Design for sustainability: turning waste into profit

Design for
sustainability:
Turning waste into profit
Donotwasteyourcash,cashyourwaste!
CO-PRODUCT
WASTE
Samuel Bautista Lazo
sabala@liv.ac.uk
Supervisors: Dr. Tim Short and Prof. KKB
Hon.
Manufacturing and Laser Engineering
SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING
SECOND YEAR PRESENTATION

 1. Ph.D., Strategic Planning
 2. Literature Review
 3. Contributions to the body of knowledge
 4. Plans for Methodology Validation through
industry case studies.
Presentation Layout

 Vision:
 To finish my Ph.D., project in 36 months producing a
thesis that requires no significant corrections and
passing the viva with no significant headaches.
Ph.D., Strategic Planning

 Mission:
 To develop and validate new academic
knowledge and a methodology that contributes
to the body of knowledge for sustainable
manufacturing; producing a doctoral thesis
within a three year time frame.

 Objectives:
 Read and gain a deep understanding of the
literature in the area of sustainable
engineering during the first year.
 Develop the theory and methodology by the
end of the second year.
 Test and validate the theory and methodology
during the third year.

 Ph.D., Goals.
 Have at least one Journal paper accepted for
publication before my viva.
 Submit thesis no later than 01 September 2011
 Pass viva with no significant corrections
 Submit corrections before October 2011

Ph.D., Strategic Planning: SWOT ANALYSIS of
the Project.
HELPFUL HARMFUL
INTERNALORIGIN
STRENGTHS
Original approach suggesting the use of
existing company’s resources to transform
waste into value adding products.
Original approach from a product
designer’s perspective.
Marketable ideas keen to be adopted by
industry.
Creative tools and methodology to analyze
and transform industrial waste.
WEAKNESSES
Lack of contact with industry
One year left to validate the
methodology through case studies
EXTERNALORIGIN
OPPORTUNITIES
Opportunity to get industry contact and test
ideas in conjunction with the recycling and
waste team from Envirolink Northwest.
http://www.envirolinknorthwest.co.uk/Envi
rolink/Remade-sig.nsf?OpenDatabase
THREATS
the timing to conclude industrial
cases is crucial to finish writing
the thesis on time.

Ph.D., Strategic Planning: Gantt Chart
Aug-09 Sep-09 Oct-09 Nov-09 Dec-09 Jan-10 Feb-10 Mar-10 Apr-10 May-10 Jun-10 Jul-10 Aug-10 Sep-10 Oct-10 Nov-10 Dec-10 Jan-11 Feb-11 Mar-11 Apr-11 May-11 Jun-11 Jul-11 Aug-11 Sep-11 Oct-11
THEORETICAL
Literature review
Develop theory
Integrate theory
PLAN
Design Experiments
Validate experiements
Contact companies
DO
Approach companies
Gather Inf, Data.
Execute experiemts
CHECK
Review results
ACT
Corrective measures
Generate report
Review theory
Improve theory
Write thesis
Submit Thesis
Prepare for Viva
Viva
Make & Submit corrections

 Sustainability
 The waste challenge
 Theory of waste in industry
 Existing solutions
 The need to turn waste into profit
Literature Review

 Sustainable development: is development that meets
the needs of the present without compromising the
ability of future generations to meet their own needs
[1].
 The simple definition of sustainability is improving
the quality of human life while living within the
carrying capacity of supporting eco-systems [2].
Literature Review: Sustainability

 In enterprise environments the term Triple Bottom
Line (TBL) is used as a framework for measuring and
reporting corporate performance against economic,
social and environmental parameters of sustainability
[3].
Literature Review: Sustainability

 Waste generation creates
environmental concerns
about resource depletion
and ecosystem
degradation, economical
issues of resource
productivity, and social
concerns about landfills
and toxic wastes.
Literature Review: The waste challenge
Figure. 1. Estimated waste arising by sector in
the United Kingdom: 2004 [4]

Figure. 2. Remaining Landfill capacity by region showing type of site and life expectancy at
the end of 2007. [5]
At the end of 2007:
• 18 per cent of capacity was
in inert sites.
•72 per cent of capacity was
found in non hazardous
sites.
•three per cent of capacity
was found in hazardous
merchant sites.
•seven per cent of capacity
was found in restricted user
sites (non hazardous and
hazardous)

 Previous research in the
field has shown that the
early stages of a
product’s life cycle have
the most environmental
impact whilst adding the
least economic value,
therefore the need for
resource efficiency and
circular economies [6]
Figure 3. Accumulation of economic value and
environmental impact along the supply chain [6]

