image 5.5 Food Preparation

Strawberry Shortcake Chocolate Torte 0

200

400

Figure 5.8 Emissions per Dessert

600

800

1000

27

8.

The items that generate the most profit per ton of emissions are the apple crisp, chicken and ravioli. These items could be considered high income-low impact. The items that generate the least profit relative to emissions are the RKR burger, the prime rib and the flatiron steak. (See Figure 5.9)

5.5 RECOMMENDATIONS 1.

2.

Apple Crisp 3.

House Salad, side Asparagus Ravioli

4.

Sesame Salmon

Work with vendors to develop a more information rich relationship; this includes: a better understanding of food sourcing, purchasing options available to the college, and environmental impacts attributed to specific suppliers.

Examine the supply chain for sources of high emissions, environmental impacts and inefficiencies; subsequently develop policies for alternative sourcing for individual items.

Explore opportunities for new menu items that are both marketable and profitable.

Incorporate customer input, market research, and industry innovations into menu development.

Develop an action plan to address issues presented in this section and to guide future purchasing and operations.

Curry Chicken RKR Burger 5.6 DATA SUPPLIERS Prime Rib

Jenesie Hardyman, Restaurant Laboratory AnalystRestaurant at Kellogg Ranch, The Collins College of Hospitality Management

Flat Iron Steak -4000

1000

$ profit/MT eCO2

6000

11000

16000

$ profit/quarter served

Chitra Perera, Culinary Laboratory Coordinator, The Collins College of Hospitality Management Barbara Jean Bruin, Lecturer, The Collins College of Hospitality and Management

Figure 5.9 Profitability Model

Image 5.6 Food Preparation

28

6.0 ENERGY 6.1 INTRODUCTION Energy use, in the form of electricity and natural gas, is critical to maintaining comfortable temperatures in buildings, providing light, fuel for cooking, and for the use of office machines and restaurant appliances. According to CPP’s 2009 GHG Inventory, purchased electricity constituted 28% of all CPP campus emissions, while natural gas comprised 15%.

Energy consumption in educational facilities has been studied extensively by the U.S. Department of Energy, which reports that there are multiple sources of intense energy loads in educational buildings, mostly related to space heating and 21 cooling, water heating, lighting and refrigeration.

In addition to its academic space, the college also has a fully operational restaurant as well as several kitchen laboratory spaces which simulate a restaurant environment. An inventory and life cycle analysis (LCA) was conducted of the energy used by the college in their academic spaces and RKR. This LCA examined the generation, transmission, distribution, and consumption of electricity, and the extraction, production, conveyance, and consumption of natural gas. Interestingly, the combustion of natural gas for electricity production constitutes approximately half of California’s energy profile, making the two inextricably linked in terms of energy and emissions profiles within our state.

CPP campus energy utility providers are determined by a CSU-wide contractual agreement brokered by the Chancellor's office. Fortunately, California energy utility providers face regulatory sanctions and incentives to provide clean energy. CPP purchases its electrical energy from Southern California Edison (SCE). At present, approximately, 83.3% of SCE's energy profile is comprised of natural gas, nuclear, coal, and hydroelectric sources. The remaining 16.7% of SCE's energy comes from alternative or renewable energy sources including geothermal, wind, biomass, solar, small 22 hydroelectric sources.

21

http://buildingsdatabook.eren.doe.gov/TableView.aspx?table=3 .9.1 22

http://www.sce.com/PowerandEnvironment/Renewables/defau lt.htm

Due to state legislation, California has an ambitious 23 renewable energy standard. This standard and the high use of natural gas for electricity production (37% for SCE), greatly affect the GHG impact of electricity use at CPP in particular, and in the state in 24 general.

CPP purchases its natural gas from the Southern California Gas Company (SCGC). SCGC sources its natural gas from reserves all over the western half of the U.S. and Canada; however, only 13% of natural 25 gas is extracted from within California , the rest must be transported via pipelines from throughout North America. Although natural gas is a cleaner source of energy than coal, it is nevertheless a fossil fuel, which emits greenhouse gases when it is burned.

According to the EIA, the three most numerous GHGs related to energy utilities in California are carbon dioxide (CO2), nitrogen oxides (NOX) and 26 sulfur oxides (SOX). Due to recent state legislation designed to reduce the overall emission of GHGs statewide, energy in California is expected to become cleaner.

23

Established in 2002 under Senate Bill 1078 and accelerated in 2006 under Senate Bill 107, California's Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS) is one of the most ambitious renewable energy standards in the country. The RPS program requires investorowned utilities, electric service providers, and community choice aggregators to increase procurement from eligible renewable energy resources to 33% of procurement by 2020. Southern CA Edison is currently at 19.3%. (http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/PUC/energy/Renewables/) 24

Based on information from Pacific Gas & Electric and Clean Air – Cool Planet, the CO2 emissions rate for electricity used on the CPP campus is approximately 0.524 lbs CO2 per kWh. On average in the U.S., electricity sources emit 1.306lbs CO2 per kWh (http://www.carbonfund.org/site/pages/carbon_calculators/cate gory/Assumptions) 25

http://energyalmanac.ca.gov/overview/energy_sources.html

26

http://www.eia.gov/cneaf/electricity/st_profiles/california.html

29

ENERGY INTENSITY OF FOOD SERVICE BUILDINGS According to information from the 1995 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey from the Energy Information Administration, food service buildings are the most energy intensive commercial buildings in the U.S. based on total energy per square foot, almost 258,000 BTU, compared to the average for all commercial buildings of 90,500 BTU (see Figure 6.1). This suggests that food service buildings are nearly three times as energy intensive as other commercial buildings on average.

Much of the energy intensity of food service businesses is due to the number and type of equipment needed for food preparation. Indeed, food preparation accounts for 35 – 40 % of energy use in food service establishments. Food service buildings have the second highest electricity intensity of all commercial building types (36 kWh per square foot, compared to the average of 13.4 27 kWh per square foot for all commercial buildings).

Food service buildings also have the highest natural gas intensity of all commercial building types (153.5 cubic feet per square foot, compared to the average for all commercial buildings of 49.7 cubic feet per 28 square foot). As an educational institution for future restaurant and hospitality professionals, The Collins College is well-positioned to produce tangible changes to these statistics in the future.

Figure 6.1 Commercial Building Energy Intensity29

Image 6.1 Gas Kitchen Equipment

Image 6.2 Kitchen Equipment

27

http://www.eia.gov/emeu/consumptionbriefs/cbecs/pbawebsit e/foodserv/foodserv_howuseelec.htm 28

http://buildingsdatabook.eren.doe.gov/ChapterIntro3.aspx

29

http://www.eia.gov/emeu/consumptionbriefs/cbecs/pbawebsit e/foodserv/foodserv_howuseng.htm

30

6.2 BOUNDARIES This inventory of energy use investigates the annual operations of the college, including RKR. This inventory does not include energy use and emissions resulting from transportation for staff, faculty and students. Transportation related to food and consumables are integrated into the calculations for environmental impact in other sections of this report.

6.3 DATA COLLECTION AND METHOD Natural gas is used by many types of equipment at RKR and the laboratory kitchen, as well as heating 30 for all three buildings. Electricity is used by equipment in all buildings, as well as for lighting and air conditioning.

While most buildings at CPP are not individually metered for electricity and gas consumption, the buildings for the college do have meters. However, investigation of these meters found them to be unreliable and the data could not be used for this study. The electrical meters supplied questionable data and not all uses of natural gas were found to be metered. The use of portable data loggers to measure energy use was deemed to be too expensive and disruptive to service.

OBSERVATION AND MODEL DEVELOPMENT Due to the uncertainty of the natural gas and electricity data from meters, a different approach to assessing energy consumption was needed. A model of energy use was developed to estimate consumption of electricity and natural gas from lighting, HVAC systems, water heating and the equipment in the RKR kitchen, laboratory kitchen, offices, classrooms, and work rooms in all three buildings.

Ratings for appliances are often listed for maximum output. Thus, a kilowatt-hour (kWh) or British Thermal Unit (BTU) rating used in the model may overestimate the actual energy use. For most items, except refrigerators and freezers and some office equipment, the ratings were not changed to account for the overestimation.

In the case of refrigerators, this issue was managed by dividing the number of hours that the appliance is 31 plugged in (168 per week) by three. In the case of office equipment, some items that are always on, such as certain printers, copiers, and fax machines in Building 79B were rated at their standby wattage.

The hours of use per week for equipment in the RKR kitchen were derived from observations of lunch and dinner services made on site in October, 2011. Data for equipment in the laboratory kitchen and other areas was assumed based on course schedules and normal business hours.

MEASUREMENT OF NATURAL GAS USAGE Kitchen Equipment Kitchen equipment that utilizes natural gas is measured in BTUs per hour. During the hours of restaurant operation, BTU consumption is a combination of actual equipment usage, as well as standby for equipment with a pilot light. BTU consumption during hours of restaurant closure was assumed to be associated with standby pilot light operation. The standby rating was assumed to be 32 1000 BTU/hour. BTU calculations were made for hours of restaurant operation as well as hours of restaurant closure.

31

The model was based on an inventory of equipment in all of the college’s buildings performed on site during summer and fall quarters, 2011. Data on the electrical and gas ratings for equipment was found on equipment nameplates, equipment manuals provided by RKR, equipment manuals found on the manufacturers’ websites, and research on the internet.

30

Building 79 is currently being converted to natural gas for space heating. Buildings 79 A & B use natural gas for space heating.

Refrigerators are turned "on" continuously, but they cycle on and off around the clock to maintain the proper interior temperature. The Department of Energy suggests dividing the total time the refrigerator is plugged in by three to come up with a fairly accurate wattage total. http://www.ehow.com/how-does_5406402_much-do-kitchenappliances-use_.html 32

This assumption is based on information from the following websites:http://www.builditsolar.com/Projects/Conservation/Pilo tLights.htm http://energyexperts.org/EnergySolutionsDatabase/ResourceDeta il.aspx?id=4407 http://www.gascoals.com/Library/PilotLightGasConsumption.aspx

31

Space Heating

Air Conditioning

Buildings 79A and 79B are currently heated by natural gas, and Building 79 is in the process of being converted to natural gas for space heating.

Therefore, we modeled natural gas consumption for heating in all buildings. To determine the heating load, the square footage of each building was 33 multiplied by 32,427 BTU/square foot. This calculation provided the total BTU consumed.

The air conditioning load for each building was determined by examining the tonnage of the air 37 conditioning units on each building. The average tonnage of the units on each building was calculated.

This number was entered into a location specific calculator to account for local climate, to determine 38 the kWh/year consumed by each unit. This number was multiplied by the number of units on each building to calculate the Total kWh/year

Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Natural Gas The GHG emissions from natural gas were calculated by converting total BTUs consumed to MMBtu. This number was then entered into the Clean Air-Cool Planet Campus Carbon Calculator to determine 34 annual MT eCO2.

Offices and Classrooms The electricity usage for equipment in offices and classrooms was determined in the same manner as the equipment in the kitchens. However, phantom loads were assumed in some of the calculations.

MEASUREMENT OF ELECTRICITY USAGE

Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Electricity

Kitchen Equipment

The GHG emissions from electricity were calculated by inputting the specific energy mix for SCE into the Clean Air-Cool Planet Campus Carbon Calculator.

Then, the total kWh consumed was entered into the calculator to determine annual MT eCO2.

Kitchen equipment that utilizes electricity (including gas powered equipment with electric ignition) is measured in watts. Watts are calculated by multiplying volts and amps or from information provided by the manufacturer. The total number of hours of use per week was multiplied by watts to arrive at kWh/week and then kWh/month. The kWh/month was multiplied by nine to determine Total kWh/year. It was assumed that there was no phantom load from electrical equipment during 35 times of non-operation.

6.4 FINDINGS

Lighting Academ ic 284.5 (52%)

The electricity used by lighting in all three buildings was determined by multiplying the square footage of 36 each building by the factor of 5 kWh/square foot.

This calculation produced Total kWh/year.

RKR 307.5 (48%)

33

This information was provided by George Lwin,- Energy Manager, Facilities Planning and Management, as a standard for energy efficiency at CPP. 34

Figure 6.2 College Energy Use

http://www.cleanair-coolplanet.org/toolkit/index.php

35

A phantom load is the electricity consumed by an appliance or electrical device when it is not actively being used or is in the “off” mode. Not all appliances consume electricity in this manner.

