You are on page 1of 17

George Jones | Y12.

2
Technology SL | Waste Investigation Research Project | Due 13th January 2011

green design
waste investigation

“are RCHK families greener ”


than other hong kong residents?

George Jones | Y12.2


Technology SL

1
George Jones | Y12.2
Technology SL | Waste Investigation Research Project | Due 13th January 2011

Contents
Introduction p2
Strategies for Research p2-5
Data Collection p5-12
Data Analysis p12-16
Research Evaluation p16

Introduction
Waste production from households is an increasingly growing cause for concern around the
world, as to the quantities which are simply landfilled (landfilling a growing cause of concern
in Hong Kong as they [landfills] are filling up) when they needn’t be. Other methods of waste
removal are available, such as recycling, reuse and composting of natural materials.

This ‘waste investigation’ aims to identify the waste output of households (that of the writer,
and classmates) in RCHK. Primary data collection will last four weeks, compiled and analysed
against statistics to determine the ‘green-ness’ of students in RCHK.

Strategies for Research


Introduction
In order to proceed in data collection, both primary and secondary collection methods need
to be planned out in order to ensure a smooth research process.

Brainstorm
The following brainstorm created identifies areas of research revolving around the topic of
waste, its disposal (methods) and strategies.

2
George Jones | Y12.2
Technology SL | Waste Investigation Research Project | Due 13th January 2011

3
George Jones | Y12.2
Technology SL | Waste Investigation Research Project | Due 13th January 2011
Research Strategies
In order stage out the research process, the following tables have been made to outline the
stages or steps of research, what sets of data are required (and if any calculations are
needed done to them). The first table below outlines the data required and to be collected by
myself as primary research, while the second outlines the data to be collected from other
sources, such as statistics, facts, definitions (from the internet for example).

Primary Research Where How Why


Collect the following pieces Collect Weigh all materials in This data will form the basis of
of data data within categories 1, 2 and 3 the investigation - of how my
1 - trash/waste my every day when family (and eventually others
2 - recyclable material household removing trash, using when compiled with theirs)
3 - reused material kitchen scales compares with the rest of HK,
4 - overall totals 4 - add all figures of in terms of how waste is
the day together managed

Average the data out From the The average daily sets Averaging the data collected
according to daily and data of data can be from the investigation allows
annually for the household obtained calculated by adding for a uniform, single set of
above figures data for use.

Obtain a per capita set of From the Divide all average Having a per capita set of data
data for daily and annual averages totals by four (the allows for easier comparison
averages compiled number of people in with others (as in families of
above my household) different sizes, HK)

Calculate percentages in From the Divide each type of The set of percentages are
terms of totals, landfilled, averages treatment method important for use in
recycled, reused, mentioned (recycle, landfill, etc) comparisons with the rest of
composted above by total, then multiply Hong Kong - the purpose of
by 100 this investigation

Compile aforementioned From all By compiling the The compilation process is


data into respective tables data above following tables: necessary for the presentation
1 - data collection of data in the aforementioned
table report
2 - my averages table
(daily and annual
averages for family;
daily and annual
averages per capita)

Obtain 3 more sets of the From By enquiring, and To be able to better discern
data needed/outlined above classmates sharing like data whether ‘RCHK’ individuals
in Tech make better dispose of waste

The following table outlines the strategies/steps of the secondary research process - through
other sources, such as that on the internet.

4
George Jones | Y12.2
Technology SL | Waste Investigation Research Project | Due 13th January 2011

Secondary Research Where How Why


Forms of waste The internet By using my web To get and outline a general
disposal/treatment browser and understanding of the methods that
(definitions, etc) searching for the will be used in the Primary
specified data Research, as well as in Hong Kong

Hong Kong’s statistics

- Total municipal waste The internet By searching By identifying HK’s total municipal
output Government data waste output per annum, the whole
investigation can be put into a
broader perspective - how we fit in,
how HK fares

- Municipal waste, per The internet By searching By calculating or finding per capita
Capita, per annum Government data data, direct comparisons can be
made between HK and ourselves

- % Landfill/ % The internet By searching Percentage data is useful in


Recycled/ % Reused/ Government data providing a simpler view on the
% Composted nature of the data, with
comparisons easily drawable

Compile above Spreadsheet Tabling all the data


statistics programs in a like manner to
primary research,
and calculating any
missing cells

Data Collection
Secondary Research
Methods of Waste Management (and Definitions)
Municipal waste is the waste that comes from “households, commerce and trade, small
businesses, office buildings and institutions” (Municipal Waste Treatment, 2007). This
excludes sewage waste.

