Communication is an enjoyable learning process

Critical Reflection

I personally believe that living in modern society today, we must be able to present ourselves well in front of the audience and write a report confidently to success, apart from having skills and knowledge. In view of this, I had a goal in mind at the start of this course that I would like to achieve upon the completion of this module. It was to improve on my presentation skills in front of a large group and be able to write a professional report writing. Through the intensive 13 weeks, I have benefitted a lot from the advice given by our lecturer. I felt that I have improved in my presentation and writing skills. However, I feel that there is still room for improvement, such as practicing on my pronunciation by learning to listen to people, the way they speak and reading more articles.

When carrying out preparation for the oral presentation, my team and I had fun and learnt a lot at the same time. Before the start of the presentation, we rehearsed a few times and in this process of working out our project, new ideas from different members will be discussed to determine if they could be used for our oral presentation. As for the technical report writing, I am thankful towards my teammates for their guidance and patience as I do not have a strong foundation as compared to my peers. They were willing to put in the extra effort to highlight and explained the mistake I made. I was constantly learning, and there is no doubt that this will come in handy in my future report writing.

In addition, the presentation showcase was an eye-opener to me. I was very impressed with some of the group that presented as I have gained valuable skills from them. For example, “Team Grayspace” and “Team YARJ” were very confident. Their speech were loud and clear, and they had smooth transitions from one team member to another. This also indicates that they had good knowledge of their material. Their hard work and perseverance eventually allowed them to secure first and third position respectively. As for “Team Resy”, every team member is full of energy and has a positive attitude, allowing them to take over the stage and successfully grab the attention of the audience. This is extremely important, as it means that the audience understands and can keep up with what the presenter is trying to tell.

Reflection on Mapletree Forum

I appreciate the opportunity to attend this forum. It was truly an eye-opening and memorable night for me. It serves as a good opportunity for people to learn from these speakers as they shared with us about their valuable experiences. The four speakers from different backgrounds shared with us not only on sustainability, but also the important aspects on what to look out for before beginning our journey as an entrepreneur.

Global climate change has already had observable effects on the environment and human activities are changing the natural greenhouse which will cause the Earth to be warmer. As a result, this will also lead to more overall evaporation and precipitation. Ms Nancy, who is the founder of eco u shared her story on her sustainable business. I was impressed with how she was willing to go the extra mile in coming up with ideas like disposables plates which is made up of pure organic matter. This eco-friendly idea is a significant contributor to save the environment. In addition, she mentioned that having just an idea is insufficient as there would be intense pressure on how to improve on her products while counterfeit product floating on the markets is constantly soaring.

I couldn’t agree more on this sentence, as having an idea itself today in modern society is insufficient to keep your career afloat. Counterfeit products by inconsiderate humans will result in a bogus product, causing consumers to purchase it which will ultimately harm the environment. Another advice from Eugene Wong is that “being an entrepreneur is never easy, we must not be afraid to fail, this is the first step that all people should know before considering being an entrepreneur”.

Technical Report Final

1. Introduction

1.1 Background
Food waste is a problem faced by Singapore and countries all around the world. Food waste is defined as “the removal of food from the supply chain which is fit for consumption, or which has spoiled or expired, mainly caused by economic behavior, poor management or neglect” (FAO, 2014, p.4). As the global population increases, the global food supply would be strained to meet the rising demand. Between 2012 to 2014, 805 million people were chronically undernourished while food was wasted or lost in other areas around the world (Galanakis, 2015). While food is scarce in developing regions in the world, food is also being wasted and lost from the food chain in other places such as Singapore. According to the National Environment Agency (NEA), in 2017, food waste accounted for 10% of total waste generated in Singapore, but only 16% of the food waste was recycled (NEA, 2018). The remainder of food waste which is not recycled will be sent to incineration plants to be incinerated. This process of incinerating food waste can be harmful to the environment as it produces large amounts of carbon emissions. It is beneficial to increase the amount of food waste recycled in Singapore as it would reduce overall carbon emissions.
Regarding the issue on food waste, the main stakeholders would be the government and government agencies as well as businesses related to the food industry. The government is responsible for formulating and implementing policies which will greatly affect the actions taken to reduce food wastage. Such policies can help facilitate the adoption of new technologies for local businesses. The government can also launch campaigns to raise awareness for the management of food waste. In a survey conducted regarding this issue (see Appendix A), 32.5% of respondents felt that lack of awareness among Singaporeans is one of the main factors which limited the recycling rate of food waste at hawker centers. Furthermore, 22% of respondents responded that inadequate policies being implemented by relevant authorities is a contributing factor which limits food waste recycling in Singapore. Businesses that have a stake in this issue include local food businesses such as hawker centers, food vendors, supermarkets, wet markets and food recycling plants. These businesses are responsible for the management of food waste as it is an important factor to ensure that they have a sustainable business. Food wastage also accounts for the loss in profits businesses due to overstocking of perishables, resulting in uncooked food being thrown away.
The issue of food waste affects all Singaporeans as the vast majority of Singaporeans contribute to food waste in Singapore. According to a study conducted by Grandhi and Singh (2016), the general public believed that food waste was not an issue since it was natural and biodegradable. Half of the respondents from the study acknowledged that they could have taken steps to avoid food waste generated from leftovers after a meal, food becoming spoilt, and throwing away blemished fruits and vegetables. It was also noted through the study that there was a lack in sorting of food waste in Singapore. This showed that there was a lack of awareness among Singaporeans about the consequences of massive amount of food waste. Hawker centers and wet markets contribute to a portion of the total food waste in Singapore, as it is a place where Singaporeans go to have their meals and thus leaving food waste if they do not finish their food. Hawker vendors and market stall owners also contribute to food wastage when the amount of food ingredients prepared exceeds the demand and is thrown away because the food is spoilt or expired. To tackle the problem of food waste in Singapore, government agencies such as the NEA must work towards ensuring food waste is handled in a sustainable manner. Food waste recovery can improve the sustainability of food systems by making full use of the valuable compounds which can be recovered from food waste.