36

This factor was determined from information from the following websites:http://greenecon.net/obama-energy-efficiency-andlighting-retrofit/energy_economics.html http://www.nrdc.org/cities/building/dcofc/dcofcch2.asap

37

Information on the air conditioning units was provided by Jesse Ochoa – HVAC Lead, Facilities Planning and Management 38

http://www.energystar.gov/ia/business/bulk_purchasing/bpsavi ngs_calc/Calc_CAC.xls

32

OVERALL 5,000

1.

Acad.

4,428

Total MMBtu

4,000

3,000

RKR, 2,322

RKR, 2,242

2,000

2.

Acad.

1,016

1,000

0 Gas

Electric 3.

Figure 6.3 Energy Use Breakdown

500 403.7 400

4.

300 200 100

The energy consumption of the college is 10,008 MMBtu annually. This total is nearly evenly divided between academic space and RKR, with 5,444 MMBtu (54%) and 4,564 MMBtu (46%) respectively. This translates to annual GHG emission from direct energy usage of 592 MT eCO2. Again this total was nearly evenly divided between academic space and RKR, with 307.5 MT eCO2 (52%) and 284.5 MT eCO2 (48%) respectively. (See Figure 6.2) Research suggests restaurants are three times as energy intensive as other commercial buildings. Our analysis did not reveal the same intensity differentiation between academic buildings and RKR. We assume this to be a result of the limited operating restaurant hours in RKR, as well as the presence of food prep labs in the academic space.

The use of natural gas for kitchen equipment within the college (academic labs and RKR) represents the largest share of total GHG emissions at 47% (33% from the laboratory kitchen and 14% from RKR kitchen). (See Figure 6.3) The use of kitchen or restaurant equipment represents 68% of annual eCO2 emissions with nearly 404 MT eCO2 annually. (See Figure 6.4)

123.8 48.3

16.2

0

Figure 6.4 College Emissions (MT eCO2) by Category

Table 6.1 Energy Intensity

CPP Gross emissions (Scopes 1 + 2) *Data from AASHE Collins Gross Emissions * Data from CPP Data Warehouse and FPM

Total MT eCO2 23,882

FTE 18,757

MT eCO2/FTE 1.3

SQ FT 4,167,374

MT eCO2/1000 SqFt 5.7

592

550

1.1

39,360

15.0

33 Other 2% Lighting 9%

Academic Space 1.

2.

Equipment in the laboratory kitchen (both gas and electric) represented 66% of GHG emissions associate with academic space.

Virtually all of these emissions came from natural gas appliances.

Heating and cooling (HVAC) accounted for 23% and lighting 9% of the GHG emissions from the academic space.

HVAC 23%

Equipment 66%

RKR 1.

2.

Equipment in the kitchen (both gas and electric) represented 70% of RKR GHG emissions. The use of electricity in the RKR kitchen contributed 41% of these emissions, while natural gas usage contributed 29%.

Heating and cooling (HVAC) accounted for 19% and lighting 8% of RKR GHG emissions.

Figure 6.5 Academic Emissions (MT eCO2) by Area of Consumption

Other 3% Lighting 8% HVAC 19%

6.5 RECOMMENDATIONS 1.

2.

3.

Develop a process for accurately measuring annual energy consumption across the college, and maintain records of all equipment to better understand specific equipment annual consumption. Functional metering or sub-metering of spaces would be effective in measuring future conservation strategies.

Develop an action plan for reducing energy consumption through procedural and behavioral change. The high proportion of emissions associated with lab and kitchen activity suggest that best management practices could be effective in reducing consumption while still fulfilling the college mission.

Develop a strategy for continuing to improve energy efficiency through technology upgrades, particularly in the laboratory and RKR kitchen. This strategy should consider cost effectiveness of improvements through an analysis of equipment life, cost, and projected energy savings.

Equipment 70%

Figure 6.6 RKR Emissions (MT eCO2) by Area of Consumption

6.7 DATA SUPPLIER George Lwin - Energy Manager, Facilities, Planning and Management Chitra Perera – Culinary Laboratory Coordinator, The Collins College of Hospitality Management Jenesie Hardyman – Restaurant Laboratory Analyst, Restaurant at Kellogg Ranch, The Collins College of Hospitality Management Scott Rudolph – Chef, Lecturer, Restaurant at Kellogg Ranch, The Collins College of Hospitality Management Rachel Duenas, Administrative Assistant, The Collins College of Hospitality Management Jesse Ochoa – HVAC Lead, Facilities Planning and Management

34

7.0 WATER 7.1 INTRODUCTION Water is integral to the operation of the college, and particularly RKR. It is a versatile compound utilized by restaurants in all three physical states. Its properties allow it to act as a solvent for cleaning and its thermal properties make it ideal for cooking, defrosting, and cooling. Although water use is instrumental to Academic and RKR operations, there are ways to reduce its waste, particularly through the use of efficient technology, education, and planning.

We conducted a life cycle analysis (LCA) of water used by the college. An LCA of water includes an account of the source, conveyance, use, and treatment of wastewater. Performing an LCA of CPP’s water source requires an investigation into California’s water-energy nexus. Relative to the amount of people and demand in Southern California, potable (drinking quality) water is scarce.

To satisfy this demand the state has developed massive engineering projects which import water from Northern California via the State Water Project (SWP) and through the importation of water from the Colorado River (Figure 7.1). The annual transportation of over one million acre feet (AF) of water takes massive amounts of energy. According to the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the SWP is the largest energy user in the state of California, consuming 2-3% of the total energy used 39 in the state .

The potable water provider for Cal Poly Pomona is Three Valleys Municipal Water District (TVMWD); TVMWD purchases water from the Southern California Metropolitan Water District (MWD), which imports 90% of its water from the SWP and the remaining 10% from the Colorado River. CPP also

Image 7.1. State Water Project40

pumps potable water from university-owned wells and blends it with the imported water on-site adding to the energy profile. The resulting mix produces 0.68 MT eCO2/AF, with 0.67 MT eCO2/AF attributed to the conveyance of water and 0.01 MT eCO2/AF 41 attributed to CPP’s on-site blending operations .

In addition to the sourcing, conveyance, and use of water, LCA typically includes the treatment of wastewater in its calculus. Wastewater from CPP is treated at the San Jose Creek Reclamation Plant, where the water is recycled using a tertiary treatment process. Emissions stemming from the treatment of wastewater have an estimated 0.2 MT eCO2/AF, however this number underestimates the 42 amount of nitrous oxide (N2O) .

CPP purchases recycled water from the Pomona Water Reclamation Plant for irrigation purposes.

Recycled water offsets the University’s demand of potable water and carries a lower water-energy profile than potable water. The garden at RKR exclusively uses recycled water at an estimated rate of 1.7 million gallons per year. Some of the produce from the garden is used directly in RKR’s operations, but it is estimated to be a relatively small percentage compared to the amount of produce purchased from outside vendors.

42 39

http://www.epa.gov/region9/waterinfrastructure/waterenergy. html 39 California State Department of Water Resources 39 Carbonnier, E. & Okihiro, A. (2009). Landscape & Grounds Case Study: Scope 3 Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategies. California State Polytechnic University, Pomona.

Water recycling produces N2O emissions from the biological Nitrogen (N) removal process but reliable information about the emissions profile are not available and as such cannot be included in this study.Townsend-Small, T., Pataki, D.E., Tseng, L.Y., Tsai, C. & Rosso, D. (2011). Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Wastewater Treatment and Water Reclamation Plants in Southern California.

Journal of Environmental Quality, 40, 1542-1550.

35

7.2 BOUNDARIES The study calculates potable and recycled water usage and associated greenhouse gas emissions for use within RKR, the academic spaces in the college, and the RKR garden. We were not able to obtain water use figures related to linen laundering by an outside contractor, so that use is excluded from the audit. In addition, irrigation for landscaping around the buildings was not included.

7.3 DATA COLLECTION AND MODELLING Water usage is only monitored at the University level; individual buildings or sub-regions are not metered for their water consumption. We were not able to obtain data related to expenses, historical use, or current water use to develop a benchmark for the study; therefore we have relied on observations, interviews with key informants, manufacturer information, modeling based on industry standards, and limited flow metering we were able to conduct with a portable water flow meter (Figure 7.2). Also, the watering schedule for the garden varied considerably, so its water consumption was estimated by Sandra Zwaal, a student assistant for the Agriculture Department who monitors the garden, and represents a very rough estimation.

The variation of RKR’s summer and special events schedule presented some challenges; these events were estimated to occur at a rate equal to 20% of the regular restaurant schedule. Also, special events in the wine library in building 79A were reported to occur three to four times per quarter, so annual usage was calculated differently for that particular building.

Observation Audit for RKR The observation audit of the kitchen at RKR was based on a literature review; a spreadsheet was subsequently developed to model multiple variables relevant to a restaurant and university setting. The audit was completed over the course of three days which included one full Ă la carte lunch service, one full Ă la carte dinner service and one banquet dinner.

Image 7.2. Portable Water Flow Meter

Where quantitative data was not available, observations and estimated use were recorded via staff and student interviews. Industry standards from Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) and manufacturer information were used to calculate restroom use, which includes sink, toilets, and urinals.

Observation Audit for Academic spaces One full HRT 281 lab was observed and audited in this evaluation. Interviews were also conducted with students and the faculty. It should be noted that students reported the dishwasher in the lab to be non-operational, but that it is assumed to work in our model. Industry standards from LEED and manufacturer information were used to calculate appliance and restroom water use.

The observation audit conducted in academic buildings 79A and 79B used LEED industry standards to calculate restroom use. Building 79A contains a wine library with various appliances, such as a dishwasher and an ice machine. Manufacturer information was obtained and used to extrapolate annual use based on information provided by staff.

36

Portable Flow Meter The portable flow meter used to measure the amount of water entering building 79 captured one banquet lunch service, one à la carte dinner service, and one session of the HRT 281 lab. The meter was not able to capture all of the water leading into the building because it was not able to be placed on the water main at a point where it could measure all of the water softener’s wastewater. The water softener’s wastewater was estimated based on observation and added to the daily total; the wastewater estimation was also included in the observation audit total. The data from the portable flow meter was effective in capturing a snapshot of daily use, however the results are limited because the data collection period was restricted to one day.

7.4 FINDINGS Overall 1. The college uses an estimated 2,664,857 gallons of water each year, with 967,714 gallons, or 36%, being potable water. RKR consumes 63% of the potable water, with the remaining 27% consumed in academic spaces. (See Figure 7.1) 2. Estimated GHG emissions for overall water service for the college are 3.66 MT eCO2; 2.02 MT eCO2 derive from potable water; treatment of wastewater amounts to 0.59 MT eCO2, and 1.04 MT eCO2 come from 43 reclaimed use . (See Figure 7.2)

Daily water use based on the data from the portable flow meter was calculated separately and later compared to the water use totals found in the observational audit. Consequently the use of two data collection methods produced divergent results and thus the findings in this area represent a range of likely usage. In order to analyze water use in building 79, we decided to use the more estimate derived from the observational audit, which represented the higher range of likely usage; furthermore, the audit allowed for better understanding of how water was being used, which is useful in developing strategies for reduction in the future.

37% Kitchen Education 63%

Figure 7.1 Kitchen & Education Water

36%

Recycled Water Potable Water

64%

Figure 7.2 Water Use by Type

Image 7.3 Washing Hands

43

Nitrous Oxide (N2O) is not included in wastewater and reclaimed water emissions figures.

37

Kitchen (RKR) Lab

29% 35%

Building 79A Building 79B Wastewater Treatment (RKR)

6% Wastewater Treatment (Education)

10%

13% 5%

Garden

2%

Figure 7.3 Distribution of Emissions by Location and Use

Restaurant at Kellogg Ranch 1. The average water use calculated from the observational audit is an estimated 633,090 gallons per year, with 1.27 MT eCO2 emissions. This usage rate is approximately 22% higher than the national average for 44 restaurants .

2. According to the audit, 75% of the restaurant’s water use is concentrated in the following five areas (in order): 1) TwoCompartment Sink (123,181 gpy), 2) HighSpeed Sprayer (121,968 gpy), 3) Student Restroom Use (87,819 gpy), 4) Water Softener Wastewater (64,843 gpy), and 5) Ice Machine (57,305 gpy). While these facilities are clearly essential, there may be a combination of behavioral and technological strategies available to reduce consumption.

