PART ONE 1.0 ISSUE & PROBLEM Thesis Statement 2.0 BOUNDARIES AND INTERFACES IN URBAN PLANNING 3.0 FOOD WASTE MANAGEMENT IN SINGAPORE Unsustainable Means of Food Waste Management in Singapore Potential Reuse for Food Waste : Homogenous Food Waste, Spent Coffee Grounds, Oyster Shell
CONTENTS
PART TWO 4.0 DESIGN INTENT Interface as a catalyst for an Alternative CBD model Collective Food Waste as a Social Infrastructure: Empowering Civic Entrepreneurship Financial Feasibility 5.0 FINAL DESIGN
part one.
background and issue
Tapping on food waste as a common resource, the thesis aims to explore how food waste
can be contributed along interfaces between districts to create new collaboration opportunities for civic entrepreneurs. Faced with land scarcity, the rise in food waste is identified as a threat to Singapore’s sustainability where the current rate of disposal exceeds Singapore’s capability to receive and treat waste. Hence, there is a need to push the boundary for more sustainable food waste management. This could be in the form of upcycling food waste into 3D printing filament, fertiliser for food production, bioenergy and carbon capture, thus creating new shared opportunities for local start-ups.
Singapore's urban policies is effected according roads often overlap with the planning boundato the planning zones set out in the master plan.
ries. As a result, urban highways become the de-
(Yuen, 1998) As such, the interfaces between marcation line between districts, disrupting the districts are often neglected and end up segre- networks within our society. However, interfacgating the urban fabric. In addition, our trans- es between districts, at the junction of diverse portation network is drawn in accordance to the resources and communities, should be explored masterplan, where urban highways and major as prime opportunities for collaboration.
Borders and Interfaces in Urban Planning
Modern Singapore is a manifestation of ‘deliberate urbanisation’, where the government
is the key driver of our urban development, shaping it according to their conception of economic, political and social wellbeing. (Yuen, 1998) Consequently, the government oversees and enforces the nation’s planned development through various tools: land use planning, development control and master planning.
Urban planning in Singapore operates to demarcate borders within the nation, between
land parcels, neighborhoods and districts. (Chew, 2016) However, much of the urban planning efforts and decisions in Singapore is constrained to within the demarcated zones, where development control is effected according to planning zones set out in the master plan. (Yuen, 1998)
neglected interfaces
Hence, our urban planning strategies neglects the interfaces between districts and as a result, they become barriers that separate the urban fabric.
While a country establishes a national boundary to demarcate its territory, urban plan-
ning demarcates boundaries on a sub-national scale. (Chew, 2016) It is with this similarity that strategies in treating borders in urban planning is understood to interfere with inclusion and exclusion in space. (Chew, 2016)
According to Van Houtum, borders in anthropology represents lines of geographical
divide (Van Houtum &Van Naerssen, 2002) and define the structure of urban space. (Breitung, 2011) Acting as zones of contact between different contexts and resources (Iossifova, 2013), contemporary scholars suggest that borders could cause discontinuities and disruption in flows and networks in society. (Breitung, 2011) In addition, they are social construct, serving to introduce order and demarcate ownership of spaces. (van Houtum & van Naerssen, 2002) Hence, borders have substantial potential to bridge resources, allowing new opportunities for collaboration across different communities.
As such, the interfaces between our districts should not be neglected. In particular, a
clear separation in urban fabric can often be observed between the city centre of Singapore with surrounding heartlands. Critique to be a landscape of ‘hyper-consumerism, centred on extravagant commodity displays and seductive urban spectacles’ in order to attract the flow of rich capital (Forrest, Koh & Wissink, 2017), our city centre ends up seemingly little in relevance to the way of life and urban reality of most citizens. (Yuen, Soh, 2011) Local scholars concludes that spaces of ‘spectacular consumption’ such as Marina Bay construct both physical and social divide between our city centre and local heartland. (Soh, Yuen, 2011) Such characteristics within our city centre appear to be unsustainable, causing fragmentation across our urban fabric and disrupting the sense of identity and belonging among the society. Can we then tap on the interfaces between the city centre and heartland as an opportunity to weave our urban fabric, activating it as a catalyst for collaborative production?
Introduction to Food Waste in Singapore
Food waste is a global problem which comes with tremendous social, economic and
environmental implications. It reveals inefficiency and resource misallocation in the global food network. Food waste is defined as food discarded at the last stages of the supply network when it is meant for retail and consumption. Faced with land scarcity, the rise in food waste is identified as a threat to Singapore’s sustainability.