1.2 Problem Statement
Ideally, food waste generated by local food centers should be thoroughly sorted in preparation for processing to be fully utilized in other means, instead of being disposed of. In 2017, Singapore produced 809,800 tons of food waste, while recycling only a mere 16% of it, with the remaining being incinerated (NEA, 2018). This is mainly due to the lack of an efficient recycling system at locations (hawker centers) where a significant amount of food waste is being produced.

1.3 Purpose Statement
This report aims to propose to the NEA Hawker Center Division in implementing a closed-loop system to maximize the food waste utilization rate of hawker centers in Singapore by providing them with an efficient system to sort and recycle food waste generated by food vendors and customers.

2. Proposed solution

The proposed solution to deal with the problem of food waste in hawker centers is to implement a closed loop system to maximize the food waste utilization rate of hawker centers. This closed-loop system consists of different stages: collection and sorting, treatment and utilization of end products. In the sorting stage, food waste is separated according to their valuable compounds to facilitate the treatment process. The sorted food waste will then be treated using two waste treatment methods, anaerobic digestion and composting.

2.1 Collection and sorting
Both composting and anaerobic digestion can be implemented simultaneously to maximize the utilization of food waste in hawker centers. Using both composting and anaerobic digestion draws benefits from each method while mitigating the drawbacks. These two systems complement each other as they reduce the cost of recycling food waste as well as ensuring all types of food waste produced at the hawker center is fully utilized. Composting helps keep the cost of processing food waste low and produces compost suitable for gardening. Anaerobic digestion is able to process most forms of food waste not suitable for composting and produces methane which can be turned to other forms of energy.

2.2 Treatment
2.2.1 Composting
Composting is a process which involves microorganisms breaking down food waste in the presence of oxygen. “Composting has been used as a method to dispose food waste (FW) and recycle organic matter to improve soil structure and fertility” (Li, Lu, Ren & He, 2013). The product of composting can be used as fertilizer or soil conditioner. The by-products of composting are heat, water and carbon dioxide. Composting is a cheap and simple way of processing food waste. Composting would be ideal for food waste such as vegetables and fruits classified as “greens”. Other types of food waste from hawker centers suitable for composting include bones or egg shells which are left after cooking. Other compounds such as meats are not ideal as they produce a foul odor and may attract stray animals.

2.2.2 Anaerobic digestion
Anaerobic digestion (AD) is a process which involves microorganisms breaking down food waste in the absence of oxygen (Zero Waste Singapore, 2008). This process produces biogases (mainly methane) and digestate, which can be utilized to produce energy and as a compost respectively. Anaerobic digestion of food waste is able to treat a “wide range of substrates of both agricultural and industrial origin” (Pesta, 2007). This method is applicable for any liquid or solid organic waste. However, due to the complexity and additional machineries needed for this process, anaerobic digestion has a higher capital and operational cost as compared to composting, in treating food waste.

2.3 Utilization of end products Through the treatment processes (composting and anaerobic digestion), food waste are being turned into bioproducts; mainly compost and methane. These bioproducts produced are usable resources that could be utilized to supplement the hawker center’s daily operational needs. This would provide an opportunity for an in-house garden to be situated at the rooftops of hawker centers. This garden would allow stall owners to grow their own ingredients, thereby reducing the stall’s dependency on external sources. Thus, the utilization of these end products creates a closed-loop system for the center, which in turn promotes self-sustainability through the reduction in reliance on external sources for its daily operations. Examples of the utilization of these end products would be the usage of compost produced at the in-house rooftop garden and recirculation of methane produced into the center’s gas pipelines.

3. Benefits
The proposed solution focuses on having a closed-loop system being implemented in the hawker center. This closed-loop system taps on food waste generated by turning them into usable resources through treatment processes. This resources produced would then be used extensively in the hawker center to meet its operational needs. It is beneficial to have such system in place as it reduces reliance on external sources and maximizes the utilization of food waste.

3.1 Reduced dependency on external resources
Operating cost of a stall in hawker center is high due to the fluctuating utilities prices. This is a significant impact to the vendors’ income as utilities cost contributes 9% to the daily operating cost (The Straits Times, 2015). Thus, having a closed-loop system in place in the hawker center is beneficial to the vendors. This system allows the food waste generated within the center to be turned into usable resources, such as biogases. These biogases produced can be recirculated into the center’s gas pipeline, which in turn reduces the utilities cost as the recirculated biogases would reduce the need for gases supplied externally (used for stoves etc.).
3.2 Maximized utilization of food waste
As mentioned earlier, in Singapore, food waste accounted for 10% of total waste generated and only 16% of it is being recycled (NEA, 2018)(see Appendix B), with the remaining being incinerated. The process of incineration does not eradicate the waste; instead, it reduces the volume of it by reducing them into ashes which are dumped into landfill subsequently. This is not sustainable as according to the Ministry of the Environment and Water Resources (MEWR) in 2019, based on the rate of waste currently being disposed, Singapore’s only landfill would be running out of space by 2035. Therefore, the ideal solution to prolong the landfill’s lifespan would be to maximize the utilization of waste instead of having them disposed of.