 The material purchase
cost of wasted
materials is the most
important
environmental cost
factor for manufacturing
companies, accounting
for 40–70% of total
environmental costs,
depending on the value
of raw materials and the
labour intensity of the
sector
Figure 4. Material and money flows in a paint shop. [7]

 In 1988 Taiichi Ohno defined the following equation:
Present capacity = Work + Waste
Based on this observations Ohno defined the seven types of waste:
[8]
 Overproduction
 Waste of time on hand (waiting)
 Waste in transportation
 Waste of processing itself
 Waste of stock on hand (inventory)
 Waste of movement
 Waste of making defective products
Literature Review: Theory of waste in
industry

 Ohno‟s concepts were further developed by
academics to create the„lean thinking‟ philosophy
to reduce waste in industry. Womack and Jones
[9] rewrote the equation as:
Process output = Value + Muda type I + Muda
type II
 Value: Work which creates value as perceived by the
customer.
 Muda type I: Work which creates no value but is currently
required by the process in order to function so cannot be
eliminated just jet.
 Muda type II: Work which creates no value as perceived by
the customer and so can be eliminated immediately.
Literature Review: Theory of waste in industry

Literature Review: Theory of waste in industry
In the field of Material Flow Cost Accounting, Jasch
defines the following equation [x]:
Outputs = product output + non product output
PO = Products + By-products + packaging
Figure 4. Material and money flows in a paint shop. [7]

 Industrial Symbiosis.
 it “engages traditionally separate industries in a
collective approach to competitive advantage
involving physical exchange of materials, energy,
water, and or by-products” [10]
 NISP outputs in the UK for the year 2005/2006
attribute cost savings to business for (£) 31,
585,723 and 393,670 tons of materials diverted
from landfills, for the complete report including
persistence estimations and environmental benefits
see [11]
Literature Review: Existing solutions

 The project Transformation of waste into products
culminated in 2006 with the publication of the
paper: “A novel assessment tool for reusability of
wastes” [12].
 The methodology used relies on brain storming
sessions to generate ideas for the reusability of
wastes

Integrated waste management From triangles to cycles proposed by Cossu [13]
Figure 5. Graphical representation of the
waste management hierarchy as adopted
in the European Union [13]
Figure 6. Material and energy cycle, from production to waste
management [13]

In spite of national industrial symbiosis efforts the
reported quantity of materials diverted from landfills is
small (393,670 tons) compared with the annual waste
generation in industry of 43.5 Million tons.
Abhishek et al. Calculated adjustments for persistence
(the time scale over which the benefits of a project are
expected to last) the total diversion accounts for only
1.36 million tones [14].
Literature Review: The gap in the literature and
the need for solutions.

 Research in policy making has shown the
potential benefits to change the discourse from
waste prevention to material efficiency [15]
 New methodologies should be market driven and
not based on government stimulation.
 The current economic situation is forcing
governments to cut spending threatening current
programs that support business reduce waste in
industry.

Industrial symbiosis doesn‟t emphasize the
potential to upgrade waste and generate profit
from it, it‟s focus is to reduce operating costs.
Certain manufacturing processes can not achieve
near zero waste targets, e.g. When Trims, cut
and cut offs are inherent to the process, therefore
the upgrading of wastes is needed.

Contribution to the body of knowledge: A proposed
definition for waste
Previous research in the field of waste management has provided a
new definition and taxonomy of waste based upon an object
oriented modelling language that describes objects by defining the
four universal properties or attributes that objects can have:
Purpose, Structure, State and Performance (PSSP) [16]. Describing
the nature of waste and explaining why things become waste
provides a base ground for waste management theory [17].
Further synthesis of the concepts explains the existence of two
major classes of waste:
Physical waste: change in an artefact’s state or structure that
prevents obtaining a desired purpose and performance.
Non physical waste: an activity’s purpose or performance that does
not provide a desired state and structure in an artefact.

Contribution to the body of knowledge
Figure 7. Analysis of a company’s outputs

ProductWaste
L
o
s
s
SALEABLE (PO)
(NPO)
+
UNSALABLE (PO)
P
r
o
f
i
t
Figure 8. Product output and non product output quadrants.

Figure 9. Cumulative profitability “Whale Curve”
source: [18]
Figure 10. Kano Diagram. Source: Berger et
al. [19]

Maximizers
Enablers
Satisficers
Product QWaste Q
- £
£
Figure 11. Product Output analysis
Maximizers are exciting
products that add exponential
levels of profit with a minimum
amount of product output, a
lack of maximizers will not
harm the competitiveness of
the product mix.
Satisficers are desired products
that have linear contributions
of profit in relation to product
output and product mix
strength.
Enablers are expected
products that have a minimal
impact on profit but a lack of
them will severely weaken the
strength of the product mix.