One prime method used of disposing waste at present is to place waste into ‘landfills’.
Landfills, like the one shown in Figure 1, are locations where in simple terms, the waste is
‘dumped’. Landfills are common-place in Hong Kong.

An alternative to get rid of waste would be to ‘incinerate’ it, which is the combustion of waste
to reduce/remove the mass of it. That said however, it isn’t a much better solution as “when
burning waste, a large amount of energy, carbon dioxide and other potentially hazardous air

5
George Jones | Y12.2
Technology SL | Waste Investigation Research Project | Due 13th January 2011

Figure 1: A landfill site, SE New Territories

pollutants is given off” (Waste Disposal,


n.d.). A plus side is the ability to generate
electricity from the burning process,
preventing wasted energy (Waste
Disposal, n.d.).

There are greener alternatives however.


Recycling is one such example, defined
as “reprocessing of waste material in a Figure 2: An Incineration Plant

production process that diverts it from the waste stream” (Municipal Waste Treatment, 2007).
Waste material in essence goes through a process that allows for it to be used again anew,
lessening the need of virgin resources.

Composting is a “biological process that submits biodegradable waste to anaerobic or


aerobic decomposition, and that results in a product that is recovered and can be used to
increase soil fertility” (Municipal Waste Treatment, 2007). This matter easily integrates within
the environment, leaving no damage, and can also be used in compost for crop growing.

Reuse lastly is the “extending the ‘life’ or repurposing an item rather than discarding or
throwing it away” (Recycle - Reduce -
Reuse, n.d.). Reusing products, while not
in the waste treatment process (occuring
before it), can prolong product use and
prevent premature disposal, for example,
reusing scrap paper or giving away
computers for new use extends their life,
slowing the rate of disposal into landfills.

Hong Kong’s Municipal Waste Output


Hong Kong has topped the list of “most Figure 3: Per Capita Disposal Rates of Municipal Solid Waste
and Domestic Waste in 1991-2009 Line Graph
waste-producing countries in the
world” (Bryskine, 2010), with its population of almost 7 million generating “6.5 million
tonnes” (Municipal Solid Waste, 2010). in 2009 alone. As shown in Figure 3, disposal rates

6
George Jones | Y12.2
Technology SL | Waste Investigation Research Project | Due 13th January 2011
into landfills have shown decrease over the past few years, particularly domestic waste from
2004 to 2009.

Hong Kong’s Waste Disposal Divided


Hong Kong’s waste treatment process only undergoes two methods - landfilling and
recycling. There is no incineration in the city, with it “halted 13 years ago” (MAHR, 2010).
There is also no data or record of composting on a city-wide scale (Municipal Waste
Treatment, 2007), and reuse data varies due to its nature (its hard to track, it can happen on
any level - e.g. I reuse a sheet of scrap paper).

% Landfill % Composted % Recycled % Reused

% 51 n/a 49 n/a

Of the aforementioned 6.5m tonnes of municipal waste generated, “49% was recycled and
the rest went to landfills” (Municipal Solid Waste, 2010).

Hong Kong’s Waste Issue


Hong Kong is facing a large issue with regards to its treatment of waste. As it doesn’t
incinerate, landfills are filling up, “with most expected to be at full capacity by 2015, according
to Friends of the Earth data” (Bryskine, 2010). Existing sites include those at “Tuen Mun,
Tseung Kwan O and Ta Kwu Ling” (Bryskine, 2010). The government is yet to decide whether
to build new ones, or create two new incinerators, which many may oppose due to the
pollution incinerators caused (MAHR, 2010).

Fortunately, Hong Kong has a recycling program, with as mentioned 49% of municipal waste
recycled. Introduced in 1993, the programs recycles “plastic, metal and paper” (Bryskine,
2010). Filled landfills are being closed up and repurposed for other uses, like for a driving
range (Municipal Solid Waste, 2010).