3.3 Inclusion of an in-house garden
Supporting the closed-loop system, there is opportunity for an in-house garden to be included at rooftops of hawker centers. Hawker centers generate up to an average of 1 ton of food waste daily. This contributes a significant amount to the overall food waste that Singapore generates. According to Yahya (2011), 1 ton of food waste will return approximately 1000 liters in reclaimed water. The reclaimed water can be used for irrigation for the in-house garden’s hydroponics system to grow local produce for use within the hawker center. Furthermore, the compost produced from the recycled food waste collected from the hawker center can be used as an enriching medium for the growing of produce in the in-house garden.

4.    Evaluation
4.1  Site limitations
Space constraints are a possible challenge most hawker centers would have to deal with prior to the implementation of the system. Due to the limitation of space, the installation of required treatment equipment and having an in-house garden may not be feasible for small hawker centers.

4.2 Operational cost
The installation of an anaerobic digester on site would have a high capital cost and could potentially increase the hawker centers’ overall operational cost; which may not be favorable to the investing stakeholders. However, in ensuring the long term sustainability of their businesses, the stakeholders have to take into account that the benefits of implementing such system would eventually outweigh the capital cost, profiting in the long run.

4.3 Inertia of hawker centers to adopt new system
As composting and anaerobic digestion are not familiar terms to stall owners and managers of hawker centers, it will take time for hawker centers to become familiar and adopt the new technology. The initial stages of implementation would be difficult as it requires a change of mindset towards how food waste is to be handled. Thus, courses must be provided to educate the stall owners and managers the proper operational procedures of the equipment.

5. Methods/Procedure

5.1 Primary research In efforts to explore the need for food waste recycling and to identify the limitation that was limiting the recycling of food waste in hawker centers, a quantitative survey research and on-site observations were carried out. In the survey (see Appendix A), respondents were asked about their contributions to food waste at hawker centers, their opinion on the food waste recycling rate and the main factor that limits food waste recycling at hawker centers. On-site observations were conducted to enhance the accuracy of the survey responses gathered, as well as to gain further insight in how food waste at hawker centers was being handled.

5.2 Secondary research

To further complement the findings obtained through primary research, a secondary research was conducted. Research articles related to food waste, the treatment methods and the utilization of end products from treatments were used to affirm the obtained findings and also to gain new information which would aid in the development of a closed-loop system for recycling food waste at hawker centers. Statistics from local government sources are also analyzed for trends to supplement the findings.

6. Concluding statement
The problem on food waste has serious social and environmental implications. Even so, a majority of the population in Singapore takes the problem lightly, continuing on the daily habits that would contribute to the generation of food waste. With the increased rate of waste generation due to the increase in population, Singapore’s one and only Semakau landfill is filling up. Thus, there is compelling need to increase the recycling rate of food waste that is being sent for incineration and dumping. The proposed closed-loop system would be the sustainable approach in tackling this problem, giving food waste a second life. Through this closed-loop system, food waste generated in hawker centers are converted into a usable bioproducts and be utilized to supplement the hawker center daily operational needs. The implementation of this system in hawker centers would be beneficial not only to the centers themselves, it would also be beneficial to Singapore’s constant pursuit of environmental sustainability.
Therefore, since the National Environment Agency has a huge role to play in increasing the recycling rate of food waste, the implementation of the proposed closed-loop system would be a good head start to encourage hawker centers to recycle food waste; thereby keeping Singapore’s mission on environmental sustainability, on track.

References

Food waste recycling(2008, December 8). Zero Waste SG. Retrieved from http://www.zerowastesg.com/tag/anaerobic-digestion/

Food Waste Management(2018, September 27). National Environment Agency. Retrieved from https://www.nea.gov.sg/our-services/waste-management/3r-programmes-and-resources/food-waste-management

Galanakis, C. M. (2015). Food Waste Recovery – Processing Technologies and Industrial Techniques.Retrieved from https://app.knovel.com/hotlink/toc/id:kpFWRPTIT1/food-waste-recovery-processing/food-waste-recovery-processing

Grandhi, B., Singh, J. A. (2016). What a Waste! A Study of Food Wastage Behavior in Singapore. Journal of Food Products Marketing, 26(4), 471-485. https://doi.org/10.1080/10454446.2014.885863

Half of food thrown away by Singapore households can be avoided: NEA study(2017, December 4).Channel News Asia. Retrieved from https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/half-of-food-thrown-away-by-singapore-households-can-be-avoided-9464560

Li, Z., Lu, H., Ren, L., & He, L. (2013). Experimental and modeling approaches for food waste composting: A review. Chemosphere, 93(7), 1247-1257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2013.06.064

Pesta, G. (2007). Anaerobic Digestion of Organic Residues and Wastes. Utilization of By-Products and Treatment of Waste in the Food Industry, 53-72. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-35766-9_4

Siau, M. (2014, April 28). Recycling of foodwaste yet to catch on in Singapore. Today Online. Retrieved from https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/recycling-foodwaste-yet-catch-singapore

Tan, A. (2015, March 11). Singapore Budget 2015: 10 more hawker centres to be built by 2027. The Straits Times. Retrieved from https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/singapore-budget-2015-10-more-hawker-centres-to-be-built-by-2027

Yahya, Y. (2011, December 28). Turning food waste into water. Eco-Business. Retrieved fromhttps://www.eco-business.com/news/turning-food-waste-into-water/

Technical Report Draft 1B: Implementing a closed-loop food waste recycling system

