solid waste management – Planet Goodwill

The Conundrum of Waste Disposal

AdminPGW — Wed, 05 Dec 2018 23:16:53 +0000

In a consumer industry, we consume, consume, consume. A task as seemingly simple as recycling has started to confuse consumers.

The Conundrum of Waste Disposal

California regulations AB 341, AB 1826, and SB 1383 are leaving cities and programs scrambling for compliance without breaking the bank.

In an ever-changing industry of waste, the challenges are only growing. Public and private clients face increasing state regulations and consumer purchasing obstacles.

Waste disposal is a service-based industry. While those disposal costs increase and landfills close, the solutions – recycling streams, food waste, organics – only become more complex. Not to mention China’s recent policy shift on imported recyclables. The announcement that they would no longer be accepting much of the world’s contaminated material is a huge blow to recyclers here at home.

The Conundrum of Waste Disposal

Waste disposal is one of the last places people look for efficiency and savings. The industry has broken on the basis of building the economics of trash over building recycling.

And, trash should be expensive, given the labor, gas, insurance, and materials. State regulations require a specific landfill diversion percentage but hauler agreements are built around landfill fees.

Recycling is cheaper and socially accepted as the right thing to do. But, it’s not that simple.

Waste and recycling have evolved over time due to public, political, and monetary pressure. While the waste industry is responsible for making sure there is a market to offset collector operations, recycling programs focus on selling that recycled material (e.g., bottles, cans, paper, cardboard).

State regulations require a specific landfill diversion percentage but hauler agreements are built around landfill fees.

The confusion over the recycling triangle results in more contamination; consumers are not recycling better, they are just ‘recycling more’ by throwing items in the wrong container.

The recycling triangle on plastic items does not necessarily mean an item is recyclable. It could just mean it’s made of recyclable material.

Keep it simple. Look at your waste program on every level.

Finding an alternative market for these materials can seem to be a no-win scenario, especially as new materials come into consumer homes. The start: Keep it simple. Look at your waste program on every level.

Look at your trash. Look at your invoices and purchases. Look at your usage. Look at your employees. Look at the commonality among what you throw out and see if there is another way.

Analyze your current programs. Whatever you do, don’t back into regulations. Look at the programs in place now, first, and then fix those programs to become compliant.

These actionable steps can be the distinction between compliance and confusion:

Government programs

Review the franchise to make sure goals and targets are in place for compliance.
Review construction/demolition programs to make sure proper disposal practices are in place.
Review internal tracking systems to ensure program success and landfill diversion.

School districts

Create the opportunity for each classroom and exterior area.
Start with reviewing custodial practices and in-classroom recycling.
Review contracts to make sure they’re being followed and billed correctly.

Both factors could benefit from partners in the community, including haulers, to ensure programs are available for the new registration. Sometimes it’s easier to hire a professional to assist in the management of these complicated waste programs in the areas of contract, compliance, outreach, education, and savings.

Success is built on the basis of simplicity. Make the program easy to follow. Move forward. It’s never too late to begin. These programs can take months, or even years, to implement. Don’t wait for regulations to force your hand.

Keep it simple, focus on your program, and utilize available resources to clear the path to success. Make the landfill the last resort. Reinvent how you reduce, reuse, and recycle to comply with material regulations and build a more informed populace around proper waste disposal.

Waste Disposal FAQs

[sc_fs_multi_faq headline-0=”h3″ question-0=”What are some California regulations related to waste disposal that are causing challenges for cities and programs?” answer-0=”California regulations AB 341, AB 1826, and SB 1383 are causing challenges for cities and programs in terms of compliance and cost management.” image-0=”” headline-1=”h3″ question-1=”How are waste disposal costs and landfill closures impacting the recycling industry?” answer-1=”Waste disposal costs are increasing while landfills are closing, making recycling a more complex solution. This, coupled with China’s decision to restrict imports of contaminated recyclables, has dealt a significant blow to recyclers.” image-1=”” headline-2=”h3″ question-2=”Why is recycling considered cheaper and socially accepted, but still not simple?” answer-2=”Recycling is perceived as cheaper and socially responsible; however, it is not a straightforward process. Consumers often face confusion regarding recycling, leading to more contamination and incorrect disposal practices.” image-2=”” headline-3=”h3″ question-3=”What should individuals and organizations consider when analyzing their waste management programs?” answer-3=”To analyze waste management programs effectively, individuals and organizations should evaluate their waste generation, invoices, purchases, usage patterns, and employee practices. Identifying common waste items and exploring alternative disposal methods is crucial.” image-3=”” headline-4=”h3″ question-4=”What actionable steps can be taken to ensure compliance and clarity in waste management programs?” answer-4=”Depending on the sector, specific steps can be taken. Government programs should review franchise agreements, construction/demolition practices, and internal tracking systems. School districts should focus on classroom and exterior recycling, custodial practices, and contract review. Engaging professionals for assistance in contract management, compliance, outreach, education, and savings can also be beneficial.” image-4=”” count=”5″ html=”true” css_class=””]

Food waste – a viable renewable resource for biogas generation in Thailand, Malaysia, and Singapore

AdminPGW — Sat, 01 Dec 2018 23:16:53 +0000

Food loss and waste are becoming increasing problems for the global community. In rich regions such as North America, Europe, and the Middle East, it’s the over-purchased at the consumer side that’s leading to food wastage, usually unfinished let-overs and expired foods thrown into the garbage bins.