Critical
Leader
Strategic
Product QWaste Q
- £
£
Fig. 12 Loss in product output
The turkey in a supermarket is a
Strategic and fixed loss which aims
to attract customers. Free Gillette
razors are Loss Leader outputs
that vary proportionally to the
Quantity being produced and sold.
Critical loss outputs have high
margins of loss per unit of product
as in the case of the Xbox video
game that is trying to enter the
highly profitable video game
market.

 Unavoidable: Inherent to
the process at a fixed
cost.
 Inefficiency: Variable and
proportional to the waste
output.
 Error Caused by accident
or error low frequency but
high margin loss.
Product QWaste Q
- £
£
Unavoidable
Error
Inefficiency
Figure 13. Losses in the non product output quadrant

 Compliance: Transforming a
waste into a low margin co-
product without adding any
significant value to the customer.
 Upgrader: Transforming waste
into a value adding co-product that
increases profits.
 Alchemy: Transmute waste into a
highly profitable co-product.
Product QWaste Q
- £
£
Alchemy
Compliance
Upgrader
Figure 14. Turning waste into profit

 ATM OF WASTE (Analyze-Transform-Market):
A tool for concept product design based on
waste.
A
T
M
IMPROVEMENT
INVEST?
Figure 15. The ATM wheel

ANALYZE.
Identify the waste generated in each step of the process
and visually represent it on a waste map parallel to the
value adding process map.
It is crucial to identify the critical waste, using the Pareto
principle (80/20 rule) we could determine which type of
waste affects profit the most.
Characterize and measure the wastes to create a waste
inventory.
A
T
M
IMPROVEMENT
INVEST?

 TRANSFORM
 Design a product concept that could be manufactured using
wasted capabilities and other wasted resources in the system.
 Identify the value adding possibilities that the wasted resources
in the system could add.
 What function can the waste provide given its characteristics?
 What value can it add to the customer?
 Is there a market need for the function?
 What are the customer requirements, needs and expectations?
 What are the manufacturing requirements?
 Can we produce it?
A
T
M
IMPROVEMENT
INVEST?

 MARKET
 Who will buy the product?
 How much potential profit could this
product generate?
 Answering each of the questions will
determine whether the product concept
can move forward. This cycle could be
iterated for improvement and to optimize
the transformation of the overall waste
into profit
A
T
M
IMPROVEMENT
INVEST?

Reincorporate
Store
Extract
Replace
Perform
Incorporate
Purpose
Structure
State
Performance
Figure 16. The inspiring wheel for potential uses of waste

 Take advantage of Waste properties when
they are more functional than conventional
products.
 Activated oyster shell produced by pyrolysis
at 750º C exhibits promising performance as
a suitable substance for phosphorus removal
[20].

Methodology validation through
industry case studies
 First Choice - skip hire.
 Large quantities of construction and demolition soil
have the potential to be upgraded into top soil for
agricultural use.