Bibliography
Waste Disposal. (n.d.). Retrieved January 1, 2011, from MMU:
http://www.ace.mmu.ac.uk/eae/sustainability/older/Waste_Disposal.html
Bryskine, S. (2010, October 30). Hong Kong Largest Garbage Producer in the World. Retrieved
January 1, 2011, from The Epoch Times:
http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/content/view/45099/
Municipal Solid Waste. (2010, September). Retrieved January 1, 2011, from GovHK:
http://www.gov.hk/en/residents/environment/waste/msw.htm
Municipal Waste Treatment. (2007). Retrieved January 1, 2011, from UN Stats:
http://unstats.un.org/unsd/environment/wastetreatment.htm
MAHR, K. (2010, October 26). Trash Talk: Hong Kongers Produce the Most Garbage in the World.
Retrieved January 1, 2011, from Time:

7
George Jones | Y12.2
Technology SL | Waste Investigation Research Project | Due 13th January 2011
http://ecocentric.blogs.time.com/2010/10/26/trash-talk-hong-kongers-produce-the-most-
garbage-in-the-world/#ixzz1Ak3PcZu1
Recycle - Reduce - Reuse . (n.d.). Retrieved January 1, 2011, from 42 Explore:
http://42explore.com/recycle.htm

Image Appendix
Figure 1 South_East_New_Territories_Landfill_2.jpg. (n.d.). Retrieved January 1, 2011,
from Wikimedia:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/29/
South_East_New_Territories_Landfill_2.jpg
Figure 2 incineration.jpg. (n.d.). Retrieved January 1, 2011, from Treehugger:
http://i.treehugger.com/files/th_images/incineration.jpg
Figure 3 e08.03.04.gif. (n.d.). Retrieved January 1, 2011, from EPD:
http://www.epd.gov.hk/epd/english/environmentinhk/waste/data/images/
e08.03.04.gif

Primary Research
The data collected for myself and family is attached at the end in appendix one. All
measurements are in grams, and the displayed values are a daily average taken from the
mean of the month’s recordings. That is multiplied to give an annual average. As different
families have different numbers of people, the values have been given two extra columns for
per capita values, whereby the family data is divided by the number of people in the family.
This thus makes it easier to compare households fairly, as well as with government statistics.

Me (George)
The following table displays the average sets of data for different methods of waste removal/
treatment, in terms of a daily and annual average, for both the family of four and a per capita
average.

Family (of 4) Per Capita


Waste Types avg. daily (g) avg. annual (g) avg. daily (g) avg. annual (g)
Waste for Landfill 174.15 63564.75 174.15 63,564.75

Composted 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00


Waste
Recycled Waste 507.60 185,274.00 126.90 46,318.50

Reused Waste 40.00 14,600.00 10.00 3650.00

Total Waste 1244.20 454,133.00 311.05 111,533.25

The table below shows the respective percentages calculated from the set of data in the
table above.

8
George Jones | Y12.2
Technology SL | Waste Investigation Research Project | Due 13th January 2011

% Landfill % Composted % Recycled % Reused

% 55.99 0.00 40.80 3.21

Sally (Li)
The following table displays the average sets of data for different methods of waste removal/
treatment, in terms of a daily and annual average, for both Sally’s family of six and a per
capita average.

Family (of 6) Per Capita


Waste Types avg. daily (g) avg. annual (g) avg. daily (g) avg. annual (g)
Waste for Landfill 593.00 216,445.00 148.25 63564.75

Composted 169.00 61,685.00 42.25 15,421.25


Waste
Recycled Waste 301.00 109,865.00 75.25 27,466.25

Reused Waste 161.00 58,765.00 40.25 14,691.25

Total Waste 1224.00 446,760.00 306.00 111,690.00

The table below shows the respective percentages calculated from the set of data in the
table above.

% Landfill % Composted % Recycled % Reused

% 48.45 13.81 24.59 13.15

Nathan
The following table displays the average sets of data for different methods of waste removal/
treatment, in terms of a daily and annual average, for both Nathan’s family of six and a per
capita average.

9
George Jones | Y12.2
Technology SL | Waste Investigation Research Project | Due 13th January 2011

Family (of 6) Per Capita


Waste Types avg. daily (g) avg. annual (g) avg. daily (g) avg. annual (g)
Waste for Landfill 1136.00 414,640.00 189.33 69,106..67

Composted 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00


Waste
Recycled Waste 1132.00 413,180.00 188.67 68,863.33

Reused Waste 400.58 146,211.70 66.76 24,368.62

Total Waste 2,668.58 974,031.70 444.76 162,339.62

The table below shows the respective percentages calculated from the set of data in the
table above.

% Landfill % Composted % Recycled % Reused

% 42.57 0 42.42 15.01

Eva
The following table displays the average sets of data for different methods of waste removal/
treatment, in terms of a daily and annual average, for both Eva’s family of four and a per
capita average.