On the other end of the spectrum in poor nations, old inadequate food-producing infrastructures, and logistics are culprits for food wastage. The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) has reported about a third of the food produced – 1.3 billion tons – doesn’t reach human stomachs. Fruits and vegetables, being the most perishable, have the highest wastage while others (see Chart 1) have significant percentages.

Chart 1 Global food losses along the value chain.

Chart 2 Food waste generated per capital from 1996 to 2009 in Malaysia.

In Malaysia, a rise in population from 21 million to 28 million between 1996 to 2009 has led to an addition of nearly 2 million tons of food waste. Recently reported in the news, the country generates 5.5 million tons of thrown-away food – that’s 15,000 tons daily. The additional bad news is that the food wastage per person is growing (see Chart 2). In 1996, the food waste generated is about 113 kg per capita. In 2009, this is 157 kg. In Singapore and Thailand, this ratio has a similar trend. It has grown from 118 kg to 140 kg in the last decade on the island nation (see Chart 3). In Thailand, the ratio in 2015 is 190 kg per capita while is 173 kg in 2008 (see Chart 4). All three countries have growing populations. It’s not hard to foresee the situation is going to get worse in the coming future.

In South East Asia, organic and food waste is typically around 40% of total solid wastes, though there is marginal seasonal and geographic variation. In Singapore, the NEA keeps a record of yearly food waste generated while in Thailand, Thailand’s state of pollution report provides municipal solid waste data. Malaysian universities have sufficient record-keeping on a state-by-state basis for waste management. These countries have put on a concrete effort to tackle food wastage. Firstly, record keeping, funding new technologies from research and development, and lastly, developing policies and initiatives.

Chart 3 Food waste generated per capita from 2006 to 2016 in Singapore.

Chart 4 Food waste generated per capita from 2008 to 2015 in Thailand.

A credible solution is to utilize food waste as a feedstock for biogas generation. This has the added benefit of creating a premium product besides eliminating unwanted waste. The tables (see Table 1, Table 2 and Table 3) below illustrates the prospect of converting the food waste to biogas and to electricity.

Table 1 Food waste generated and prospect for electricity conversion in Malaysia.

Table 2 Food waste generated and prospect for electricity conversion in Singapore.

Table 3 Food waste generated and prospect for electricity conversion in Thailand.

The calculations in Table 1 to Table 3 are based on Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change (PICC)’s CH4 emission from biological treatment (such as anaerobic digestion). The anaerobic digestion is assumed to be operated near-atmospheric and produces 57% content methane. The energy content of the biogas is taken as 6 kWh per cubic m while the gas is burned to generate electricity at 40% efficiency in a power plant. This is the upper efficiency in a natural gas or coal-fired engine.

The numbers aren’t by no means small as the feedstock can power up to 150,000 homes in Thailand, 50,000 homes in Malaysia, and 8,000 homes in Singapore. This is assuming a 4200-kWh average use per household each year.

Let’s turn the tide on food waste together! Join the movement to transform food waste into clean energy and make a positive impact on our environment. By utilizing innovative biogas generation from food waste, we can not only eliminate waste but also create a valuable resource. Imagine powering up to 150,000 homes in Thailand, 50,000 homes in Malaysia, and 8,000 homes in Singapore with this sustainable energy source. Be part of the solution and help us build a greener future. Take action today!

FAQs

Q1: What are the main causes of food loss and waste in rich regions like North America, Europe, and the Middle East?

A1: In rich regions, food wastage is primarily caused by over-purchasing at the consumer side, leading to unfinished leftovers and the disposal of expired foods.

Q2: What factors contribute to food wastage in poor nations?

A2: In poor nations, old and inadequate food-producing infrastructures and logistics systems are major contributors to food wastage.

Q3: According to the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), what proportion of the food produced globally does not reach human consumption?

A3: The FAO reports that approximately one-third of the food produced globally, equivalent to 1.3 billion tons, does not reach human stomachs.

Q4: How has food waste generation in Malaysia changed between 1996 and 2009?

A4: The rise in population from 21 million to 28 million in Malaysia between 1996 and 2009 has led to an increase of nearly 2 million tons of food waste. The country currently generates 5.5 million tons of food waste, amounting to 15,000 tons daily.

Q5: How has the food wastage per person in Malaysia, Singapore, and Thailand changed over time?

A5: In Malaysia, the food waste generated per capita has increased from 113 kg in 1996 to 157 kg in 2009. Similarly, Singapore’s food wastage per capita has grown from 118 kg to 140 kg between 1996 and 2016. In Thailand, the ratio increased from 173 kg in 2008 to 190 kg in 2015.