In Singapore, food waste accounts to be one of most significant waste streams in which
763 million kg of food waste was generated in 2018. The amount of food waste generated in Singapore has increased by 30% over the last 10 years and is projected to increase due to our continuous population growth and economic development. (MEWR, 2019)
food waste
Unsustainable Methods of Food Waste Management in Singapore
Singapore would require a new landfill every 35 years and a new waste-to-energy plant every 7 years. (NEA, 2015)
Our current methods of food waste management drains our scarce resources while
imposing high economic and environmental costs. Recycling rate for food waste is low at 17% currently and limited to two companies processing homogenous food waste into animal feed along with a few small scale firms dealing with on-site composting. (Huang, 2018) Incineration remains our main mean for disposal since 1999, despite being expensive, land and energy-intensive and a major contributor to greenhouse gas emission. (NEA, 2019)
In addition, at the current rate of waste disposal, it is estimated that Singapore would
require a new landfill every 35 years and a new waste-to-energy plant every 7 years. (NEA, 2015) In land scarce Singapore, this depletes our resources and poses to be an unsustainable long-term solution to our burgeoning consumption lifestyle. Hence, food waste is a critical issue in Singapore in which recycling and upcycling of food waste serves as a low cost alternative to disposal. (NEA, 2015) There is a need to depart from linear ‘take-make-waste’ models and embrace a new circular model, one which recovers resources at the end of its life-line and create new production opportunities in order to reduce the resource strain on our city. (Daubach, 2018)
Potential Reuse for Food Waste: Homogenous Food Waste
In metabolism of the city, Lehmann argues that sustainable urban development is akin to
natural ecosystems: it requires a vision of applying waste from one process into inputs for other processes. (Lehmann, 201) The following section will analyse the potential of reusing food waste as opportunities in various industries.
The common approach to treating homogenous food waste in Singapore is converting
them into renewable energy production through anaerobic digestion. Anaerobic digestion is the process of using different micro-organisms to break down food waste to produce bio-gas. The process consist of four main reactions a) Hydrolysis, b) acidogenesis c) acetogenesis and d) methanogenesis. (Morales-Polo, Soria & Cledera-Castro, 2018) At the moment, National Environmental
REUSING FOOD WASTE
Agency (NEA) is currently testing out the anaerobic digestion of food waste with water sludge for biogas energy production in Singapore. Anaerobic digestion of food waste is already implemented for testing in two local hawker centres. (Collymore, 2019)
“Nothing is waste until it’s wasted.” Minister for the Environment and Water
Fig 5: Work flow of Anaerobic digestor according to NEA (NEA, 2019)
Potential Reuse for Food Waste : Spent Coffee Grounds
However, existing upcycling strategies in Singapore treat food waste homogenously which
ends up limiting the scope of their reuse potential. Identifying and separating specific contributors from homogenous food waste would allow us to tap on their respective potential.
Coffee is the world’s second most valuable traded commodity, right after petroleum.
(Blinová, Sirotiak, Bartošová & Soldán, 2017) As we face rapid urbanisation, the global coffee con
Hence, the novelty of the research lies in identifying new opportunities and technology
sumption has also increased rapidly by 91% from 4.2 million tonnes in 1970 to 8.1 million tonnes
that maximise the reuse potential of specific major contributors to food wastes, such as spent
in 2010. (ICO, 2011) Today, Coffee consumption is part and parcel of the lifestyles of many, where
coffee grounds and oyster shells. This aims to bridge the gap in existing food waste upcycling
nearly 2.5 billion cups of coffee are consumed each day globally. In Singapore itself, we have con-
strategies in Singapore.
sumed 5.7 million kg of coffee in 2018. (Hirschmann, 2019) However, our burgeoning coffee consumption has led to vast amount of waste produced as well as significant environmental impact. Spent coffee grounds(SCG) are the waste product from brewing coffee, streaming from both soluble coffee industry as well as food outlets and individual home consumption. (Blinová, Sirotiak, Bartošová & Soldán, 2017) As single-use products, the total waste generated from the coffee disposal is almost equal to all imports and sale. About 0.91 g of the spent coffee grounds are produced per 1 g of ground coffee, and about two kilograms of wet spent coffee grounds for every kilogram of instant coffee made (Cruz, 2014) As such, current waste disposal practices of disposing spent coffee grounds to landfills take up significant amount of land space and release millions of tons of methane emission. (Bio-bean, 2009)
There are many opportunities for potential reuse of spent coffee grounds. This include
biodiesel production, 3D printing filament, carbon capture and algae farming. Firstly, spent coffee ground is an oil-containing waste material and fuel source. (Blinová, Sirotiak, Bartošová & Soldán, 2017) Oil can be extracted to form biodiesel by undergoing transesterification. Coffee-powered biodiesel could be used to power our everyday lifestyle and it has already been used as a fuel in trials on London buses. (Bio-bean, 2019) At a global scale, this could add approximately 340 million gallons of biodiesel to the world’s fuel supply, produced from a year’s supply of coffee waste. (-, 2019) For Singapore itself, a year worth of coffee waste would translate into 2million litres of fuel which is enough to power 70 buses for an entire year.