Family (of 4) Per Capita


Waste Types avg. daily (g) avg. annual (g) avg. daily (g) avg. annual (g)
Waste for Landfill 81.00 29,565.00 20.25 7,391.25

Composted 462.00 168,630.00 115.50 42,157.50


Waste
Recycled Waste 645.00 235,425.00 161.25 58,856.25

Reused Waste 238.00 86,870.00 59.50 21,717.50

Total Waste 1244.20 454,133.00 311.05 111,533.25

10
George Jones | Y12.2
Technology SL | Waste Investigation Research Project | Due 13th January 2011
The table below shows the respective percentages calculated from the set of data in the
table above.

% Landfill % Composted % Recycled % Reused

% 5.68 32.40 45.23 16.69

Chiman
The following table displays the average sets of data for different methods of waste removal/
treatment, in terms of a daily and annual average, for both Chiman’s family of four and a per
capita average.

Family (of 4) Per Capita


Waste Types avg. daily (g) avg. annual (g) avg. daily (g) avg. annual (g)
Waste for Landfill 188.00 68,620.00 47.00 17,155.00

Composted 694.00 253,310.00 173.50 63,327.50


Waste
Recycled Waste 197.00 71,905.00 49.25 17,976.25

Reused Waste 58.38 21,308.7 14.60 5,327.18

Total Waste 1,137.38 415,143.70 284.35 103,785.93

The table below shows the respective percentages calculated from the set of data in the
table above.

% Landfill % Composted % Recycled % Reused

% 16.53 61.02 17.32 5.13

JoJo
The following table displays the average sets of data for different methods of waste removal/
treatment, in terms of a daily and annual average, for both JoJo’s family of four and a per
capita average.

11
George Jones | Y12.2
Technology SL | Waste Investigation Research Project | Due 13th January 2011

Family (of 4) Per Capita


Waste Types avg. daily (g) avg. annual (g) avg. daily (g) avg. annual (g)
Waste for Landfill 777.00 283,605.00 194.25 70,901.25

Composted 257.00 93,805.00 64.25 23,451.25


Waste
Recycled Waste 94.00 34,310.00 23.50 8,577.50

Reused Waste 7.00 2,555.00 1.75 638.75

Total Waste 1,135.00 414,275.00 283.75 103,568.75

The table below shows the respective percentages calculated from the set of data in the
table above.

% Landfill % Composted % Recycled % Reused

% 68.46 22.64 8.28 0.62

Data Analysis
Analysis of Data
Of the data collected, the essential can be composed into the following table can be
compiled - showing my family’s (or mine, per capita) distribution of waste against an average
of RCHK students (five plus myself, per capita) as well as Hong Kong’s average (per capita).

6.5m tonnes can’t be used in the form that it is. It is divided the estimated population of HK,
7 million, and multiplied by 1,000,000 to give it in the form of grams like every other set of
primary data.

12
George Jones | Y12.2
Technology SL | Waste Investigation Research Project | Due 13th January 2011

Me (per capita) RCHK (per HK Average (per


capita) capita)
Waste Types avg. daily avg. annual avg. daily avg. annual avg. daily (g) avg. annual
(g) (g) (g) (g) (g)

Waste for 174.15 63,564.75 578.60 211189.00 1399.22 47351.43


Landfill
Composted 0.00 0.00 263.67 96,239.33 0.00 0.00
Waste
Recycled 126.90 46,318.50 479.43 174,993.17 1246.58 455,000.00
Waste
Reused 10.00 3,650.00 150.83 55,051.73 0.00 0.00
Waste
Total Waste 311.05 113,533.25 1472.53 537,472.23 2544.03 928,571.43

This information can be transformed into the following chart (for daily averages, as annual
averages is identical, except only all figures have been multiplied for an average for 365 days
of the year).

Landfilled Composted Recycled Reused

Bar Graph comparing daily (avg) waste disposed (g) and proportionate allocation
3000

2250
mass in grams (g)

1500

750

0
Me (p.c.), daily avg. RCHK (p.c.), daily avg. HK avg. (p.c.), daily avg.
Source of waste

13
George Jones | Y12.2
Technology SL | Waste Investigation Research Project | Due 13th January 2011
The graph above shows a comparison of waste produced on a daily basis, on average. As
clearly shown, the Hong Kong average for produced municipal waste is significantly higher
than that of students and their families in RCHK and myself (all done per capita of course for
fair comparison). There is all a significant contribution to recycling, reuse and compost
amongst those in RCHK, though I have demonstrated no capacity of composting, while
Hong Kong on a public level, no reuse (due to nature of difficulty for data recording) or
composting. There is significant recycling however on a grand scale.