44

On average, restaurants use 5800 gallons per day (http://www.swfwmd.state.fl.us/conservation/waterwork/checkli st-restaurant.html). Based on RKR’s operating schedule, the use of 5800 gpd should total 519, 860 gallons per year (gpy)

3.

The garden at RKR uses approximately 1.7 million gallons of reclaimed water annually, although due to a lack of metering, this is considered to be a very rough figure. Micro and drip irrigation are used throughout the garden to reduce consumption, however this would need to be compared to quantities of fruit and vegetable production to determine efficiency.

79A

38

Restroom

29,161.60

79B

Upstairs Restroom

34,389.20

Downstairs Restroom

58,392.00

79 (Lab)

All 2 Compartment Sinks

46,800.00

Sinks & Toilets: Students: Labs

32,850.00

Sinks & Toilets: Students: Kitchen

87,819.00

Kitchen (RKR)

Ice Making Station:

57,305.00

2 Compartment Sinks (defrost):

123,181.88

Hi-Speed Sprayer:

121,968.00

Dishwasher:

29,527.21

Figure 7.4 Highest Water Use by Building

Academic Space 1.

2.

The audit of buildings 79A, 79B and the lab portion on building 79 revealed that 357,016 gpy, or 37% of the total water usage was consumed in academic spaces.

Predictably, the major water uses in buildings 79A and 79B were student, faculty and staff restroom use, totaling 87% of all water usage in those buildings.

Manufacturer information combined with observation data determined that 31% of potable water use is non-restroom related water use in building 79A. Only 6% of potable water use went to non-restroom related activity in building 79B.

Image 7.4 Cleaning Mats

The HRT 281 laboratory accounted for 27% of the total water consumed in building 79, and 23% of all potable water usage overall.

The three highest water uses in the building 79 lab were 1) student restroom use (46,800 gpy), 2) two compartment sink (32,850 gpy), and 3) water softener wastewater (22,392 gpy).

39

7.5 RECOMMENDATIONS

120000

1.

60,462 100000 2.

48,964

Gallons

80000

3.

4.

60000

Incorporate technologies which would expand metering capabilities, particularly over a prolonged period for more accurate data collection.

Examine behavior-related water loss; this will help identify high water use practices/stations and nature of the consumption.

Develop better strategies to evaluate water use and anticipated food production in the garden at RKR. Develop an action plan to reduce high water use through planning, behavior and technology.

7.6 DATA SUPPLIER

49,910 40000

40,729

20,508 15,610

Sandra Zwaal, Student Assistant, Department of Agriculture

13,253

Joe Phillipy, Lead Plumber, Facilities Management

20000 16,883

Barbara Jean Bruin, Lecturer, The Collins College of Hospitality and Management

0 Kitchen Lab (79) Sinks

79A

79B

Toilets/Urinals

Figure 7.5 Breakdown of Restroom Use

Image 7.5 Three Sink Compartment

40

8.0 CONSUMABLES 8.1 INTRODUCTION Restaurants and colleges support their operations with a variety of materials which contribute to their overall environmental impact. Disposable products for containing and preparing food, paper, and cleaning chemicals represent three major areas of consumption. This section will inventory existing consumption of these materials in order to determine their “environmental footprint.”

A consumable is something capable of being consumed, destroyed, dissipated, wasted, or spent. Consumables are used once or are considered temporary, having a lifespan of less than three years. Examples include cleaning products, office supplies, packaging and containers, paper products, disposable rubber and plastic materials.

8.2 BOUNDARIES Consumables purchased for use at the college between July 1 2010-June 30, 2011 were inventoried and analyzed for this study.

Food-Related Disposables Disposable items used to store and prepare food were grouped in this product category. Items studied were gloves, takeout containers, foodrelated paper products, plates, cutlery, straws, plastic bags, cling wrap, and products made of aluminum.

Chemicals Cleaning and sanitizing products were included in this category. Products studied were general purpose cleaners, sanitizers, detergents, hand soap, polishes, floor cleaner, carpet shampoo, oven cleaner, rinse aid, pre-soak, de-limer and window cleaner.

Paper Paper-based office supplies such as loose leaf paper, notepads, spiral-bound books, index cards, sticky

notes, file boxes, file folders, envelopes and labels were part of this category.

Custodial paper such as roll towels, bath tissue, seat covers, liner bags for restroom receptacles, vacuum cleaner bags, and napkins were also in this category.

Exclusions Goods with the potential for multiple uses beyond a 3-year period, non-paper office supplies, and cleaning chemicals used by a third-party linen service provider were not included in the study. Also not included were products whose combination of materials did not permit them to fit into any single sectors defined by the LCA tool, and consumables purchased through suppliers used on a contingency basis. These types of products were estimated to comprise a small percentage of total consumables purchased. Consumables were grouped as pertinent to the “Academic” and “RKR” categories as follows: Table 8.1 Consumables Categories

Food-Related Disposables

Chemicals

Academic Food storage and prep products for lab kitchens Cleaning products for classrooms, offices, common areas

RKR Food storage and prep products for RKR Cleaning products for RKR

Cleaning products for lab kitchens Paper

Office paper for academic and office use Custodial paper for restrooms Food related paper products for lab kitchens

Roll towels for RKR

41

8.3 DATA COLLECTION AND METHOD

Data processing and analysis

Data collection

All consumables purchasing data collected or estimated for the study was entered into a spreadsheet model. The material composition of each consumable product was researched, and sectors as determined by The Carnegie Mellon calculator were assigned to each product. The calculator determined the amount of carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions associated with the purchases of each product, and combined the emissions calculations to produce results in metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents (MT eCO2). The results were then grouped into product and procurer categories to determine which products and functions of the college emit the highest and lowest MT eCO2.

Purchasing data on RKR consumables was provided

by Jenesie Hardyman, Restaurant Laboratory Analyst, in the form of reports generated by Cheftec, third-party software for analyzing restaurant costs, inventory and nutritional information. Ms. Hardyman inputted the reports’ source data from Sysco invoices. Data for Academic laboratory kitchen consumables was obtained from Sysco invoices provided by Chitra Perera, Culinary Laboratory Coordinator. Academic office supply purchasing data was derived from a purchasing report requested by Barbara Russell, Budget Analyst, and generated by Julie Hawk of OfficeMax. Desiree Baker, Administrative Support Assistant, provided supplemental information.

Cal Poly Pomona’s Facilities Management is responsible for providing custodial maintenance for all state-funded buildings at Cal Poly Pomona, including all areas of the college except the restaurant’s and labs’ kitchens. Custodial Services consolidates purchases for all University buildings into single Waxie invoices; therefore it was impossible to determine what portions of the purchases were allocated for maintaining the college buildings. Cindi Grani, Lead Custodian for the college furnished use estimates of custodial paper and cleaning chemicals. Humberto Arias, Manager of Custodial Services and Daniel Vest, Administrative Support Coordinator for Facilities Administrative & Energy Services provided the products’ unit prices.

Method The economic input-output lifecycle assessment calculator developed by Carnegie Mellon University was used to calculate consumables’ metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents (MT eCO2). This method and tool was chosen because it was consistent with the approach used with the food section of this report, its inputting requirements were compatible with the purchasing records and cost estimates provided for this study, the materials defining the tool’s sectors applied to most of the products, and the U.S.-derived data was presumed to be relevant to most of the consumables studied.

Limitations Items purchased by or for the college between July 1, 2010 and June 30, 2011 were used in this analysis.

However the results may not represent the college’s actual emissions during the study’s time boundary if the items were not used during this period, or if previously purchased items were used. It is assumed that previous purchases and unused items in each category are equal, and thus cancel each other out.

Because a plant-based plastic sector was not developed for the Carnegie Mellon calculator, no MT eCO2 results were generated for plant-based (PLA) plastic cups. While PLA cups comprised a small percentage of RKR’s purchases, the lack of a compatible sector in the calculator presents a missed opportunity to compare the MT eCO2 of “conventional” and “green” plastic cups.

While distributors did not list products’ countries of origin, it is reasonable to assume that some consumables studied were sourced or manufactured outside of the United States. The U.S.-derived data of the Carnegie Mellon calculator may underestimate their impact due to the greater distances traveled, modes of transportation, and production methods.

Purchasing information for the RKR consumables was in the form of Cheftec, which combined total expenditures of individual items by academic quarter. Unit prices were calculated by dividing total expenditures by number of units purchased. The results in some instances differed from the unit price of the same product on Sysco invoices for Academic

42

lab products. Because price fluctuations were not observed on a year’s worth of Sysco lab invoices, Sysco invoice unit prices were assumed to be the most reliable and Cheftec unit prices were adjusted accordingly.

RKR 44%

Custodial product purchasing totals were based on use estimates rather than actual purchasing data, which may impact the reliability of the custodial product findings./Changes in products and procedures due to budget, product and vendor performance will need to be factored if this study is used as a baseline for subsequent inventories.

Acad.

56%

Figure 8.1 College Emissions by Producer

8.4 FINDINGS 11.61

12.50

Overall 1.

2.

3.

The annual emissions of all college consumables included in the study was nearly 29 MT eCO2.

Consumables associated with academic space in the college accounted for approximately 56 percent of total college MT eCO2 while 44 percent of college MT eCO2 was emitted by the RKR operations.

(See Figure 8.1) Paper and food related disposables were the highest emitting product types of all college product categories at 44% and 41% respectively. Chemical products represented 15% of the annual emissions from consumables. (See Figure 8.2)

Image 8.1 Office Paper

4.27

Food Related Disposables (41%)

Paper (44%)

Chemicals (15%)

Figure 8.2 Annual College Emissions (MT eCO2) by Product Category

43

Academic Space

1.32 Food Related Disposables (18%)

Paper (74%) Chemicals (8%)

Figure 8.3 Academic Emissions by Product Category (MT eCO2)

Food Related Disposables

8.80

Paper 0.86

Chemicals

2.84

11.65

2.96 1.32

0.00

5.00

RKR

10.00

15.00

Academic

Figure 8.4 College Emissions by Product Category (MT eCO2)

F.R.D. (18%)

3.

2.84

Labs Labs

Image 8.2 Office Paper

Paper (74%)

2.

Academic activity accounted for approximately 56 percent of total college MT eCO2, with annual emissions totaling approximately 16 MT eCO2. (See Figure 8.1) Paper was the primary source of annual Academic emissions, with office supplies responsible for the majority of paper emissions at 74%. Food related disposables associated with the kitchen labs represented 18% of annual Academic emissions and Chemicals emitted the smallest percentage at 8%. (See Figure 8.3 and 8.4) The majority of emissions resulting from Paper purchases can be attributed to Office and Custodial activity, 60% and 39% respectively. Lab activity was entirely responsible for emissions derived from Food Related Disposables. (See Figure 8.5)

2.84 0.10

Custodial

4.59

Office Chemicals (8%)

1.

11.65

Labs Custodial

6.96 0.87 0.45

Figure 8.5 Academic Emissions by Product Category (MT eCO2)

44

Restaurant at Kellogg Ranch

8.5 RECOMMENDATIONS

1.

Total annual emissions from RKR consumables was 12.6 MT eCO2 or approximately 44% of total annual college emissions. (See Figure 8.1)

2.

Food related disposables represented 70% of RKR emission or approximately 9 MT eCO2. Disposable gloves and takeout containers represented nearly 50% of these food related disposables. (See Figure 8.6 and 8.7)

3.

Chemicals represented 23% of annual emissions and paper products comprised only a small percentage of RKR’s total emissions at 7%. (See Figure 8.6)

1.

Work with vendors and buyers to improve data collection methods to more accurately and efficiently track purchasing, with the goal of saving money and reducing emissions.

2.

Work with students, staff and faculty to develop methods to utilize technology to reduce the need for paper within the college.

3.

Research behaviors of consumer market and food service staff to develop options for reducing food related consumable use.