1. Introduction

1.1 Background
Food waste is a problem faced by Singapore and countries all around the world. Food waste is defined as “the removal of food from the supply chain which is fit for consumption, or which has spoiled or expired, mainly caused by economic behavior, poor management or neglect” (FAO, 2014, P.4). As the global population increases, the global food supply would be strained to meet the rising demand. Between 2012 to 2014, 805 million people were chronically undernourished while food was wasted or lost in other areas around the world (Galanakis, 2015). While food is scarce in developing regions in the world, food is also being wasted and lost from the food chain in other places such as Singapore.
According to the National Environment Agency (NEA), in 2017, food waste accounted for 10% of total waste generated in Singapore, but only 16% of the food waste was recycled (NEA, 2018). The remainder of food waste which is not recycled will be sent to incineration plants to be incinerated. This process of incinerating food waste can be harmful to the environment as it produces large amounts of carbon emissions. It is beneficial to increase the amount of food waste recycled in Singapore as it would reduce overall carbon emissions.
Regarding the issue on food waste, the main stakeholders would be the government and government agencies as well as businesses related to the food industry. The government is responsible for formulating and implementing policies which will greatly affect the actions taken to reduce food wastage. Such policies can help facilitate the adoption of new technologies for local businesses. The government can also launch campaigns to raise awareness for the management of food waste. Businesses that have a stake in this issue include local food businesses such as hawker centers, food vendors, supermarkets, wet markets and food recycling plants. These businesses are responsible for the management of food waste as it is an important factor to ensure that they have a sustainable business. Food wastage also accounts for the loss in profits businesses due to overstocking of perishables, resulting in uncooked food being thrown away.
The issue of food waste affects all Singaporeans as the vast majority of Singaporeans contribute to food waste in Singapore. According to a study conducted by Grandhi and Singh (2016), the general public thinks that food waste was not an issue since it was natural and biodegradable. Half of the respondents from the study acknowledged that they could have taken steps to avoid food waste generated from leftovers after a meal, food becoming spoilt, and throwing away blemished fruits and vegetables. It was also noted through the study that there was a lack in sorting of food waste in Singapore. This showed that there was a lack of awareness among Singaporeans about the consequences of massive amounts of food waste.
Hawker centers and wet markets contribute to a portion of the total food waste in Singapore; as it is a place where Singaporeans go to have their meals and thus leaving food waste if they do not finish their food. Hawker vendors and market stall owners also contribute to food wastage when the amount of food ingredients prepared exceeds the demand and is thrown away because the food is spoilt or expired.
To tackle the problem of food waste in Singapore, Singaporeans must work towards ensuring food waste is handled in a sustainable manner. Food waste recovery can improve the sustainability of food systems by making full use of the valuable compounds which can be recovered from food waste.

1.2 Problem Statement
Ideally, food waste generated by local food centers should be thoroughly sorted in preparation for processing to be fully utilized in other means, instead of being disposed of. In 2017, Singapore produced 809,800 tonnes of food waste, while recycling only a mere 16% of it, with the remaining being incinerated (NEA, 2018). This is mainly due to the lack of an efficient recycling system at locations (hawker centres) where a significant amount of food waste is being produced.

1.3 Purpose Statement
This report aims to propose to the NEA Hawker Centre Division in implementing a closed-loop system to maximize the food waste utilization rate of hawker centres by providing an efficient system to sort and utilize food waste generated by food vendors and customers.

2. Proposed solution
The proposed solution to deal with the problem of food waste in hawker centres is to provide a closed loop system to maximize the food waste utilization rate of hawker centres. This closed loop system consists of different stages; collection and sorting, treatment and utilization of end products. In the sorting stage, food waste is separated according to their valuable compounds to facilitate the treatment process. The sorted food waste will then be treated using two waste treatment methods, anaerobic digestion and composting.

2.1 Collection and sorting
Both composting and anaerobic digestion can be implemented simultaneously to maximize the utilization of food waste in hawker centers. Using both composting and anaerobic digestion draws benefits from each method while mitigating the drawbacks. These two systems complement each other as it reduces the cost of recycling food waste as well as ensuring all types of food waste produced at the hawker center is fully utilized. Composting helps keep the cost of processing food waste low and produces compost suitable for gardening. Anaerobic digestion is able to process most forms of food waste not suitable for composting and produces methane which can be turned to other forms of energy.

2.2 Treatment
a. Composting
Composting is a process which involves microorganisms breaking down food waste in the presence of oxygen. “Composting has been used as a method to dispose food waste (FW) and recycle organic matter to improve soil structure and fertility.” (Li, Lu, Ren & He, 2013). The product of composting can be used as fertilizer or soil conditioner. The by-products of composting are heat, water and carbon dioxide. Composting is a cheap and simple way of processing food waste. Composting would be ideal for food waste such as vegetables and fruits classified as “greens”. Other compounds such as meats are not ideal as they produce a foul odor and may attract stray animals.

b. Anaerobic digestion
Anaerobic digestion (AD) is a process which involves microorganisms breaking down food waste in the absence of oxygen. (Zero Waste Singapore, 2008). This process produces biogases (mainly methane) and digestate, which can be utilized to produce energy and as a compost respectively. Anaerobic digestion of food waste is able to treat a “wide range of substrates of both agricultural and industrial origin” (Pesta, 2007). This method is applicable for any liquid or solid organic waste. However, due to the complexity and additional machineries needed for this process, anaerobic digestion has a higher capital and operational cost as compared to composting, in treating food waste

2.3 Utilization of end products
Through the treatment processes (composting and anaerobic digestion), food waste are being turned into bioproducts; mainly compost and methane. These bioproducts produced are usable resources that could be utilized to supplement the hawker center’s daily operational needs. Utilization of these end products creates a closed loop system for the center, which in turn promotes self-sustainability through the reduction in reliance on external sources for its daily operations. Examples of the utilization of these end products would be the usage of compost produced at the in-house rooftop garden and recirculation of methane produced into the center’s gas pipelines.