The graph does suggest that we in RCHK produce less waste on a daily basis and as such
create less of an impact on the environment - particularly Hong Kong’s landfills.

The table below compares all of the percentages against one another, myself (per capita),
RCHK students (per capita), and Hong Kong on average (per capita).

% Landfill % Composted % Recycled % Reused


My % 55.99 0.00 40.80 3.21

RCHK % 39.29 17.91 32.56 10.24

HK Average % 51.00 n/a 49.00 n/a

As mentioned, Hong Kong has no public composting system in place, and reuse data is hard
to discern, as identified in the ‘Secondary Research’ section. As such, the graph for HK’s
average below only shows recycling and landfill percentages.

% Landfill % Composted % Recycled % Reused

A Pie Chart to show how waste is treated - me, per capita

3%

41%
56%

14
George Jones | Y12.2
Technology SL | Waste Investigation Research Project | Due 13th January 2011
A Pie Chart to show how waste is treated - RCHK students, per capita

10%

39%
33%

18%

A Pie Chart to show how waste is treated - Hong Kong Average, per capita

49% 51%

These sets of percentages provide the basis for more accurate comparisons between all
groups given. As the table and pie charts show, there is a very balanced proportion for all
groups: myself, RCHK and HK. HK demonstrates nearly 1:1 landfill to recycling, though as
noticed no capacity for reuse or composting. I, on average, fell slightly short - 40.80%
recycled and 55.99% landfilled against Hong Kong’s 49% and 51% respectively. This would
suggest, that I and my family are not as green as we could be, and could do more recycling,
reusing or composting to reduce the overall landfilled percentage.

RCHK students as a whole are more diverse in waste treatment methods - with reuse taking
a significant portion, 10.24%, and compost even more so with 17.91%. While recycling
makes up only 32.56%, it does mean however, that as a whole, we are greener, with only

15
George Jones | Y12.2
Technology SL | Waste Investigation Research Project | Due 13th January 2011
39.29% being sent straight to the landfills, making us as a group on average, greener than
the average Hong Kong resident (myself and family included).

Conclusions
To sum up the analyses of the data collected from both primary and secondary sources,
Hong Kong has a progressively worsening situation with regards to waste disposal. Though
disposal into landfills has decreased over the past five or so years, many landfills will be full be
2015 and the government needs to create more to accommodate the influx of waste.
Recycling has been a mainstay of Hong Kong - its people in general, since a program was
introduced in 1998. The Hong Kong average is 49% recycled, while my family and I fall short
with 40.80%, implying that we aren’t as ‘green’ as we could be. RCHK students (from DP
Tech class) on average are much ‘greener’ than typical HK residents, with only 39.29% going
to the landfills, with the rest recycled, reused and composted (32.56%, 10.24% and 17.91%
respectively). Furthermore, compared with the average HK resident, we contribute much less
waste, especially to landfills - I, per capita, with 174.15g; RCHK average, per capita,
578.60g; compared with 1399.22g of HK residents. As such, it can be said that we in RCHK
- our families and ourselves, based upon the findings of the investigation data - are ‘greener’
families on average for contributing less to landfills in both percentage and overall average
figures.

Much of the landfill-destined waste is compostable and as such a composting facility is a


necessary introduction, so as to reduce the landfill waste even further, and potentially turn
that composted material into useful matter, say for farming - selling it to farmers in China and
Hong Kong for example, being one possibility (how feasible it would be is questionable).

Research Evaluation
As a whole, this was an awkward research investigation to carry out, and though I did very well in my
opinion to be as accurate as possible - using kitchen scales to weight all waste material - I did not do
as well as I’d have hoped for in terms of accuracy, consistency.

Firstly, I was in the UK for a significant portion of December, and so had to carry the data recording
into January while also having to do only twenty-five days rather than the required thirty-one. Worse
though, I didn’t compost at all (had no facility to) and I had dilemma in trying to to create a ‘reused’
figure set. We only reuse paper, having a box full of it. I recorded the mass of it each day but it
amounted to 1000g every time, so I divided by the total days (25) to get an average of 40g per day,
which is what I stuck with. It isn’t particularly representative or accurate, and is a major flaw. For the
next investigative process, I will need to ensure that data is fully recorded within the timeframe, and as
accurately done as possible - this a key improvement needed performance-wise.

16
George Jones | Y12.2
Technology SL | Waste Investigation Research Project | Due 13th January 2011

Appendix One:
Data Tables

17

You might also like