8.6 DATA SUPPLIERS Jenesie Hardyman, Restaurant Laboratory AnalystRestaurant at Kellogg Ranch, The Collins College of Hospitality Management

8.80

Chitra Perera, Culinary Laboratory Coordinator, The Collins College of Hospitality Management

2.96 0.86 Food Related Paper (7%) Disposables (70%)

Barbara M. Russell, Budget Analyst, The Collins College of Hospitality Management

Chemicals (23%)

Desiree Baker, Administrative Support Assistant, The Collins College of Hospitality Management

Figure 8.6 RKR Emissions by Product Category (MT eCO2)

Julie Hawk, Business Development Manager, OfficeMax

Food Related Disposables

Jackie Miranda, Buyer II, Procurement Gloves

2.16

Takeout Containers

1.99

Humberto D. Arias, Manager, Custodial Services, Facilities Management

1.24

Cindi R. Grani, Lead Custodian, Facilities Management

Plastic Bags and Cling Wrap

1.2

Maria Lopez, Custodian, Facilities Management

Cutlery and Straws

1.11

Aluminum

Paper-Food Related Plates

0.53 0.38

Figure 8.7 RKR eCO2 by Product Subcategory (MT eCO2)

Lorena Ramirez, Custodian, Facilities Management Daniel P. Vest, Administrative Support Coordinator I, Facilities Administrative & Energy Services

45

9.0 SOLID WASTE 9.1 INTRODUCTION The reduction and management of waste is a critical facet of sustainable practices from a life cycle assessment perspective. Careful planning ensures that what could end up in the “grave” phase as refuse is instead returned to the “cradle” phase as a useful product, thereby creating a closed-loop system. This is especially important in the restaurant industry, as the average U.S. restaurant produces 68,100 kilograms of waste every year, 30-70% of 45 which is food. An estimated 25 to 50 percent of all food grown and raised in the United States is wasted, 97 percent of which is ultimately conveyed 46 to landfills. Food waste is particularly harmful in landfills, as the anaerobic conditions cause organic matter to release prodigious amounts of methane as 47 it decomposes.

Waste is classified as either pre-consumer or postconsumer, a designation that differentiates between waste created as a byproduct of production and waste created by the user. Pre-consumer waste in the restaurant industry consists of items such as scraps generated during food preparation, food that was prepared but not served, kitchen overstock, preparation mistakes, and packaging. On average, between 4 and 10 percent of the food purchased by 48 restaurants is lost as pre-consumer waste. Postconsumer waste in restaurants includes items such as food left on the plate by a customer, disposable cutlery, and take-out containers.

For the purposes of this study, the college’s total waste stream, which includes items destined for recycling or composting, will be referred to as

45

Bloom, J. (2010). American Wasteland: how America throws away nearly half of its food (and what we can do about it). New York: Da Capo Lifelong Books.

46 Environmental Protection Agency. (2011). Basic Information about Food Waste. Retrieved from http://www.epa.gov/osw/conserve/materials/organics/food/fdbasic.htm 47

Inaba, R., Nansai, K., Fujii, M., & Hashimoto, S. Hybrid life-cycle assessment (LCA) of CO2 emissions with management alternatives for household food wastes in Japan. Waste Management and Research, 28(496), 496-507.

48

Bloom, J. (2010). American Wasteland: how America throws away nearly half of its food (and what we can do about it). New York: Da Capo Lifelong Books.

“waste,” while items intended for the landfill will be referred to as “trash.”

9.2 BOUNDARIES To assess the waste stream of the college, the trash, recycling and compost dumpsters were examined.

Thus, all waste generated by the college and collected on its campus was included in this study, excepting grease and the portion of landscape trimmings that are collected by Facilities Management. Kitchen grease is deposited behind the restaurant and collected by outside contractors who were not able to provide quantity estimates.

When landscape trimmings are too voluminous to deposit in the college’s dumpsters, they are aggregated on the main CPP campus and thus the college’s contributions cannot be discretely quantified. However, a significant quantity of landscape trimmings were found in the dumpsters and included in this study.

9.3 DATA COLLECTION AND METHOD Because trash is aggregated in dumpsters, it is not possible to distinguish between waste generated by RKR and by the academic portion of the college.

However, based on observations made during waste audits, it was assumed that RKR is responsible for 40% of paper waste, 85% of plastic waste, 95% of organic waste and all glass, metal and unclassifiable waste. It was assumed that the academic portion of the college is responsible for the remainder.

In order to fully assess the waste stream of the college, it was subdivided into categories based on intended destination. Thus the trash, recycling and composting systems were evaluated separately.

Trash Two waste audits were conducted with the help of The Collins College students in order to ascertain the composition of the institution’s waste stream. Trash collection was delayed for the audits so that the combination of the two audits captures approximately a full week of the college’s operation. th The trash audited on November 10 , 2011 included RKR waste from Saturday through Thursday,

46

classroom waste from Friday through Wednesday, and office waste from building 79. The trash audited th on November 18 included RKR waste from Friday, classroom waste from Thursday, and office waste 49 from building 79B. In total, the two audits measured waste from two regular lunch services, two lunch buffets, two regular dinner services, and one dinner buffet.

Table 9.1 Landfill Scenario

2010-11 Emissions

100% Landfill Scenario

Trash

29.9

53.7

Paper

15.6

28.2

The trash was sorted into six major categories: paper, plastic, glass, organics, metal and other, which consists of items such as chafing fuel containers and whiteboard markers. Organic matter includes both food waste and landscape trimmings.

All trash bags were removed from the dumpsters and sorted on large tarps into the six major categories, which were then subdivided into specific types, which will be addressed below. After sorting all trash, the weight and volume of each subtype was recorded for comparison and all trash was returned to the dumpsters. While quantification by weight is the industry standard for waste audits, it creates some uncertainty within the model due to the distinct densities of different types of trash.

Organics

14.2

21

Plastics

0.05

0.05

Other

0.01

4.5

Recycling

7.5

0

Cardboard

6.7

0

Glass

0.8

0

Compost

-3.7

0

Recycling

(MT eCO2)

33.7

53.7

In order to assess the portion of the college’s waste stream being diverted for recycling, visual inspections were conducted during the waste audits and daily over the course of one week. These observations reveal that the recycling dumpster behind the college is filled predominately with cardboard packaging from the restaurant.

Observations within the kitchen and interviews with custodial staff revealed a strong effort to recycle glass beer and wine bottles, though it is usually collected by Facilities Management due to its weight.

The restaurant currently recycles all of its grease through outside contractors, though information regarding the volume of grease generated is not available.

Total

Image 9.1 Preparing to sort solid waste

49

Variability in which days are captured is the result of different trash collection patterns between the restaurant and other buildings.

Image 9.2 Sorted recycling

47

Compost

4.

Observation in the restaurant’s kitchen revealed that preparation scraps that are appropriate for worm composting are separated from the rest of the waste for collection by students in the Agriculture department. This food waste is taken to Spadra Ranch for composting and will ultimately be used there as a soil amendment. Interviews were conducted with students from The Collins College and the Agriculture department to obtain estimates of the volume of compost generated.

Based on the total estimated users of the college over the previous fiscal year, approximately 1.5 kilograms of waste is generated per building user every year; this figure can serve as a baseline against which to measure waste reduction in the future.

1% Food waste

37%

9.4 FINDINGS

Plastic

The audits, observations and interviews provide cumulative data regarding the total waste stream of the college, including waste intended for recycling or composting (see figure). The waste stream is predominantly composed of food waste and paper, while metal and glass are responsible for very little of the total waste stream. Over the course of a year, approximately 28,100 kilograms of material, excluding grease, leaves the college as waste; 18,600 kilograms is sent to landfills, 5000 kilograms is recycled and 4,500 kilograms is composted.

Trash

1.

1.

2.

3.

Over the course of the 2010 to 2011 fiscal year, the college’s waste stream generated 33.7 MT eCO2 emissions (see Table 9.1). RKR is responsible for 22.3 metric tons of emissions and the academic portion of the college is responsible for the remaining 11.4 metric tons.

The degradation of paper and food waste in landfills contributes 88% of the college’s total impact from waste. This is due to both the high volume of these materials in the waste stream and the comparatively high environmental impact generated by these materials when in landfill conditions. (See Figure 9.1) Current efforts to divert a portion of the college’s waste stream to recycling and composting has reduced the waste’s potential impact by 37%. By diverting all recyclable and compostable waste from landfills, the college could reduce its current waste-related impact by 102%, resulting in negative net emissions.

These negative net emissions are due to the production of compost and recyclables which would avoid emissions that would have been produced by other farming or manufacturing processes.

44%

Landscape trimmings Metal

Glass 2%

10%

5% 1%

Paper Other

Figure 9.1 Waste Stream Composition by Weight (kg)

2.

3.

4.

50

The estimated 18,600 kilograms of trash produced by the college each year compares very favorably to industry standards, though this is partially due to the fact that the restaurant is operational for less than half of the year. In total, the trash sent to the landfill over the course of the previous year equates to 50 approximately 30 MT eCO2 emissions.

The trash intended for landfills is predominantly composed of organic matter (51%), followed by paper (30%) and plastic (16%) (See Figure 9.2).

Metal, glass and unclassifiable material each make up less than 2% of trash.

Organic matter consists of both food waste and landscape trimmings; examining food waste on its own, 61% of the food being sent to landfills is plate scrapings, 19% is kitchen overstock, 15% are preparation scraps and the final 4% is food that was prepared but not served.

Paper waste was predominantly (72%) lightweight paper, which was largely composed of paper towels, tissues, and waxed paper.

Computer paper accounts for 15% of paper

Australian Greenhouse Office. (2004). AGO Factors and Methods Workbook. Retrieved from http://www.soetownsville.org/data/factors_ methods_workbook.pdf

48

5.

intended for the landfill, medium weight paper like cups and cardstock another 11% and cardboard the remaining 2%.

Exactly one third of plastic waste is low-density polyethylene, which mainly consists of Saran Wrap and thin plastic bags. Polystyrene makes up another 18% and mainly consists of Styrofoam and thick plastic packaging.

Polypropylene accounts for 13% of plastic waste and includes items such as plastic to go cups and thin, sturdy packaging. Synthetic latex gloves account for a full 12% of plastic waste, while high-density polyethylene makes up 5% and consists mainly of food packaging like jugs and bottles. Plastic cutlery makes up 7% of plastic waste, metallic wrappers another 6% and unclassifiable plastic the remaining 6%.

Recycling 1.

2.

Based on observation, the college recycles an estimated 4500 kilograms of cardboard per year.

Approximately 5.9 MT eCO2 emissions are prevented by recycling this cardboard instead of 51 sending it to the landfill.

Beer and wine bottles generate approximately 540 kilograms of glass each year, and by recycling it, the college avoids 3.7 MT eCO2 52 emissions.

Other 1% Paper 30%

Organics 51%

Glass 0% Plastic 16%

Figure 9.2 Trash Composition by Weight (kg)

by intended destination. Compared to the hotel and restaurant industry, The Collins College produces an expected amount of food and plastic waste, more paper waste than average, and less metal and glass waste than is customary. Compared to the education industry, the college produces more food waste than average, less plastic and metal waste than expected, and an expected amount of paper and glass waste. In concert, the high ratios of food and paper waste in these two industries mimic the waste stream of the school and restaurant. (See Figure 9.3)

Compost 1.

Based on estimates from the students who collect the compost scraps from the restaurant, approximately 4500 kilograms of food waste is composted over the course of a year. Diverting this food waste from landfills prevents 10.5 MT eCO2 emissions from being generated.

Industry Standards Previous studies have established the characteristics of waste streams by industry, though they primarily examine the full waste stream without classifying it Image 9.3 Food waste 51

Confederation of Paper Industries. (2010). Paper and cardboard recycling: greenhouse gas benefits explained. Retrieved from http://www.paper.org.uk/information/factsheets/greenhouse_ga s.pdf 52 Barret, J., Vallack, H., Jones, A., & Haq, G. (2002). A material flow analysis and ecological footprint of York. Retrieved from http://www.seiinternational.org/mediamanager/documents/Publications/Future /Material_Flow_Analysis_york.pdf

Metal 2%

49

Figure 9.3 Waste Stream Comparison

9.5 RECOMMENDATIONS In order to effectively reduce the waste generated by the college, a waste management plan should be developed that addresses all components of the waste stream. Emphasis should be placed primarily on avoiding and minimizing the generation of waste, and any wastage that cannot be prevented should be assessed for possible reuse. Items that do not possess immediate reuse value should be recycled, and any waste that cannot be recycled should be recovered from the waste stream and diverted from landfills.

1. Develop a plan for improved data collection and consistent monitoring in order to best identify opportunities for reducing impacts related to waste. Data collection should focus on waste minimization strategies.

2. Investigate opportunities to change behavior related to waste generation, including the actions of students, staff, and customers.