3. Benefits
The proposed solution focuses on having a closed-loop system being implemented in the hawker centre. This closed-loop system taps on food waste generated by turning them into usable resources through treatment processes. This resources produced would then be used extensively in the hawker centre to meet its operational needs. It is beneficial to have such system in place as it reduces dependency on external resources, maximizes the utilization of food waste and

3.1 Reduced dependency on external resources
Operating cost of a stall in hawker center is high due to the fluctuating utilities prices. This is a significant impact to the vendors’ income as utilities cost contributes 9% to the daily operating cost (The Straits Times, 2015). Thus, having a closed-loop system in place in the hawker center is beneficial to the vendors. This system allows the food waste generated within the center to be turned into usable resources, such as biogases. These biogases produced can be recirculated into the center’s gas pipeline, which in turn reduces the utilities cost as the recirculated biogases would reduce the need for gases supplied externally (used for stoves etc.).

3.2 Maximized utilization of food waste
As mentioned earlier on, in Singapore, food waste accounted for 10% of total waste generated and only 16% of it is being recycled (NEA, 2018), with the remaining being incinerated. The process of incineration does not eradicate the waste; instead, it reduces the volume of it by reducing them into ashes which are dumped into landfill subsequently. This is not sustainable as according to the Ministry of the Environment and Water Resources (MEWR) in 2019, based on the rate of waste currently being disposed, Singapore’s only landfill would be running out of space by 2035. Therefore, the only solution to prolong the landfill’s lifespan would be to maximize the utilization of waste instead of having them disposed of.

3.3 Hawker center localised garden for growing of small produce
Hawker centers generate up to an average of 1 ton of food waste daily. This contributes a significant amount to the overall food waste that Singapore generates. According to Yahya (2011), 1 ton of food waste will return approximately 1000 litres in reclaimed water. The reclaimed water can be used for irrigation for a hydroponics system to grow local produce for use within the hawker centre that the farm is located in.
Furthermore, the compost produced from the recycled food waste collected from the hawker centre can be used to enrich the growing medium for the produce grown in the hawker centre garden for use by the vendors for their own use in their stalls.
As for the biogas produced from anaerobic digestion, it can be used to fuel the generators the systems that run the hydroponics farm like water pumps for irrigation and UV lamps to keep the produce in optimum lighting levels throughout the day.

4. Evaluation
4.1 Site limitations
One possible challenge which the proposed treatment system may face would be the limited space which most hawker centers have. Installing equipment to treat the food waste may not be feasible for small hawker centers as there would be no space for the equipment. The proposed garden would also be limited to the space around the hawker center.

4.2 Operational cost
Installing an anaerobic digester on site would be costly and could potentially cost the hawker center more money to maintain its operation. From the point of view of stakeholders who invest money in installing an anaerobic digester on site, the benefits of the treatment system must outweigh the cost of operation. Stakeholders must weigh the benefits of recycling food waste against the cost of such a system to ensure their business is sustainable and that the system will eventually cover the capital cost.

4.3 Inertia of hawker centers to adopt new system
As composting and anaerobic digestion are not familiar terms to hawker stall owners and managers of hawker centers, it may be difficult to implement a new system as it will take time for hawker centers to familiarize and adopt new technology. Hawker vendors may also not be well trained to operate equipment to treat food waste. The initial stage of implementation would be difficult as it requires a change of mindset towards handling food waste as opposed to the traditional method of dumping food waste in a bin.
Basic lesson on using those machinery can be taught free to all hawker stall owners, at the same time explaining to them the benefits on adopting these new technology.

5. Methods/Procedure
5.1 Primary research
A survey was conducted to identify the problem with regards to food waste in hawker centers. Respondents were asked about their contributions to food waste at hawker centers and their opinion on the rate of recycling food waste at hawker centers as well as the main factor which limits food waste recycling. The survey was conducted to justify the need for food waste recycling at hawker centers as well as identify the current problem which limits the food waste recycling rate. Interviews with hawker stall owners were also carried out to gain further insight into how food waste at hawker centers is being handled.

5.2 Secondary research
Secondary research was conducted by reading research articles related to food waste treatment methods and utilization of products from recycling food waste, which will help in developing a closed-loop system for recycling food waste at hawker centers. Local statistics on the rate of food waste recycling were taken from the NEA website.

6. Concluding statement
Food waste has serious social and environmental implication but many of us don’t think twice about it. Furthermore, with the increase of population, landfills running out of space and human living longer. There is compelling need to increase the recycling rate then letting food waste be send for incineration. Our proposed on closed loop system could be a sustainable approach by the end-product could be a usable resources that could be utilized to supplement the hawkers center daily operational needs.
The benefits of implementing a closed-loop system for food waste in hawker centers would be limited by the willingness of hawker centers to adopt such a system. The NEA could play a big role in encouraging hawker centers to recycle food waste. To ensure this system is well received by hawker centers around Singapore, some incentives could be given to hawker centers which are willing to adopt the system. In a survey conducted regarding this issue, 32.5% of respondents said that lack of awareness among Singaporeans is one of the main factors which limited the recycling rate of food waste at hawker centers. Furthermore, 22% of respondents said that inadequate policies being implemented by relevant authorities is a contributing factor which limits food waste recycling in Singapore. To ensure successful implementation, it is vital that NEA takes initiative in campaigning for food waste recycling and educating Singaporeans on the importance of recycling food waste.
A pilot project is recommended to test the feasibility of implementing the recycling system in hawker centers around Singapore. The pilot project will involve upgrading a hawker center by installing food waste treatment equipment as well as planting a garden in close proximity to the hawker center. The project should be monitored and if successful can be adapted and implemented in hawker centers all around Singapore.

Technical Report Draft 1 – Improving the efficiency of food waste management in hawker centre

Background

Food waste is a problem faced by Singapore and countries all around the world. Food waste is defined as “the removal of food from the supply chain which is fit for consumption, or which has spoiled or expired, mainly caused by economic behavior, poor management or neglect” (FAO, 2014, 4). As the global population increases, the global food supply will be strained to meet the rising demand. Between 2012 to 2014, 805 million people were chronically undernourished while food is wasted or loss in other areas around the world (Galanakis. M, 2015). While food is scarce in developing regions in the world, food is also being wasted and loss from the food chain in other places such as Singapore.