Secondly, SCG have already been used to create 3D printing filament in the market cur-
Oyster shells have high potential for reuse due to their high concentration of calcium
rently. For example, produced by manufacturer 3Dom, Wound Up is created by SCG mixed with
carbonate which ranges from 80-95 percent. (Alvarenga, Galindro, Helpa & Soares, 2012). Hence,
PLA. Research by Polytechnic of Milan have also discovered the potential of coffee waste mixed
one prominent reuse opportunity for oyster shell is in the construction industry.
with clay based material for 3D printing. (Canavarro, Rangel, & Alves, 2016) Hence, existing technology to support the production of SCG into 3D printing filament is already on the market.
Moving on, according to the institute of Physics’ Nanotechnology, spent coffee grounds could be
substitute for aggregates in building materials such as limestone and sand. (Morris, Backeljau &
heated with potassium hydroxide to form a material to store methane and carbon dioxide. The
Chapelle, 2018) The idea of shell waste in construction is by no means a new one: historical ex-
process is found to be fast and cheap, compared to other carbon capture and storage methods.
amples of shell use include ‘Tabby’ – bricks made of grinded oyster shell for construction of walls.
(Kemp, Baek, Lee, Meyyappan & Kim, 2015)
(Sickels‐taves, 2016).
Lastly, SCG are a rich source of fertiliser for promoting growth as it contains nutrients in
Oyster shell can be used as an alternative material in building construction, acting as a
According to a research by Federal University of Santa Caterina (UFSC), shell waste could
8:1 carbon to nitrogen ratio. Research has discovered that SCG when dried, could help to facil-
be grinded to replace aggregates in the manufacture of concrete blocks and blocks for paving.
itate growth in algae. Algae requires inorganic nutrients such as nitrogen and phosphorus, in
The resulting building material is viable in terms of strength and water absorption, meeting the
addition to water and carbon dioxide for growth. Hence, dry coffee ground has been found to
material standards for concrete. (Silva, Mesquita-Guimarães, Henriques, Silva & Fredel, 2019)
increase photosynthesis rate and growth of algae in place of nitrogen and phosphorus as a 50:50
As a source of calcium oxide, shell waste will replace limestone in building material and reduce
fertilizer ratio. (Miller, Murphy, McCary, Mcintire, Scarlett, 2016)
the use of cement. (Erni, Gagoek & Purwanto, 2016) Another study in 2004 concluded that shell waste can be crushed into small particles and mixed as a mortar. The results found that it was a
Potential Reuse for Food Waste : Shell Waste from Aquaculture
suitable substitute to conventional mortar sands with regards to compressive strength. (Morris, Backeljau & Chapelle, 2018) Hence, shell waste has high reuse value for the construction indus-
Shell waste is one of the major contributor to unavoidable food waste. Mollusks is
try.
a type of shellfish and includes clams, mussels, oysters and scallops. At a global scale, 438 billion tons of oysters were produced in 2016, resulting in a large amount of shell waste.
(Silva, Mesquita-Guimarães, Henriques, Silva & Fredel, 2019) According to the USDA Foreign
waste present to be an untapped opportunity in Singapore as an input for further production.
Agricultural Service, 340 million tonne of mollusks were imported to Singapore in 2016, of
Consumed across all scales at home, in food chains and industries, the waste serves as a poten-
which 249 million tonnes were oysters. (USDA, 2017) For every dozen or 1kg of oysters con-
tial resource for the different stakeholders to come together to collectively contribute towards
sumer, the post-consumption shell waste generated is between 370g and 700g. (Alvarenga,
an upcycling system. Fundamentally, collective upcycling of food waste serves as an alternative
Galindro, Helpa & Soares, 2012). The significant quantity of oyster shell waste indicate the
and sustainable mean of waste disposal in Singapore. From a broader perspective, it can also be
need for proper disposal and to assess their potential for reuse. (Silva, Mesquita-Guimarães,
explored as opportunity for collaborative production in creating new economic, environmental
Henriques, Silva & Fredel, 2019)
and societal opportunities.
With the existing technology and innovation in place, spent coffee grounds and shell
part two.
design intent
The topic of urban edges and food waste are not new areas of research. However, the
thesis identifies a fresh perspective of bridging these areas of research – by identifying food waste as a common resource to create new collaborative opportunities for civic entrepreneurs along the urban edge .
Interface as a Catalyst For an alternative CBD model
Aside for food consumption and waste concentration, city centres have a high concentra-
tion of economic activities and human flow, bearing access to varying communities and resources from diverse industries. Hence, the Central Business District (CBD) is identified as a prime location for a new food waste collective system due to its potential for cross-sector and stakeholder collaboration.