Behavioral change should target reuse and recycling strategies.

3. Explore available technologies for minimizing waste generation, as well as available technologies for treating and managing unavoidable waste. Adoption of new technology should target waste minimization and recovery strategies.

9.6 DATA SUPPLIERS Jenesie Hardyman, Restaurant Laboratory AnalystRestaurant at Kellogg Ranch, The Collins College of Hospitality Management Shelley Doonan, Lecturer, The Collins College of Hospitality Management Monika Kamboures, Recycling Coordinator, Facilities Management

50

10.0 CONCLUSION

This report reveals the environmental impact of present activities at The Collins College. It includes recommendations designed to improve data collection and initiate steps toward actions designed to reduce environmental impact. The college is encouraged to consider each of these recommendations as the basis for taking tangible action toward their stated obligation to protect the environment. This tangible action should address college operations through the development of a sustainability action plan, the integration of sustainability into curricula, and communication of the college’s commitment to students, supporters and the broader public.

The development of a sustainability action plan for the college would involve participation of students, faculty, staff and administrators in the development of priorities for action by the college to lessen their impact. These priorities should be informed by potential greenhouse gas reductions, operational feasibility, market viability, and financial feasibility.

Cost effectiveness calculations can be useful in identifying actions which yield maximum reductions in environmental impact, while minimizing costs.

The recommendations in this report focus on developing better understandings of behavioral and technological solutions which may be central to this action plan.

The integration of sustainability into the hospitality curricula is of great interest to students and faculty at The Collins College. The Lyle Center faculty are leaders in the development of curriculum aimed at advancing sustainability using a transdisciplinary approach, and are a valuable resource. However, in order for issues of sustainability to be effectively integrated into any curriculum, the concepts must be developed by the core teaching faculty of that program. Collaborative workshops with college faculty, would empower them to develop strategies for integrating sustainability into their curriculum.

These workshops would consist of two, six-hour days where faculty would be introduced to sustainability issues and principles, and work collaboratively on changes and/or additions to the curriculum to address such issues. Specific outcomes would be the

development or modification of course outlines to integrate sustainability into key portions of the curriculum, as determined collectively by the faculty.

Finally, the results of this inventory and the subsequent action planning need to be communicated to a broad array of constituencies, including faculty, staff, students, RKR customers, college supporters, and industry and academic leaders. This inventory is unique and innovative in many ways. It represents one of the first efforts of its kind to broadly assess environmental impacts of a specific academic unit within a University. It is also one of the first to systematically assess the impact of menu items, water, waste and consumables from a restaurant operation. In short, this initiative provides a model for the hospitality industry and other academic units interested in addressing their environmental impact and their obligation to the environment. Communication through restaurant displays, various Collins College media, industry and academic publications is encouraged.

trend

Going Green for Good

Sustainability may seem trendy, but it is here for the long run

BY ELAINE REGUS

R

estaurant owners are discovering that sustainable practices are not only good for the environment but for the bottom line as well. Green restaurants can realize considerable savings on energy, water and waste hauling by switching to low-energy LED light bulbs, installing low-flow water valves and composting. Return on larger investments such as installing solar panels or Energy Star appliances may take longer but eventually will pay off in terms of lower energy costs and consumer goodwill.

Studies show that customers are choosing to patronize restaurants that have adopted eco-friendly practices such as recycling or serving locally grown produce even if it means they have to pay more for dinner and a drink. A recent study conducted by the National Restaurant Association (NRA) in partnership with Georgia-Pacific Professional found that 60 percent of consumers preferred to patronize restaurants that recycle and 51 percent of respondents were willing to pay more at those restaurants.

A study of consumers in Taiwan by Dr. John Self, professor at The Collins College, and his colleagues, Hsin-Hui Hu and H.G. Parsa published in the Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, revealed that their knowledge of a restaurant’s sustainable practices was an important factor in their decisions to patronize green restaurants.

“The Dynamics of Green Restaurant Patronage” found that those who were older, had more money and higher education were more likely to dine at a green restaurant even if they had to pay more for the experience. Self noted that 20 years or so ago, the United States restaurant industry moved toward more healthy menus including veggie burgers at McDonald’s but no one bought it.

“People were talking about it but not really acting on it,” Self said.

“Today, as all the Baby Boomers are starting to age, they are much more cognizant of their health and the calories they consume and of doing the right thing.”

Jot Condie, president and CEO of the California Restaurant

22

Association, said many restaurant owners are green-minded individuals. They also are aware that they are serving green-minded customers, who are increasingly expecting similar commitments from the businesses they patronize.

“Combined with the potential advantages adopting green practices can have on a bottom line, it’s only natural that restaurants would make adjustments as it makes sense for their situation,” Condie said.

Sustainability is not just a trend any more, it is a mainstream movement.

The NRA study found that 65 percent of restaurateurs currently have a recycling program in place and 13 percent participate in composting programs. Seventy-two percent of restaurant owners said they use products such as bags, paper products and food containers made from recycled materials.

The NRA has been promoting earth-friendly practices with its Conserve: Solutions for Sustainability initiative since 2007. The Conserve website (http://conserve.restaurant.org) provides tips, tools and money-saving techniques for restaurant operators, who are interested in developing or expanding their green profile. A virtual green restaurant feature takes visitors on a tour from the front to the back of the house offering tips for conserving natural resources along the way.

Collins College student Kirk Bullock interned at the NRA in the summer of 2009. He helped develop content for Conserve, which was just getting started. The Conserve website not only offers best industry practices and educational videos, it has an actual cost calculator. For example, restaurant operators can input their energy costs and how many light bulbs they use. Then, they can select a green alternative and the calculator will determine the initial capital investment and how much money the restaurant will save in energy costs over time.

“It generates a return on investment for you,” Bullock said.

Some steps toward sustainability are as simple and inexpensive as asking guests whether they would like water instead of automatically serving it or opening blinds in the winter to let in natural light and heat. Others, like replacing incandescent light bulbs with longer lasting CFL bulbs or LED and installing high-efficiency refrigerators can require a significant investment.

“We usually like to suggest more low-hanging fruit especially for restaurants that want to do things more cost effectively,” said Jennifer Fleck, communications manager for the Green Restaurant Association, which has been working with restaurants since 1990 to cut energy, water and waste costs.

“Some low-hanging fruit can result in a significant amount of savings,” she said. (continued on page 24)

TOM ZASADZINSKI

TOM ZASADZINSKI

TOP: Student Kirk Bullock, who interned with the NRA’s Conserve sustainability initiative, is surrounded by fruit trees in the college’s culinary garden. LOWER LEFT: Student Kimberli Turner gets into the spirit of recycling.

The Collins College has recycling cans in each of its classrooms, offices and the Restaurant at Kellogg Ranch.

23

trend (continued from page 22) The GRA will certify restaurants that earn a minimum number of points in each of seven categories including Sustainable Food, Disposables and Energy, and a minimum of 100 points overall.

Other requirements include a full-scale recycling program and no Styrofoam. More than 300 restaurants nationwide have been certified.

“Restaurants will continue to find the right balance of integrating greener practices into their business model,” Condie said. “But a lot of this is still new, and more products and solutions are introduced all the time that are marketed as sustainable, but have pros and cons about them like anything else. Those sorts of things will come and go as operators figure out what really works best in the real restaurant environment.”

As more and more restaurants join the green revolution, they need to aggressively market their efforts to the public. While the addition of solar panels is one of the more obvious displays of a restaurant’s commitment to green, a lot of sustainable alterations in restaurants are much more nuanced.

“Energy-efficient kitchen appliances, inventive recycling programs, compost heaps in the back – customers aren’t going to see those kinds of things,” Condie said. “So it’s important for restaurant companies to proactively and tastefully communicate their effort and philosophy to their customers so they have a sense of what the company is all about.”

Websites, information cards, menu notes and window displays can be employed to inform consumers about the restaurant’s environmentally friendly practices. Self said one of the surprising findings of his study of Taiwanese consumers was how important that information is to consumers. “It really behooves the restaurant owner or manager to make sure they publicize exactly what the restaurant is doing and really go out of their way to educate the consumer,” he said.

“It’s vital to get the message across that we’re not just a restaurant giving good food and good service. We’re also recycling and doing this and that. It’s for all of us that we’re doing this.”

As competition among green restaurants grows, some are realizing that green lifestyles and healthy lifestyles go hand in hand.

Chris Rodriguez, an ‘09 Collins College graduate and now a cook at the Four Seasons Hotel in Seattle, believes consumers are not only looking for more ecologically sound choices they are expecting more healthy choices as well.

“Being green to me is having a nutritionally sound menu with lower salt and fat content because a healthy community is dependent on a healthy environment and vice versa. Restaurants doing both are really ahead of the game as opposed to those that are just providing

24

biodegradable packages but not really restructuring their menus to be healthier.”

Rodriguez recalled when he first came to The Collins College in 2005 that progress was just beginning.

“Being that Cal Poly was an agricultural school, I found it mind boggling that it didn’t have many organic or healthy food choices.

Most of the food was fast food and processed,” Rodriguez said of the dining options on campus.

He also questioned why the Restaurant at Kellogg Ranch was not growing its own food as part of the curriculum to develop the “farm to chef ” relationship.

In just a few years, vast improvements have been made. Not only have healthier food products been introduced across campus, at The Collins College specifically, the Restaurant at Kellogg Ranch has gone through significant changes. A one-acre culinary garden has been planted behind the commercial kitchen and is tended by students in the College of Agriculture. The two colleges work together during planting season to coordinate seasonal crops with menu items. The restaurant also follows standard sustainability practices including: dumping green trim in a compost pile next to the garden; using green-friendly, to-go containers; energy- and water-efficient equipment and fixtures, and bringing in locally sourced ingredients.

Additionally, The Collins College is undergoing a two-part, environmental audit to identify a baseline for energy and water consumption. Dr. Kyle Brown, director of the John T. Lyle Center for Regenerative Studies, said one audit focuses on determining the environmental footprint of the Restaurant at Kellogg Ranch; the other focuses on the entire college. The audit looks at a number of key areas including electricity, natural gas and water consumption and waste generated. The audit should be complete by the end of fall quarter.

“I’m really excited about the level of detail in the Collins study,” Brown said. “It’s really very innovative and we’re very excited to be part of it.”

While sustainability is a major initiative for The Collins College, Chef Ernie Briones said that, unlike traditional restaurants, the Restaurant at Kellogg Ranch has a different and larger mission.

Briones said there are a lot more students going through the restaurant every year than new customers coming in. Students are trained to pick, clean and process the produce as well as cooking and serving.

“The students going out have a bigger impact on what potentially can be done because of what they see Chef Scott Rudolph and I doing in the restaurant,” Briones said. “That’s where we’re getting the bang for the buck in teaching sustainability.”

Culinary Garden Springs to Life, Offers Menu Inspiration April 5, 2009 Chef Scott Rudolph does not need to look far to find inspiration for new recipes at the Restaurant at Kellogg Ranch. In fact, the Collins College lecturer just needs to gaze out his office window.

Thanks to a partnership between The Collins College of Hospitality Management and the College of Agriculture, a field outside the hilltop restaurant is transforming into a culinary garden. The proceeds from Horsehill Vineyards wine, another joint project between the colleges, is funding the garden.

"This is more than a garden. It's an interdisciplinary project that shows students what it takes to get food from the field to the table," Rudolph says. "It's a hands-on example of local sustainable farming, which is one way we can contribute to Cal Poly Pomona's overall goal of achieving climate neutrality."

The garden is about one acre and was planted this winter with 44 dwarf trees, including blood oranges, avocado and Pink Lemonade lemons, along with a variety of other fruits and vegetables.

They are planting dwarf trees so the view of the valley won't be obscured. Rudolph also hopes to have a pathway and gazebo built, so the studentoperated and -managed restaurant can host special events in the garden. Rudolph and Chef Ernie Briones plan to incorporate much of that bounty into the menu at the Restaurant at Kellogg Ranch.

Student Ryan Connelly is overseeing much of the design and planting of the garden, under the guidance of Dan Hostetler, chair of the Plant Sciences department.

"The garden will be esthetically pleasing and functional," Connelly says. "You can produce quite a few fruits and vegetables off all this land. This is not a little backyard garden."