According to the National Environment Agency (NEA, n.d.), in 2017, food waste accounts for 10% of total waste generated in Singapore, however only 16% of the food waste is recycled . The remainder of food waste which is not recycled will be sent to incineration plants to be incinerated. This process of incinerating food waste can be harmful to the environment as it produces large amounts of carbon emissions. It is beneficial to increase the amount of food waste recycled in Singapore as it would reduce overall carbon emissions.

Regarding the issue of food waste, the main stakeholders would be the government and government agencies as well as businesses related to the food industry. The government is responsible for formulating and implementing policies which will greatly affect the actions taken to reduce food wastage. Such policies can help facilitate the adoption of new technologies for local businesses. The government can also launch campaigns to raise awareness for the management of food waste. Businesses that have a stake in this issue include local food businesses such as hawker centers, food vendors, supermarkets, wet markets and food recycling plants. These businesses are responsible for the management of food waste as it is a important factor to ensuring they have a sustainable business. Food wastage also accounts for the loss in revenue for businesses as food is over ordered or over produced.

The issue of food waste affects all Singaporeans as the vast majority of singaporeans contribute to food waste in Singapore. According to “What a Waste! A Study of Food Wastage Behavior in Singapore” (Grandhi B. & Singh J. A., 2016), it was said that the general public thinks that food waste is not an issue since it is natural and biodegradable. This shows that there is a lack of awareness in Singaporeans about the consequences of massive amounts of food waste. It was also noted that there is a lack of sorting of food waste in singapore. Half of them acknowledged that they could have taken steps to avoid food waste generated from leftovers after a meal, food expiring or becoming spoilt, and throwing away blemished fruits and vegetables.

Hawker centers and wet markets contribute to a portion of the total food waste in Singapore as it is a place where Singaporeans go to have their meals and thus leaving food waste if they do not finish their food. Hawker vendors and market stall owners also contribute to food wastage when the amount of food ingredients prepared exceeds the demand and is thrown away because the food is spoilt or expired.

To tackle the problem of food waste in Singapore, Singaporeans must work towards ensuring food waste is handled in a sustainable manner. Food waste recovery can improve the sustainability of food systems by making full use of the valuable compounds which can be recovered from food waste.

Problem statement

Ideally, food waste generated by local food centers should be thoroughly sorted in preparation for processing to be fully utilized in other means, instead of being disposed of. In 2017, Singapore produced 809,800 tonnes of food waste, while recycling only a mere 16%

Purpose statement

This report aims to tackle the problem of food waste from food centers (hawkers & wet markets) in Singapore by providing a convenient system to sort and utilize food waste generated by food vendors and customers.

Summary_Reader_Response – Draft 4

In the article from Science Daily, “Natural Engineering Offers Solution against Future Flooding” by Newcastle University (2014), it was stated that “back-to-nature flood schemes” which utilise the environment’s “natural capabilities can be an economical alternative to preventing and mitigating floods”. In the article, Dr Mark Wilkinson, the research lead, also mentioned that winter rainfall and flooding occurrence would escalate in the future. It was reported that several strategies of river-flow management have been exhibited in Belford, Northumberland, which illustrated the reduction of surface run-off and soil mineral depletion.
The article stated that the Natural Flood Management (NFM) aspires to scale down the maximum water height or delay the arrival of the flood, adding more preparation time for response. This would be done by the management system hampering the progress of water while working sustainably in tandem with the environment. Strategies include storing, slowing and redirecting water and increasing soil infiltration. This proved to be much cheaper (~£200,000) in the Belford Scheme instead of a “full conventional flood-defense scheme” (~£2.5m). Mirroring Belford’s flooding situation, many other rural towns can also benefit from the NFM. The article stated that the Natural Flood Management (NFM) aspired to scale down the maximum water height or delayed the arrival of the flood, adding more preparation time for response. This will be done by hampering the progress of water while working sustainably in tandem with the environment.

The NFM scheme has multiple benefits to the environment. According to Scottish Environment Protection Agency (2015), NFM measures seek to directly restore or strengthen an ecosystem which in turn supports a broader range of habitats and species. On top of that, the mechanisms of the NFM system help to reduce flooding by restoring natural sediment processes and improve water quality.

Despite so, the NFM may have overlooked the possible challenges or problems which may arise if the system was to be implemented in other regional areas since there may be differences in regional geography. According to Kirk (2018), it has been predicted that United Kingdom will be hit by drastic storms, intense downpours and increasing sea levels in the upcoming century. Because of this, there were concerns about the country’s capabilities in coping with the issues of flooding. Even though defences and precautions have been taken, there is no guarantee about its sustainability. Thus, nature also plays a role in tackling this treacherous situation, which is supported by the measures taken by NFM of strengthening an ecosystem. With any NFM measure which works to enhance the quality of water, it could also possibly improve the habitat for fishes and other wildlife (SEPA, 2015).

For instance, The Eddleson Water Project is a project which involves the restoration of Eddleson Water for the advantages of flood attenuation, local community and natural habitat. An extensive network of measures for rain gauges, groundwater and river level have been put in place throughout the entire valley to monitor how the changes affect river flows and flood frequencies, which may also show the kind of changes which will occur to the river’s habitat and wildlife. In addition to the advantages to flooding and habitat restoration, the project has also improved soil conservation and water quality, while improving landscape (SEPA, 2015).

