8+Science+4+Alexandre's+MSW+Project


 * I. Introduction:**

Our hypothesis was that if fertilizer is replaced by compost then the benefits will be visible in both efficiency and cost. We thought that if school switched to composting things taken from grounds maintenance and using the compost received instead of using fertilizer bought from stores the school could save both time and money. __Hypothesis:__ If store-bought fertilizer is replaced by compost, then the grass will grow faster and last longer, and it will also save the school money.


 * II. Materials and Safety:**

-Planting Trays -1500 Milliliters of soil -10.6 Grams of grass seed -10 Grams of Compost -10 Grams of fertilizer -Card Board -Ruler -Paper -Scissors -Camera -Cling wrap
 * Materials:**

-When using scissors, cut away from yourself -When working with soil, wear goggles to protect your eyes.
 * Safety:**

I. Gather materials. II. Gather information of how much school/business spends on lawn and feild fertilizer per year. III. Determine the savings of using compost as fertilizer compared to store bought fertilizer. IV. Separate one planting tray into three equal areas and fill each with the same amount of grass seed. V. Make sure each pot gets the same amount of water and sunlight VI. Wait for grass to reach a height of two inches. VII. Put compost in one pot, grass clippings in another pot, and leave one pot unfertilized. VIII. Continue giving each tray/pot the same amount of light and water. IX. Take pictures and measure height of grass each day. X. Compare the effectiveness of each kind of fertilizer by comparing growth times and rates. XI. Evaluate data to determine what is the most cost effective way to fertilize grass. XII. To collect further data, fill two equal sized pots with soil and grass seed. XIII. Add Compost to one pot and the same amount of fertilizer as compost added to the other. IXX. Measure soil each day, and elvauate the differences and efficiency of compost vs. store bought fertilizer.
 * III. Procedure:**

Independent Variable: Use of Compost as fertilizer Dependent Variable: Cost spent on fertilizer, and results on grass Control: Grass with No fertilizer or compost added Experimental Group 1: Fertilizer Experimental Group 2: Compost


 * IV. Data:

Daily Photographic Data**

Wednesday, February 17, 2010 Thursday, February 18, 2010 Friday, February 18, 2010 Monday, February 22, 2010 Tuesday, February 23, 2010 Wednesday, February 24, 2010

Friday, February 26, 2010

Monday, March 1, 2010


 * Data of cost benefits:**


 * || Compost Pile || Estimated Yearly Cost of Fertilizer at MS ||
 * Cost || $0 || $1129.43 ||


 * Data Table:**
 * Control ||  ||   ||   |||||||| Compost ||   ||   |||||| Fertilizer ||   ||   ||
 * || 1 || 2 || 3 || General |||| Average || 1 || 2 || 3 || General |||| Average || 1 || 2 || 3 || General || Average ||
 * 17-Feb || 6 || 8 || 7 || 7 || 7 ||  || 7 || 6 || 9 || 7 || 7.3 ||   || 9 || 6 || 6 || 7 || 7 ||
 * 18-Feb || 10 || 9 || 7 || 10 || 8.7 ||  || 7 || 10 || 9 || 10 || 9.3 ||   || 8 || 6 || 6 || 7 || 6.7 ||
 * 19-Feb || 12 || 10 || 11 || 11 || 11 ||  || 13 || 12 || 7 || 11 || 10.7 ||   || 8 || 9 || 7 || 7 || 8 ||
 * 22-Feb || 18 || 14 || 15 || 13 || 15.7 ||  || 18 || 16 || 14 || 17 || 16 ||   || 12 || 11 || 7 || 8 || 10 ||
 * 23-Feb || 17 || 18 || 12 || 15 || 15.7 ||  || 15 || 15 || 14 || 14 || 14.7 ||   || 10 || 9 || 10 || 8 || 9.7 ||
 * 24-Feb || 15 || 14 || 18 || 14 || 15.7 ||  || 20 || 13 || 16 || 14 || 16.3 ||   || 10 || 12 || 12 || 8 || 11.3 ||
 * 26-Feb || 16 || 15 || 11 || 15 || 10.7 ||  || 17 || 11 || 16 || 16 || 11.3 ||   || 14 || 7 || 7 || 8 || 9.3 ||
 * 1-March || 11 || 12 || 7 || 11 || 10 ||  || 22 || 20 || 15 || 14 || 17 ||   || 13 || 7 || 3 || 7 || 7.6 ||


 * V. Analysis:**

Line graph of daily and linear growth of grass:
 * || Control || Compost || Fertilizer ||
 * 17-Feb || 7 || 7 || 7 ||
 * 18-Feb || 10 || 10 || 7 ||
 * 19-Feb || 11 || 11 || 7 ||
 * 22-Feb || 13 || 17 || 8 ||
 * 23-Feb || 15 || 14 || 8 ||
 * 24-Feb || 14 || 14 || 8 ||
 * 26-Feb || 15 || 16 || 8 ||
 * 1-Mar || 11 || 14 || 7 ||


 * [[image:Line_Graph_Grass_Growth_MSW_ending_March_1.JPG caption="Line_Graph_Grass_Growth_MSW_ending_March_1.JPG"]] ||
 * Line_Graph_Grass_Growth_MSW_ending_March_1.JPG ||

Bar graph of overall growth of grass:
 * [[image:Bar_Graph_Grass_Growth_MSW_ending_March_1.JPG caption="Bar_Graph_Grass_Growth_MSW_ending_March_1.JPG"]] ||
 * Bar_Graph_Grass_Growth_MSW_ending_March_1.JPG ||

Graph Trends: The control, with no energizer, actually grew faster as you can see in the line graph, but also declined at a much faster rate, all the way down to where it had started. This shows us that compost is definetly the most useful energizer in plant growth as it allows for fast growth as well as healthy, strong grass.


 * VI Conclusion:**

After collecting our data we noticed that our hypothesis had been proved to be accurate. Our hypothesis stated that if school replaced the fertilizer they use with compost, they would save money, have nicer grass, and reduce their ecological footprint. We found that school uses around 3750 pounds of fertilizer per year, which is 75 bags at 50 pounds. A typical 50 pound bag of fertilizer costs around 50 dollars. That ends up being a total of over 3,500 dollars a year. In relevance to ecological footprint, we thought that switching to compost would eliminate the use of bags that fertilizer comes in. After collecting this, we began our experiment, which ultimatly lead us to the conclusion that compost was the most effective growth energizer. We also noted that compost results in nicer, healthier grass, and definetly has less waste involved. The one major problem we had on a regular basis was taking pictures from similar distances and angles, which could make the grass look to be at different heights against the ruler. This was a human error which effected our photographic data collection. We also faced the challenge of figuring how to to measure the grass. We finally settled on measuring three random peices of grass and averaging them, and also taking an eyeball measurement of the grass tuft.

We conclude that using compost as an energizer for grass growth is far more efficient than fertilizer, as it is cheaper, and gives healthier grass at similar growth speeds. It costs virtually nothing to compost, all you need is a plastic bin with some moisture, while fertilizer can cost upwards of 600 dollars a ton. Compost also reduces our campus's Municipal Solid Waste because it composts any clippings taken from the campus, instead of having to throw them away.