Connelly speaks from experience. In addition to his studies, he works for his family business, Connelly Farms, which provides a range of services including consulting, design and cultivation of personal culinary gardens in the San Diego area. The company's micro-farms are popular with chefs and other customers who have a plot of land and an interest in fresh seasonal ingredients. Their

biggest client is The Bridges at Rancho Santa Fe, a gated community and golf course, where numerous types of vegetables are grown year-round, he says.

In late summer, Connelly, and a few other agriculture students including Kyle McEnroe and Deanne Ecklund, planted a variety of peppers, lettuce and onions as a test crop at the Cal Poly Pomona garden. They wanted to see what the rabbits, squirrels and bugs might eat before planting the whole field. A previous garden project in the same area was decimated by rabbits a few years ago.

To their surprise, they ended up with a bumper crop of peppers, which Rudolph and his students have used for enchilada sauce, and, luckily, they have not encountered the hungry rabbits of yore.

The agriculture students who have worked on the garden so far have all volunteered their time.

"Whoever wants to leave a positive mark on Cal Poly Pomona is welcome to help out with the garden," says Connelly, who expects to graduate in 2010. "I want to set up a nice foundation, so when I graduate, the garden can continue."

For more information about the restaurant, visit www.rkr.csupomona.edu. Vegetables from the garden also may be sold at the Farm Store at Kellogg Ranch.

Visitwww.csupomona.edu/~farmstore for details. Details about Horsehill Vineyards are available at www.horsehill.csupomona.edu.

CALIFORNIA TRAVEL & TOURISM COMMISSION

CALIFORNIA SUSTAINABLE TOURISM HANDBOOK

Prepared by: Sandra Sun-Ah Ponting, PhD Jess Ponting, PhD San Diego State University Sustainable Tourism Program 1

What Is Sustainable Tourism?

Sustainable tourism, in simple terms, is tourism that does not deplete economic, social/cultural and environmental resources. The ultimate goal is to provide high-quality experiences for visitors, strengthen host communities and cultures, and develop tourism-related livelihoods while preserving the surrounding environments.

2

Contents

Addressing Sustainable Tourism ................................................................... 4 About the Handbook ........................................................................................ 5 The First Step – Decide to be Sustainable .................................................. 6 The Big Picture – Sustainable Management.................................................................. 6

Economic Sustainability................................................................................... 9 Nature of the Issue .............................................................................................................. 9 Guidelines for Tourism Businesses ................................................................................. 10

Social/Cultural Sustainability ......................................................................... 11 Nature of the Issue .............................................................................................................. 11 Guidelines for Tourism Businesses ................................................................................. 12

Environmental Sustainability ......................................................................... 15 Nature of the Issue ............................................................................................................. 15 Guidelines for Tourism Businesses ................................................................................. 16

Motivating Tourists to Embrace Sustainability During Travel .............. 23 Business Checklist for Adopting Sustainable Tourism Principles and Practices ............................................................................................................ 24 First Steps ........................................................................................................................... 24 Economic ............................................................................................................................. 24 Social/Cultural ................................................................................................................... 25 Environmental .................................................................................................................... 25

Sources for Further Information .................................................................. 26 3

Addressing Sustainable Tourism Over the past two decades, sustainability has become a focal point for tourism development around the world. Reflecting this trend, in 1999 the United Nations World Tourism Organization (UNWTO) created a Global Code of Ethics for Tourism. More recently, in 2008 the Rainforest Alliance, the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP), the United Nations Foundation and the UNWTO initiated the Global Partnership for Sustainable Tourism Criteria (GSTC Partnership), a coalition of 32 organizations working to increase understanding of sustainable tourism practices and principles. Sustainable tourism is widely considered to be the fastest growing segment of the world’s largest industry.

“Sustainability is now becoming a mandatory business requirement. The sustainability movement is being driven and shaped by forces outside of the tourism industry’s control – among them sharply rising energy costs, increased regulatory pressures, and growing consumer demand.”

(Deloitte 2009 Tourism Industry Outlook) California, an innovator in many areas, has also taken a leading role in raising awareness about sustainability and taking action to address the surrounding issues. An example is the 2006 California Global Warming Solutions Act (Assembly Bill 32). This legislation has positioned California as a leader in green innovation, resulted in green investment and jobs, and helped to brand the state as a sustainable destination.

As the most visited state in the union, and home to two of the nation’s 10 most visited cities, tourism is one of California’s largest and most prosperous industries. California’s unique and diverse environmental and social/cultural resources are major tourism attractions. As such, they are also vulnerable to the impacts of tourism. In order to protect the resources that support tourism, and to capitalize on the growing global market for sustainable consumer goods and services, the Californian tourism industry and its suppliers need to take cohesive steps toward sustainable tourism management.

4

About the Handbook This handbook is designed to be a straightforward first introduction to sustainable tourism with a view to raising awareness of sustainable tourism principles and practices, and encouraging their implementation. The best, most comprehensive, and most recent Global Sustainable Tourism Criteria have been adapted to reflect California’s tourism industry.

This handbook firstly provides the “big picture” context of sustainable tourism management. This is followed by an exploration of the “three pillars” of sustainability: economic, social/cultural and environmental sustainability. For each pillar, the handbook covers: •

The Nature of the Issue

•

Guidelines for Tourism Businesses (sustainability recommendations)

•

Making it Happen (Examples of best practice in California)

This handbook concludes by recommending ways to motivate and encourage tourists to travel sustainably, by providing a simple checklist for businesses looking to adopt sustainable tourism principles and practices, and by providing a list of sources for further information.

Given the broad range of businesses involved in delivering the tourism experience, recommendations may not directly apply to all sectors of the tourism industry. Indeed, recommendations are purposefully non sector-specific with a view to being as inclusive as possible.

5

The First Step – Decide to be Sustainable The first step to becoming a sustainable tourism business is making the decision to do so. It is important to remember that sustainable tourism management is not anti-growth. Rather, a sustainable approach recognizes the realities of resource limitations and helps you to work creatively within these boundaries for the long-term success of your business and the conservation of the social/cultural and natural environments in which you operate.

“80% of CEOs of 900 global corporations believe sustainability is or soon will be vital to their profitability. 71% would sacrifice short term gains to move their company towards sustainability”

(Savitz & Webster, 2006)

The Big Picture – Sustainable Management Once you have taken the first step and decided to commit to sustainable tourism, begin with the big picture and establish an overarching mission statement to incorporate sustainable management systems in your business. Be aspirational, but be sure that the mission is realistic and practical for your specific tourism operations. Embrace sustainability as a part of your corporate social responsibility and communicate your commitment to your staff, suppliers, customers and local community. From the conceptual beginnings of your tourism business to everyday operations, you should always try to embrace sustainable practices.

The following sections are designed to show how you might implement these strategies in a way that reflects the three pillars of sustainability.

6

Making it Happen Cities and counties embracing the big picture of sustainability

San Francisco: •

Rated in the top 10 green cities in the U.S. by National Geographic’s The Green Guide.

•

Public transit is first priority for the city, and it dedicates more than 17% of its 49 square miles to parks and open space. Additionally, there are hybrid taxis, the nation’s first hybrid ferry boat (to Alcatraz Island), a ban on plastic bags, a solar-paneled convention center, a solar-paneled scoreboard at AT&T Park, and scores of environmentally aware hotels, restaurants, attractions and tours.

•

The San Francisco Planning & Urban Research Association (SPUR) opened its Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED)-certified green Urban Center. The center is available for events, presentations, symposia, product launches, plenary sessions and more.

•

City officials in San Francisco are testing out a new program, “Pavement to Parks,” to transform portions of streets into car-free pedestrian plazas. For information visit www.sfgov.org.

Santa Barbara: •

The Central Coast region’s visitor’s bureaus and Simple Shoes (a Santa Barbara-based brand) provide visitors with information on self-guided tours and all things green, including architecture, art, transportation, sustainable agriculture, biodynamically grown wines, recycling, nature preserves and ecotourism activities, green hotels and tour itineraries. www.GreenSantaBarbara.com.

•

The Santa Barbara Car Free Project is a cooperative partnership led by the Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District. Travelers arriving to Santa Barbara car-free can save up to 50% at 22 hotels and 20 activities and restaurants. www.SantaBarbaraCarFree.com.

7

Orange County Region: •

The Slow Food Movement promotes fresh, local ingredients in food preparation. This involves less transportation, water and pesticides, and is environmentally, animal welfare and human health friendly production. For example, Casa Laguna Inn & Spa in Laguna Beach contracts exclusively with local farmers within a 100 mile radius.

•

At Huntington Beach, visitors can tour protected wetlands that are home to rare birds and an ecological sanctuary of native plants and wildlife. International travelers can also volunteer in coastal protection services for dolphins, and planting and restoration days at nature reserves.

Mendocino County: •

Mendocino has long been recognized as being eco-friendly and environmentally-orientated.

18% of Mendocino vineyards are certified organic, the highest proportion of any county in the United States – representing more than a third of all California’s certified organic vineyards.

Mendocino’s Parducci Wine Cellars was the first carbon-neutral winery in the nation.

Parducci uses tree-free papers and soy-based inks for its labels, while its tractors are fuelled by biodiesel. www.mendowine.com.

•

Mendocino has the highest percentage of certified sustainable forest in the U.S. Tourists visit Jackson State Demonstration Forest to learn about sustainable forestry.

•

MacKerricher State Park, just outside of Fort Bragg, has recently implemented the “Save Our Shorebirds” project, where visitors can learn about and contribute toward the preservation of the endangered American golden plover, black turnstone and red knot species. Additional information can be found at www.parks.ca.gov.

8

Economic Sustainability Sustainable tourism supports a viable economic base.

Your economic practices have substantial impacts on your local community. A sustainable tourism business supports a viable economic base in its community, creates employment and drives local prosperity through backward linkages into all kinds of local industries and businesses that comprise and supply the tourism industry. The way you manage your business impacts the economic sustainability of California tourism.

“More than half of Americans say they would be more likely to select a travel provider that uses more environmentally friendly products and processes.”

(U.S. Travel Association, formerly Travel Industry Association, 2007)

Nature of the Issue The key to achieving economic sustainability for tourism in California is maximizing the “economic retention” of tourist spending in your local economy.

Sustainable tourism businesses need to develop strategies that are capable of meeting the long-term economic needs and aspirations of the local community. Communities that are engaged by tourism businesses as stakeholders in tourism, and economic partners in the tourism industry, will actively support local tourism businesses. If tourism is an important source of local employment and a significant buyer of local goods and services, residents are more likely to be supportive. Business operators and local communities need to work together to maximize local economic benefits.

9

Guidelines for Tourism Businesses •

Employ locally and equitably. Set targets to increase the number of local residents you employ.

•

Include local residents in high-skilled positions such as managers, architects, researchers, skilled construction workers and others. Offer on-the-job skill training where appropriate and necessary.

•

Collaborate with your community. Purchase locally and actively seek out ways to include local service providers and producers in your business. This may include the development of new tourism products. Establish the percentage of local products and services you use, and set targets to increase it.

•

Encourage your local business suppliers to develop sustainable goods and services that reflect local nature, history and culture. Encourage your customers to buy them.

•

Promote your sustainable practices to your customers.

Making it Happen Utilizing local services and products •

FarmerBrown in San Francisco supports local and particularly African-American organic farmers, using organic, biodynamic and/or sustainably raised foods and beverages. www.farmerbrownsf.com

•

The Ambrose Hotel in Santa Monica is the first hotel in the nation to receive the United States Green Building Council’s LEED certification. The hotel supports neighbors and local merchants, and promotes sustainability in the local community. The property recycles, uses ecologically responsible cleaning products and cooks with organic produce. www.ambrosehotel.com/green.shtml

•

Urban Tavern in San Francisco uses organic and sustainable ingredients made in-house or sourced from within 200 miles of the restaurant.

•

Chez Panisse Café in Berkeley uses food that is organically grown and harvested in ecologically sound ways from more than 60 local suppliers.

10

Social/Cultural Sustainability Sustainable tourism respects the vitality of social and cultural systems of destinations.

Tourism brings social and cultural impacts to destinations and influences the livelihoods of local residents. Sustainable tourism aims to minimize the negative impact of tourism on host communities while supporting their social and cultural integrity. “As early as 2002 55.1 million American travelers demonstrated preference in their travel and consumption choices for companies that support sustainable tourism.�

(TIA and National Geographic Traveler 2002)

Nature of the Issue Tourism can bring improvement in local living standards for residents.