Overall, we will never be able to determine the rising of the next flood. The protection of coasts solely with hard engineering structures (e.g. sea walls) would lead to more problems as the costs would be tremendous. Thus, this highlights the importance of nature and natural processes in the long run, as it is more prudent to work alongside with nature by adapting to the consequences of climate change, rather than challenge the sea as an enemy.

References

Kirk, A. (2018, March 26). What is Britain doing to tackle flooding in the face of extreme weather? Retrieved January 25,2019 from
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/11/23/britain-tackle-flooding-face-extreme-weather/

Newcastle University. (2014, January 28). ‘Natural’ engineering offers solution against future flooding. ScienceDaily. Retrieved February 8, 2019 from www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/01/140128094531.htm

Scottish Environment Protection Agency. (December, 2015). Natural Flood Management Handbook. Retrieved February 15, 2019, from https://www.sepa.org.uk/media/163560/sepa-natural-flood-management-handbook1.pdf

Annotated Summary

Othman, L. (2016, October, 24). Reducing food waste: Getting Singaporeans to embrace ‘ugly food’. Retrieved from Channel newsasia: https://www.Channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/reducing-food-waste-getting-singaporeans-to-embrace-ugly-food-7775360

This article shows the seriousness of food wastage in Singapore. In Singapore, out of the 676,800 tonnes of food waste that was generated, only 16% was recycled. This includes the discarding of blemished or oddly-shaped food. It seems that Singaporeans are not keen on buying food which looks not fresh. Food wastage also makes up 7 per cent of greenhouse gas emissions, which is a major cause of global warming. To solve this issue, NTU’s sociology professor Md Saiful Islam mentioned that it will require the commitment of retailers and manufacturers. This article suggests ways to reduce food waste while helping those who genuinely need food. Firstly, recognize those needy families who need food (i.e. eating just one meal per day). Secondly, reach out to companies and organizations, including food manufacturers and bakeries with excess stock. Also, the government can play a part by enact legislation like the United States’ Good Samaritan Act. For instance, when a company donates edible food to charities, they will not be liable for anything that happens to those who consume that food. Food waste can be reduced significantly by working together with all the organization and company. Therefore, this will help maximize the reduction of food wastage.

Summary_Reader Response Draft 3

In the article from Science Daily, “Natural Engineering Offers Solution against Future Flooding” by Newcastle University (2014), it was stated that “back-to-nature flood schemes”, which utilise the environment’s natural capabilities, can be an economical alternative to preventing and mitigating floods. In the article, Dr Mark Wilkinson, the research lead, also mentioned that winter rainfall and flooding occurrence would escalate in the future.

It was reported that several strategies of river-flow management have been exhibited in Belford, Northumberland, which illustrated the reduction of surface run-off and soil mineral depletion.
The article said that the Natural Flood Management (NFM) aspires to scale down the maximum water height or delay the arrival of the flood, adding more preparation time for response. This would be done by the management system to hampering the progress of water while working sustainably in tandem with the environment. Strategies include and storing, slowing and redirecting water and increasing soil infiltration. This proved to be much cheaper (~£200,000) in the Belford Scheme instead of a “full conventional flood-defence scheme” (~£2.5m). Mirroring Belford’s flooding situation, many other rural towns can also benefit from the NFM.

The article stated that the Natural Flood Management (NFM) aspired to scale down the maximum water height or delayed the arrival of the flood, adding more preparation time for response. This would be done by hampering the progress of water while working sustainably in tandem with the environment. Strategies include and storing, slowing and redirecting water and increasing soil infiltration. This proved to be much cheaper (~£200,000) in the Belford Scheme instead of a “full conventional flood-defence scheme” (~£2.5m). Mirroring Belford’s flooding situation, many other rural towns can also benefit from the NFM.

Doubtlessly, the scheme proposed by NFM is approaching the right direction towards flood management and displayed cost savings. And it is more effective as compared to the traditional flood management system due to the high cost, lack of space for flood and walls and banks. However, I feel that NFM failed to foresee the problem or challenges that they might encounter if this system were to implement it to other regional areas.

Nevertheless, NFM scheme not only it can delay the arrival of the flood and cut-cost. There are multiple benefits to the environment. According to Scottish Environment Protection Agency (2015), NFM measures seek to directly restore or strengthen an ecosystem which in turn supports a broader range of habitats and species. On top of that many of the mechanisms by which NFM system help reduce flooding also work to restore natural sediment processes and improve water quality.

Overall, from my point of view, Though Belford scheme had been such a success, it because they had the support of the community and local landowners. It failed to show that other areas will likewise gain support from the local community. In addition, I feel that research by Dr Mark Wilkinson researched are insufficient to implement the system into other places, as there is difference regional geography. Dr Paul Quinn based in the school of Civil Engineering and Geosciences at Newcastle University stated that “There is no single solution to flooding – no ‘silver bullet’.

Bibliography

Ashley Kirk. (2018,March 26). What is Britain doing to tackle flooding in the face of extreme weather? Retrieved January 25,2019 from
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/11/23/britain-tackle-flooding-face-extreme-weather/

Coping with rising sea levels (2017). In World Ocean Review online.
Retrieved February 1, 2019, from
https://worldoceanreview.com/en/wor-5/improving-coastal-protection/coping-with-rising-sea-levels/

Newcastle University. (2014, January 28). ‘Natural’ engineering offers solution against future flooding. ScienceDaily. Retrieved February 8, 2019, from www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/01/140128094531.htm

Scottish Environment Protection Agency. (December 2015). Natural Flood Management Handbook. Retrieved February 15, 2019, from https://www.sepa.org.uk/media/163560/sepa-natural-flood-management-handbook1.pdf

Summary_Reader Response Draft 2

In the article from Science Daily, “Natural Engineering Offers Solution against Future Flooding” by Newcastle University (2014), it was stated that “back-to-nature flood schemes”, which utilise the environment’s natural capabilities, can be an economical alternative to preventing and mitigating floods. Dr Mark Wilkinson, the research lead, also mentioned that winter rainfall and flooding occurrence would escalate in the future.