Located in between the existing CBD and future greater southern waterfront develop-
ment, the Keppel viaduct is identified as a major boundary in the existing landscape. It segregates the existing urban fabric and disrupts the networks across the two sites. In addition, the Keppel Viaduct is at the intersection of many communities aside from the CBD - Outram, Bukit Merah and Tiong Bahru. The strategic location of the site enables access to diverse resources in its proximity such as HDB estates, institutions, hospitals and offices. Hence, the viaduct serves as a key Fig 7: Site Selection, Keppel Viaduct as interface between communities, CBD and future develop-
interface to allow for collaboration to happen across the different stakeholders.
ment
The thesis proposes to spatialize the Keppel Viaduct as a landscape of collaboration to
generate new shared opportunities for local startups from food waste – i.e. carbon capture, community 3d printing, algae farming, bio-energy and building materials. Leveraging on the reuse opportunities of food waste, the interface is then capitalized as a catalyst for an alternative CBD model in the Greater Southern Waterfront – one that empowers civic entrepreneurship.
empowering civic entrepreneurship
Prototyping and Ideation
In addition to converting food waste to bioenergy through anaerobic digestors, carbon
captured from spent coffee ground can also be converted into energy to power the shared programs along the viaduct. This allows civic entrepreneurs to have sustainable and open access to shared programs such as business incubators, community 3d printers and workshops. 3D printing filament would be generated from both spent coffee grounds and algae farming in the interface through the proposed system and fed into the community 3D printers in the city centre. Local start-ups could easily experiment and prototype with the community 3D printer. Idea generation and experimentations are no longer restricted by distance in the production line due to traditional manufacturing hubs that are located far from the city centres. With its close proximity to different expertise and knowledge, the keppel viaduct allows for an exchange of ideas and feedbacks between existing and new businesses. Local start-ups can then tap on these programs to prototype and experiment with new ideas.
Moving on, in order to meet changing spatial needs and user groups, brick produced from
shell waste through the system would be used as infill material in the CBD, allowing for flexible configurations of fabrication and business incubators.
Food Production and Experimentation
Agricultural activities are commonly located out of the city centre, where only 5-10% of
food today is grown in cities. (Ludher, tan, 2016) However, farming in cities centres could offer access to unique resources as city centres attract entrepreneurs and talents. The congregation of ideas and knowledge allow cities centres to be hotbeds for creation along with innovation in food type and techniques. (Ludher, tan, 2016) This includes opportunties for existing businesses and Fig 8 : Proposed Collective Food Waste System
new start-ups to have close collaboration in their operations through shared kitchens and experimental food labs. They serve as common platforms where an exchange of skills could occur.
The produce from farming within the city centre can also be used by emerging F&B start-
ups as low-cost resources and for experiment in new food innovation. Spent coffee ground would be processed as fertilisers for algae farming. Aside from being a food source for direct consumption, algae farming is also feed source for shrimps, unlocking further opportunities for aquaponics farming in the city. (Hartman, Jeršin, Guček & Žnidaršič, 2015)
financial
feasibility
“By 2030, Singapore wants to send about one-third, or 30 per cent, less waste to offshore
Semakau landfill.” Amy Khor, Senior Minister of State for the Environment and Water Resource (Tan, 2019)
Moving on, I will investigate how the project will be financially feasible for both corporate
firms and the government.
To begin with, the analysis will be carried out by breaking down the existing investment
in waste management in Singapore. To date, the government has invested S$45 million in the Closing the Waste Loop initiative. These funds could easily be channelled into the new proposed system as the system fits the goals of the fund initiative – to build Singapore’s ability in recovering value from waste.
In addition, the proposed system serves as an alternative to money which would be spent
on creating landfills and incinerators to cater to food waste disposal in Singapore. According to Singapore Environmental Council (SEC) the amount of unconsumed food thrown away by households accounts to S$342 million (Lin, 2019) and food waste management is estimated to cost $2.54 billion worth of food annually. (Tan, 2019) This is existing financial cost that could potentially be translated into a new economy.
Due to the new policies that have been carried out by the government, corporate firms
now have incentive to collaborate and contribute to the proposed system. From 2021, new properties that are expected to produce large amount of food waste have to set aside space for food-waste treatment from 2024. In addition, sizeable food waste generators have to treat their food waste on and off-site from 2024. (Feng, 2016) Hence, the new proposed system would serve as an attractive low cost off-site food waste treatment for corporate firms, providing them with long-term economic incentive to invest capital and expertise in.
KEY CONCEPT & DESIGN TOOLKIT
design key concept
PLUG IN FOR FOOD WASTE INFRASTRUCTURE
PROGRAMS BREAKDOWN
programs requirement