However, it can also conflict with social and cultural values. California tourism businesses need to recognize and consider the social values and cultural heritage of destination communities. A sustainable tourism business strengthens and develops the social and cultural fabric of local communities. This may involve instilling a sense of pride in local culture and heritage, and working in conjunction with local communities to find synergies between your business and the needs of the local community. Clear and transparent communication and consultation with local communities and the participation of local communities in planning for tourism is the key.

11

Guidelines for Tourism Businesses •

Support social infrastructure development.

Identify priority needs with community representatives. Assist in social initiatives that help improve the local quality of life, including education, health and sanitation.

•

Take interest in local community projects such as local schools or sports teams that require assistance.

•

Increase the skill level of the local workforce and offer opportunities for professional development.

•

Build relationships with local education and training institutions. Offer roles for interns and local graduates, and provide on-the-job training where necessary.

•

While respecting the intellectual property rights of local communities, use local art, architecture, or cultural heritage in operations, design, decoration and cuisine.

•

Treat cultural heritage with dignity and ask your customers to follow. Develop and explain guidelines for appropriate behavior at culturally and historically sensitive sites.

•

Where appropriate, contribute to the protection and conservation of local historical, archeological, cultural, and spiritually important properties and sites.

•

Offer interpretation of natural and cultural environments and local cultural heritage.

•

Ensure that your activities do not jeopardize the basic services of local and neighboring communities such as water, energy or sanitation.

•

Provide equitable access for persons with special needs.

12

Making it Happen Enrich and support the social/cultural development of your community •

VolunTours is a social enterprise of the nonprofit organization Los Niños, based in Chula Vista, San Diego County. It provides opportunities for travelers to directly support development through overnight and weekend trips involving activities like laying cement for classroom foundations and plazas and/or helping to pack locally produced honey. www.voluntourism.org

•

The Ambrose Hotel in Santa Monica is an active supporter of local non-profits and charitable organizations. The hotel also creates opportunities for staff members to be paid volunteers for local events such as Heal the Bay coastal cleanup day and Tree People tree planting days.

•

Fisherman’s Wharf Merchants Association in San Francisco strives to ensure the growth of its community by preserving the history and sustaining the future health and success of the fishermen and merchants. There are over 125 members in hotels, restaurants, attractions, retail stores, tour operators and service providers. The association is currently supporting The San Francisco Police Department Youth Fishing Program and The Fishermen’s and Seamen’s Memorial Chapel Fund.

Making it Happen Provide services and support events to increase community awareness of sustainability •

The Discovery Science Center in Santa Ana educates children about sustainability with 100 interactive exhibits.

•

Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary takes the opportunity to educate visitors about environmentally friendly tourism aboard cruises.

•

Pacific Life Tours provides trips that educate passengers on Monterey Bay’s kelp forest ecosystem, adaptations for animals living in the ocean and human effects on the sea.

•

Roseville Utility Exploration Center in the Gold Country Region offers high-tech, hands-on exhibits on a variety of topics ranging from electricity and water conservation to reducing solid waste and storm water pollution. Technology workshops offer classes in photovoltaic energy, xeriscaping (landscaping to minimize water use), building with recycled products and other practical topics.

•

The Stanford Inn in Mendocino reduces environmental impacts for the community by helping to protect Big River from environmental degradation, banning the use of herbicides and pesticides, composting, using bio-diesel powered trucks, and sponsoring community events. In addition, the Inn is an advocate for the social equity of its staff in an expensive region.

13

•

Sierra-at-Tahoe Ski Resort holds an annual Push, Pull or Pedal EcoParade for travelers moving via their own power through the village at the base of Squaw Valley such as wagons and bikes made from recycled materials.

•

Santa Margarita de Cortona Asistencia holds its annual Earth Day Food and Wine Festival, featuring an array of cuisine from locally sourced ingredients and sustainable wines while promoting a “zero waste” event.

•

Solar Living Institute in Hopland offer all kinds of classes to the community, from making your home solar to how to retrofit your car to run on bio-fuels to workshops on energyefficient building and organic gardening. They also produce an annual SolFest celebration in August. www.solarliving.org

•

Loews Coronado Bay Resort helps preserve and maintain the Silver Strand State Beach with California State Parks and the California State Parks Foundation. Guests can take part in the resort’s Volunteer Vacation package stay overnight, tour Silver Strand with a State Park Environmental Educator and participate in a hands-on restoration project or coastal beach clean-up, with the overall goal of learning more about preserving and protecting natural resources and giving back to the local environment. The company has explicit, publicly accessible policies on multicultural initiatives, a good neighbor policy and a green policy. For example, Loews addresses issues of social concern by: o Donating excess food to local food banks, shelters and hunger relief programs. o Supporting local literacy programs by providing space for classes to be held and volunteer instructors from the hotels. o Extensive recycling programs including office paper, newspapers, aluminum, plastic and the purchase of recycled products when possible. o Donating used goods such as linens and furniture to local organizations and shelters. o Encouraging volunteer activities for hotel employees. o Implementing energy saving equipment in new hotels and in existing properties as they are renovated. www.loewshotels.com

•

Hornblower Cruises & Events based in San Diego is increasing its initiatives to reduce environmental impact and educate the public. Guests learn about the company’s eco-outreach through video clips and on-board displays, and other local businesses making sustainability a priority. The company also participates in an EPA-funded Port of San Diego study of copperfree paints that aims to minimize boating impact in the bay. Hornblower also serves sustainable food and beverages on its tours and private charters, choosing recyclable and biodegradable service items, and bio-fuels whenever possible. Hornblower has partnered with several local organizations in its sustainability including the Port of San Diego, San Diego Oceans Foundation and San Diego Natural History Museum.

14

Environmental Sustainability Sustainable tourism positively contributes to the quality of its surrounding ecological and natural environments.

California’s environments range from urban to rural, from beaches to ski resorts, from coastlines to deserts and mountains. All are major tourism attractions in their own right.

Tourism business practices can influence the quality of surrounding environments. Failure to protect the environment will result in undermining the resources on which successful tourism businesses are based. Sustainable tourism businesses not only minimize their negative impacts, but positively contribute to conserving and enhancing the quality of the local environment. “95% of business travelers think that lodging companies should be undertaking green initiatives. 48% try to be green when they travel.�

(Deloitte 2009 Tourism Industry Outlook)

Nature of the Issue The impact of poorly planned and managed tourism on the natural environment can be seen at degraded tourist destinations around the world. In order to protect the diverse natural beauty of California for its residents and visitors, tourism businesses need to adopt sustainable practices as part of their corporate social responsibilities.

15

In addition, global trends reflect a rapidly growing concern for environmental sustainability among consumers. Good environmental practice not only sustains your business, but also makes economic sense and is likely to provide a marketing advantage.

Guidelines for Tourism Businesses Some developments are required to conduct Environmental Impact Reports (EIR) under the California Environmental Quality Act. If your tourism business does not require an EIR, or if you are looking to further improve your environmental performance, you could take some of the following general measures: •

Hire a professional consultant who can assess your environmental impact and guide you in environmental planning for your business.

•

Style the architecture of your business to blend into already established local styles and surroundings. Use local and/or sustainable materials where available.

•

Design the structure of your business to minimize noise and visual hazards (e.g. strong lights) that impact local residents, surrounding environments and visitors.

•

Conduct an environmental audit of your business that establishes your current environmental practice and allows you to improve and monitor your performance over time.

16

Biodiversity, ecosystems and landscapes conservation •

Develop a business mission statement and a code of conduct that clearly explains your dedication to conserving nature. Disseminate this to your staff, customers and community.

•

Educate your staff, local communities and tourists on the importance of environmental sustainability and what they can do to make a positive impact on the environment.

Promote your own sustainable efforts.

•

Contribute and support local nature and wildlife conservation. Set targets to increase the level of your contribution to nature conservation. For example, increase the amount of funding for, or the provision of staff time to volunteer in, local biodiversity conservation programs.

•

Embed a conservation levy into your product and/or service pricing. Promote to your customers how the levy supports local conservation projects and environmental sustainability.

•

Use climate-appropriate native species for landscaping and restoration to avoid the introduction of invasive alien species. Native plants need less fertilizer, pesticides and irrigation, and attract native wildlife.

•

Ultimately, your business practice should not produce adverse effects on local ecology and wildlife. Any disturbance of natural ecosystems should be minimized.

17

Making it Happen Incorporate environmental planning in design, construction, management and maintenance •

The Moscone Center is a sustainable convention center that helps protect the environment.

With its sustainable purchasing, green cleaning and management of toxic materials, the center minimizes environmental impact and benefits the local community. The Moscone Center was awarded the Environmental Honor by the EPA in 2009. www.moscone.com.

•

The Orchard Garden Hotel in San Francisco was built adhering to LEED standards. In addition, the Orchard Garden uses in-room recycling systems, chemical-free cleaning products, compact fluorescent light bulbs and guestroom key card energy control systems. www.theorchardhotel.com

•

The Brower Center in Berkeley is a four-story mixed-use office, meeting and conference centre constructed with 53% recycled materials. The center practices sustainable operations by including photovoltaic panels, 100% day lighting, collection and reuse of rainwater, solar shading devices and many other initiatives. www.browercenter.org.

•

Hotel Carlton, a Joie de Vivre hotel, is ranked as San Francisco’s greenest hotel by the U.S. Green Building Council’s LEED certification system. The hotel has LEED Gold certification and incorporates compact fluorescent light bulbs throughout the hotel, toiletry dispensers rather than individually packed disposable containers, filtered water machines with glass pitchers instead of bottled water, carpets made from post-consumer recycled material, and only low-VOC paints and non-toxic cleaning products. Additional hotel initiatives include a green meetings program and purchase of carbon offsets for all carbon usage.

•

The Little River Golf Course in Mendocino county is a member of the Audubon Cooperative Sanctuary Program, which recognizes golf courses that protect the environment, conserve natural resources and provide wildlife habitats.

•

The California Academy of Sciences in San Francisco strives to be the greenest museum in the world with its 2.5 acre Living Roof, an expansive solar canopy, an extensive water reclamation system and walls insulated with recycled blue jeans.

18

Resource preservation and pollution reduction •

Perform a professional energy audit of your business to get started.

•

Be aware of your purchasing behavior and actively seek to minimize the use of disposable goods and unnecessary packaging. Implement a “reduce, reuse and recycle” policy. Use environmentally friendly building materials, source local produce and purchase only reusable, recyclable or recycled consumables.

•

Seek ways to reduce carbon emissions related to transport. For example, motor coaches and trains are very energy efficient, while large SUVs and first-class flights use large amounts of energy. Using non-fossil fuel-powered transport such as bicycles and walking can help reduce the carbon footprint of the tourism industry. Communicate your innovations and the reasons behind them to your customers and staff.

•

Consider providing an option for your customers to offset the carbon emissions associated with use of your product or service.

•

Measure your energy consumption. Record your water, electricity and gas consumption for several months and set specific and realistic targets to reduce usage.

Consider implementing alternative forms energy production (e.g., solar, wind turbine). There are many ways you can reduce your energy consumption and pollution.

19

Water •

Treat and reuse your wastewater.

•

Use natural cleaning products.

•

Use low flow shower heads and faucet aerators, and install low-flow or dual-flush toilets.

•

Collect storm water and use it for cleaning or landscaping.

•

Water your landscape in the morning, evening or non-windy days to minimize water evaporation.

•

Install a rain sensor on your irrigation controller so it will not run when it is raining.

•

Monitor your appliances and plumbing regularly, and service immediately when problems occur.

•

Educate your staff and customers about ways to reduce water usage and the importance of these measures in the local context.

Solid waste •

Make electronic files rather than paper files where possible. If printing and photocopying is necessary, use both sides of the paper.

•

Buy recycled products where possible. For example, send your toner cartridges to be recycled and buy recycled toner cartridges.

•

Talk to your suppliers (e.g., produce, office equipment) to reduce packaging.

•

Compost coffee grounds and food scraps, and use it as natural fertilizer.

•

Have separate garbage bins for glass, plastic, paper, cans and other recyclable waste.

20

“Energy efficiency is the cheapest, fastest and smartest strategy available for saving money and resources and reducing greenhouse gas emissions around the world.”

(United Nations Development Program, 2009)

Electricity and gas •

Source your local renewable energy suppliers. Reduce and offset your greenhouse gas emissions to minimize your impact on climate change.

•

Consult professionals to help take advantage of free energy sources such as natural sun light and passive solar architectural design.