It was reported that several strategies of river-flow management have been exhibited in Belford, Northumberland, which illustrated the reduction of surface run-off and soil mineral depletion.
The article said that the Natural Flood Management (NFM) aspires to scale down the maximum water height or delay the arrival of the flood, adding more preparation time for response. This would be done by hampering the progress of water while working sustainably in tandem with the environment. Strategies include and storing, slowing and redirecting water and increasing soil infiltration. This proved to be much cheaper (~£200,000) in the Belford Scheme instead of a “full conventional flood-defence scheme” (~£2.5m). Mirroring Belford’s flooding situation, many other rural towns can also benefit from the NFM.

The article stated that the Natural Flood Management (NFM) aspires to scale down the maximum water height or delay the arrival of the flood, adding more preparation time for response. This would be done by hampering the progress of water while working sustainably in tandem with the environment. Strategies include and storing, slowing and redirecting water and increasing soil infiltration. This proved to be much cheaper (~£200,000) in the Belford Scheme instead of a “full conventional flood-defence scheme” (~£2.5m). Mirroring Belford’s flooding situation, many other rural towns can also benefit from the NFM.

Doubtlessly, the scheme proposed by NFM is approaching the right direction towards flood management and displayed cost savings. However, I feel that research by Dr Mark Wilkinson ideas are insufficient to implement it, to other places around the world as there is difference geography.

Firstly, for centuries Britain has been draining wetlands, reclaiming salt marshes and lining rivers with concrete banks and has driven rapid development. But as the climate changes and rainfall records are broken through the next century, there are concerns about the country’s ability to tackle the floods it will bring.

Second, today tried and tested system will no longer be sufficient. As sea levels continue to rise coastal populations, have always been threatened by flooding. Although over time we learned to build structures that can withstand against flooding. Sea level should increase by one meter or more by the end of the century, and no one knows how strong or climate will change. Engineers will continue to encounter problems in designing structures as they do not have enough information as compared to past centuries.

From my point of view, though Belford scheme had been such a success, it because they had the support of the community and local landowners. It still failed to show that it will be a success in other places. Dr Paul Quinn based in the school of Civil Engineering and Geosciences at Newcastle University stated that “There is no single solution to flooding – no ‘silver bullet’.

Bibliography

Title: What is Britain doing to tackle flooding in the face of extreme weather?
Published Date: 26/03/2018
Link: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/11/23/britain-tackle-flooding-face-extreme-weather/

Title: Coping with rising sea levels
Published Date: Year 2017
Link: https://worldoceanreview.com/en/wor-5/improving-coastal-protection/coping-with-rising-sea-levels/

Title: Natural Engineering offers solution against future floodingPublished Date: 28/01/2014Link: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/01/140128094531.htm

Summary_Reader Respond Draft 1

In the article from Science Daily, “Natural Engineering Offers Solution against Future Flooding” by Newcastle University (2014), it was stated that “back-to-nature flood schemes”, which utilise the environment’s natural capabilities, can be an economical alternative to preventing and mitigating floods. Dr Mark Wilkinson, the research lead, also mentioned that winter rainfall and flooding occurrence would escalate in the future.

It was reported that several strategies of river-flow management have been exhibited in Belford, Northumberland, which illustrated the reduction of surface run-off and soil mineral depletion.
The article said that the Natural Flood Management (NFM) aspires to scale down the maximum water height or delay the arrival of the flood, adding more preparation time for response. This would be done by hampering the progress of water while working sustainably in tandem with the environment. Strategies include and storing, slowing and redirecting water and increasing soil infiltration. This proved to be much cheaper (~£200,000) in the Belford Scheme instead of a “full conventional flood-defence scheme” (~£2.5m). Mirroring Belford’s flooding situation, many other rural towns can also benefit from the NFM.

The article said that the Natural Flood Management (NFM) aspires to scale down the maximum water height or delay the arrival of the flood, adding more preparation time for response. This would be done by hampering the progress of water while working sustainably in tandem with the environment. Strategies include and storing, slowing and redirecting water and increasing soil infiltration. This proved to be much cheaper (~£200,000) in the Belford Scheme instead of a “full conventional flood-defence scheme” (~£2.5m). Mirroring Belford’s flooding situation, many other rural towns can also benefit from the NFM.

Overall, it was stated that the scheme was a triumph due to the backing and approval of the community, together with the comprehension of the “land and local environment”.

Science daily published Dr Mark Wilkinson research is purely in theory and is not proven yet are extremely risky and not practical. Giving the green light to go ahead will cause catastrophic tragic.

Research by Dr Mark Wilkinson ideas is insufficient to implement it to other places around the world as there is difference geography. Altering ways might cause severe consequence, for centuries Britain has been draining wetlands, reclaiming salt marshes and lining rivers with concrete banks and has driven rapid development. But as the climate changes and rainfall records are broken through the next century, there are concerns about the country’s ability to tackle the floods it will bring.

Today tried and tested system will no longer be sufficient. As sea levels continue to rise coastal populations, have always been threatened by flooding. Although over time we learned to build structures that can withstand against flooding. Sea level should increase by one meter or more by the end of the century, and no one knows how strong or climate will change. Engineers will continue to encounter problems in designing structures as they do not have enough information as compared to past centuries.

Sourced From:

Title: Coping with rising sea levels
Published Date: Year 2017
Link: https://worldoceanreview.com/en/wor-5/improving-coastal-protection/coping-with-rising-sea-levels/