•

Double-glaze your windows and close vents and doors in unused spaces. Install programmable thermostats in your offices.

•

Use solar water heating. Insulate water heaters and hot water pipes. Lower thermostat temperatures by a few degrees.

•

During the summer, a 5°F higher setting on your air conditioning thermostat will save about 10% on cooling costs.

•

During the winter, lowering the temperature 3-5°F can save up to 20% on heating costs.

•

Reduce air conditioning costs by using fans, keeping windows and doors shut and closing shades during the day.

•

Remind your staff and customers to turn off lights and equipment when not in use. A simple notice next to switches can be effective.

•

Use laptop computers where possible, as they use up to 80% less energy than standard desktops.

21

“When done correctly, tourism investment can create local jobs, conserve natural resources and infuse long-term wealth.”

(United Nations Foundation, 2009) •

Use task lighting instead of overhead lighting where possible. Use compact fluorescent lights that last 10 times longer and use 80% less energy than normal bulbs. Dimmer switches and occupancy sensors can also lower energy use.

•

All chemical usage in your business should be properly managed. Substitute harmful substances used in pesticides, swimming pool disinfectants, cleaning products, and others to innocuous, biodegradable products where available.

•

Practice reducing pollution that your business creates. Consider the noise, light, erosion, ozone-depleting compounds, and air and soil contaminants.

•

Reward staff who take public transportation or carpool to work.

•

Ask staff for their opinions on ways to save energy and reduce pollution.

Making it Happen Adopt energy efficient systems •

Universal Studios Hollywood is the first theme park awarded with the Environmental Media Association’s Green Seal Award for its energy-efficient Simpsons Ride, with the largest installation of LED lamps in the history of theme parks.

•

Yosemite National Park has the first U.S. fleet of all-hybrid buses, 18 new buses designated for use in Yosemite’s free shuttle service by three million travelers annually.

•

Glen Ivy Hot Springs Resort in Corona uses low-flow faucets and showerheads, recycles its waste and uses green products – like unbleached paper. The resort is a member of the Green Spa Network, a group dedicated to using environmentally sustainable practices in the spa industry. www.greenspanetwork.org

•

The Mission Bay Aquatic Center in San Diego is completely energy self-sufficient, uses solar water heating, employs water-saving high-pressure cleaning hoses and recycles all grey water that falls on the premises. www.missionbayaquaticcenter.com

•

Pacific Park in Santa Monica has the world’s first-ever solar-powered Ferris wheel. The Pacific Wheel generates more than 71,000 kilowatt hours of renewable photovoltaic power from the sun’s rays.

22

Making it Happen Practice sustainable waste management measures •

The American Center for Food, Wine and the Arts in Napa composts the center’s restaurant and food programs waste and puts it back into their 3.5 acres of organic gardens.

•

Palm Springs Aerial Tramway recycles its office waste by using Shred-It, a mobile paper shredding and recycling company that has helped them save more than 40 trees by recycling their office paper and newspapers.

•

Hotel Triton in San Francisco adopts a broad strategy of waste and energy reduction.

Triton’s “eco-king premier” rooms feature green furnishings, such as an armchair woven from recycled seatbelts, a shower curtain made from hemp and walls coated with non-toxic paint.

Motivating Tourists to Embrace Sustainability during Travel There is no doubt that consumers around the world are becoming increasingly conscious of sustainability in their daily purchasing behavior. It is the responsibility of California tourism businesses to ensure that sustainable purchasing options are available to tourists as well.

There are a number of ways to motivate tourists to travel sustainably.

•

Actively promote your sustainable practices. For example, if your business is accredited with sustainable accreditation schemes, communicate them in your Web site and brochures, and to your agents, staff, guests and community.

•

Encourage tourists to spend money within the local economy. Explain the support they are providing to the local community. Showcase your efforts to improve and nurture the

23

local economy. For example, if your business supports local community projects, or if the majority of your staff is hired locally, explain these efforts to your customers.

•

Have information sheets available on how to act appropriately in the local environment.

Places such as check-in points and information desks can carry pamphlets for tourists to browse on “do and don’t” behaviors when visiting local national parks.

•

Commit to ongoing research to understand your customers. Leave questionnaire surveys in their rooms or information desks to ask about their opinions and commitment to sustainability issues. This will allow you to not only research for future product and services development, but also present an image of your commitment to sustainability.

•

Instill conservation values in tourists. Educate them about sustainable ways of not only exploring California, but also the world. Encourage tourists to give more back to the people they meet and the places they visit to make their travels more meaningful.

Business Checklist for Adopting Sustainable Tourism Principles and Practices First Steps 9 Decide to be sustainable.

9 Establish mission statement then publicize it, promote it, embrace it, act upon it at all levels of your business involving strategies for all three pillars of sustainability.

Economic 9 Establish a local, equitable hiring policy; provide training where necessary.

9 Seek to localize your supply chain.

9 Purchase sustainable local products that reflect local nature and culture.

24

Social/Cultural 9 Support local social infrastructure: education, health, sports and sanitation.

9 Provide opportunities for professional development of local population 9 Build relationships with local education and training institutions.

9 Employ locally appropriate design, decoration and cuisine.

9 Develop guidelines for behavior at sensitive sites.

9 Contribute to conservation of important cultural sites.

9 Offer interpretation of natural and cultural heritage.

9 Provide equitable access for persons with special needs.

Environmental 9 Educate your staff, local communities and tourists about environmental sustainability.

9 Contribute to and support local nature and wildlife conservation.

9 Embed a conservation levy into your product and/or service pricing.

9 Use climate appropriate native species for landscaping and restoration.

9 Perform a professional energy audit of your business.

9 Implement a “reduce, reuse and recycle� policy.

9 Reduce carbon emissions related to transport.

9 Consider offsetting your carbon production.

9 Reduce energy and water consumption; source renewable energy.

9 Reduce solid and liquid waste pollution.

25

Sources for Further Information •

The California Small Business Association (CSBA) is a volunteer-driven non-profit organization that supports and communicates small business owners’ voices in state and federal government. The CSBA advocates issues ranging from workforce skills, health care, labor, to environmental for California business owners.

Source: http://csba.com/home/

•

National Geographic is encouraging Northern Californian communities and individuals to participate in creating the North Coast MapGuide. Source: www.nationalgeographic.com/travel/sustainable/ pdf/north-california-mapguide.pdf

•

The Genographic Legacy Fund by National Geographic and IBM aims to empower indigenous and traditional peoples on a local level, which includes the management of tourism.

Source: https://genographic.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/lan/en/legacy_fund.html

•

The National Trust for Historic Preservation partners with communities to support the Main Street Center program to revive historic or traditional areas. The Trust also supports the Heritage Tourism Program, which provides information on how heritage tourism can be beneficial for individuals or communities. Sources: www.preservationnation.org/mainstreet/ and www.preservationnation.org/issues/heritage-tourism/

•

The Green Hotel Association provides memberships for hotels that are aware of environmental issues and desire to adopt sustainable practices. The association provides its members with information on environmentally-friendly energy and water-saving

26

products, ideas and techniques to reduce hotels’ environmental impact. Source: www.greenhotels.com •

The U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) provides the third-party verification Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design (LEED) certification for buildings or communities that are designed and built to “implement practical and measurable green building design, construction, operations and maintenance solutions.” Source: www.usgbc.org

•

Conservation Innovation Grants in California, provided by the Natural Resources Conservation Service, are conducting projects such as developing farmer-friendly conservation technologies (e.g., sustainable wine-grape growing, on-farm pollinator habitat and biodiversity). Source: www.nrcs.usda.gov/programs/cig

•

The California Department of General Services provides the California Green Lodging Program, which brings together the lodging industry, travelers and the environment by providing information for travelers on green lodges, green traveling tips and green resources for lodges. Source: www.travel.dgs.ca.gov/lodging/greenlodging.htm

•

Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) prioritizes energy efficiency. The company develops new technologies for energy efficiency and educates customers on simplistic ways to change the environment. Company staff donates to volunteer programs for local communities, and the company takes part in managing lands and waters sustainably. Source: www.pge.com/about/environment

•

Stirling Energy Systems is “a pioneer in the design and development of Concentrated Solar Power solutions.” The company provides efficient energy solutions that are clean, cost-effective and sustainable. Source: www.stirlingenergy.com

•

California Urban Water Conservation Council sustains “partnerships among urban water agencies, public interest organizations, and private entities” to increase efficient usage of water. Source: www.cuwcc.org

27

•

The Consortium for Energy Efficiency is “a consortium of efficiency program administrators.” The EPA has awarded its Efficiency Programs for Climate Protection.

Source: www.cee1.org/

•

The International Ecotourism Society aspires to be the “global source of knowledge and advocacy uniting communities, conservation and sustainable travel” by providing opportunities for international networking, educating tourists and professionals and influencing the practice of sustainable travel. Source: www.ecotourism.org

•

Sustainable Travel International is a non-profit organization that provides education and services to support environmental conservation, preservation of cultural heritage during travel while achieving “cross-cultural understanding and economic development.” Source: www.sustainabletravelinternational.org

•

Smart From the Start is a California “water conservation program that provides userfriendly tools and landscape templates to assist new homeowners and developers design and install beautiful, water-smart landscape.” Source: www.h2ouse.net

•

Flex Your Power is California's statewide energy efficiency marketing and outreach campaign. It provides best practice guidelines and energy-saving tips for international residential, commercial, industrial, institutional and agricultural energy consumers. For example, it has a guide for hotel and restaurant operators on how to boost their profits with energy efficiency and conservation measures. Source: www.fypower.org

•

The Go Solar California Web site is provided by California's Public Utilities Commission and Energy Commission. This site provides a "one-stop shop" for information on rebates, tax credits and incentives for solar energy systems in California. Source: www.gosolarcalifornia.ca.gov

•

The Union of Concerned Scientists is “the leading science-based nonprofit working for a healthy environment and a safer world. UCS combines independent scientific research and citizen action to develop innovative, practical solutions and to secure responsible 28

changes in government policy, corporate practices, and consumer choices.” The UCS recently produced a green travel guide with information about the carbon footprint of different types of tourist transportation. Source: www.ucsusa.org •

The Business and Organization Carbon Calculator is provided by The Climate Trust to calculate individual organizations’ carbon footprint. Source: http://www.climatetrust.org/content/calculators/Business_&_Org_Calculator.pdf

•

The Green Institute for Village Empowerment provides visitors and residents with handson tips for going green via its educational symposiums and special events that highlight sustainable lifestyles, technologies and developmental practices. Source: www.giveforthefuture.org

•

The Solar Living Institute is a 12-acre renewable energy and sustainable living demonstration site for renewable energy, alternative fuels, green building, permaculture and sustainable living technologies. Source: www.solarliving.org

•

SunLine Transit Agency provides hydrogen-electric hybrid buses for environmentally conscious public transportation services and alternative fuel solutions. Source: www.sunline.org

•

AC Transit dedicates its public transit services to reducing emissions and was the first transit agency to join the California Climate Action Registry. Source: www.actransit.org

•

Eqocar provides hybrid rental cars for travelers to minimize their carbon footprint. Source: www.eqocar.com

•

Huntington Beach promotes its ecotourism activities in its Web site for tourists who want to volunteer in conservation programs. It also presents monthly eco-news updates and eco-events. Source: http://www.surfcityusa.com/surf-city-ecotourism/default.aspx

•

Parkvisitor.com provides information on how to travel in an environmentally sensitive manner and “is an alliance of businesses dedicated to preserving the beauty and 29

recreation opportunities of state parks.” Members assist in preserving public lands and recreation programs, and has gained recognition from customers for its attempts to conserve state parks. Source: http://www.parkvisitor.com/20forparks/index.html •

Orange County’s Anaheim provides information on Green Entertainment. Information on recycling programs, sustainable entertainment and the green standard of Disney Cast Members are included in their promotional Web site. Source: http://www.anaheimoc.org/Articles/Archive/Webpage101192.asp

•

The Green Meeting Industry Council (GMIC) is the premier global community solely dedicated to sustainability not only through education, but also by spearheading research, policy and standards for the meetings and event industry. Source: www.greenmeetings

•

The Green Restaurant Association’s mission is to create an environmentally sustainable restaurant industry by working to provide convenient and cost-effective tools to help the restaurant industry reduce any harmful impacts on the environment. Source: www.dinegreen.com

30