REFERENCES:
1. Beeton, I.M., The book of household management. 1863, S. O. Beeton: London.
2. Hawken, P., L.H. Lovins, and A.B. Lovins, Natural capitalism : the next industrial revolution. 1999, London: Earthscan
396.
3. Ohno, T., Toyota Production System - Beyond Large Scale Production. 1988, Portland, Oregon: Productivity Press.
4. Womack, J. and D. Jones, eds. Lean Thinking: Banish waste and create wealth in your corporation. 2003 ed. 2003, Simon & Schuster UK Ltd: Bath, UK. 396.
5. Bicheno, J., The lean toolbox: A quick and dirty guide for cost, quality, delivery, design and management. 1998, Buckingham, England: PICSIE Books. 166.
6. systems2win. Muda - The 7 Types of Muda %U http://www.systems2win.com/lk/lean/7wastes.htm. [cited 2009 14th December].
7. Friend, G., EcoMetrics: Integrating direct and indirect environmental costs and benefits into management information systems. Environmental Quality Management, 1998. 7(3): p. 19-
30.
8. Schmidtbleek, F., Toward Universal Ecology Disturbance Measures : Basis and Outline of a Universal Measure. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, 1993. 18(3): p. 456-462.
9. Ritthoff, M., H. Rohn, and C. Liedtke, Calculationg MIPS: Reseource productivity of products and services. 2002: Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment and Energy at the
Science Centre North Rhine-Westphalia.
10. Brundtland, H., et al., Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future. 1987, UNITED NATIONS: Oslow, Norway.
11. Pohjola, V., Formalizing Waste Management. 2006. p. 47-82.
12. Pongrácz, E., Re-Defining the Concepts of Waste and Waste Management: Evolving the Theory of waste managemet. 2002, University of Oulu: Oulu, Finland.
13. Jasch, C., Environmental and Material Flow Cost Accounting - Principles and Procedures. Eco-Efficiency in Industry and Science, ed. A. Tukker. Vol. 25. 2009, Delft, The
Netherlands: Springer Netherlands.
14. Hess, J.D. and E. Gerstner, Loss Leader Pricing and Rain Check Policy. Marketing Science, 1987. 6(4): p. 358-374.
15. DeGraba, P., The loss leader is a turkey: Targeted discounts from multi-product competitors. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 2006. 24(3): p. 613-628.
16. Overfelt, M., GILLETTE. FSB: Fortune Small Business, 2003. 13(3): p. 44.
17. Investopedia. Loss leader strategy. 2010 [cited 2010 January 15]; Available from: http://www.investopedia.com/terms/l/lossleader.asp.
18. BusinessWeek. Microsoft's red ink game. 2005 [cited 2010 January 15]; Available from: http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/nov2005/tc20051122_410710.htm.
19. Erkman, S., Industrial ecology: An historical view. Journal of Cleaner Production, 1997. 5(1-2): p. 1-10.
20. Chertow, M.R., Industrial symbiosys: Literature and taxonomy, in Annual Review of Energy and Environment. 2000. p. 313-337.
21. Jacobsen, N.B., Industrial Symbiosis in Kalundborg, Denmark: A Quantitative Assessment of Economic and Environmental Aspects. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 2006. 10(1-2): p.
239-255.
22. Laybourn, P., NISP: Origins and Overview, in Industrial Symbiosis in action: Report on the Third International Symbiosis Research Symposium, J. Coppock, R. Lombardi, and P.
Laybourn, Editors. 2007, Yale University: New Haven, Connecticut. USA. p. 13-18.
23. Agarwal, A. and P. Strachan, NISP: Towards Developing a New and Integrative Methodology to Evaluate Industrial Symbiosis Networks, in Industrial Symbiosis in Action: Report on
the Third International Industrial Symbiosis Research Symposium, J. Coppock, R. Lombardi, and P. Laybourn, Editors. 2007, Yale University: New Haven, Connecticut. USA. p. 21-24.
24. Gadiesh, O. and J.L. Gilbert, How to map your industry's profit pool. Harvard business review, 1998. 76(3): p. 149-162.
25. Gadiesh, O. and J.L. Gilbert, Profit pools: a fresh look at strategy. Harvard business review, 1998. 76(3): p. 139-147.
26. Doyle, P. and P. Stern, Marketing management and strategy. 4th ed. 2006, Harlow, England: Pearson Education. 446.
27. Porter, M.E., Competitive strategy: techniques for analyzing industries and competitors. 2nd ed. 1980, New York, NY. USA: The free press. 396.
28. South, J.B. and J.E. Oliver, What Is a Profitable Product? Industrial Marketing Management, 1998. 27(3): p. 187-195.
29. Boyd, W.H. and C.W. Orville, Marketing management: a strategic approach 1990, Homewood, IL. USA.: Irwin. 899.
30. Kotler, P., Marketing management. 11th ed. 2003, New Jersey, USA: Prentice Hall. 130.
31. Hague, D.C., Pricing in business by D.C. Hague, ed. U.O.M.C.f.B. Research. 1971, London: Allen & Unwin. 332.
32. Schwartz, B., et al., Maximizing versus satisficing: Happiness is a matter of choice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2002. 83(5): p. 1178-1197.
33. Kaplan, R.S. and A.A. Atkinson, Advanced management accounting / Robert S. Kaplan, Anthony A. Atkinson. 3rd ed. ed. 1998, Upper Saddle River, NJ :: Prentice-Hall International
34. Kaplan, R.S. and R. Cooper, Cost & effect : using integrated cost systems to drive profitability and performance. 1998, Boston: Harvard Business School Press. 357.
35. Berger, C., et al., Kano's Methods for Understanding Customer-defined Quality. Center for Quality Management Journal 1993. 2(4): p. 36.
36. Sauerwein, E., et al., The kano model: how to delight your customers, in in: Preprints Volume I of the IX. International Working Seminar on Production Economics. 1996:
Innsbruck/Igls/Austria. p. 313-327.
37. Keiningham, T.L., et al., Does customer satisfaction lead to profitability? The mediating role of share-of-wallet. Managing Service Quality, 2005. 15(2).
38. Simbanegavi, W., Loss leader or low margin leader? Advertising and the degree of product differentiation. 2008, University Library of Munich, Germany.

Design for sustainability: turning waste into profit

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (10)

Similar to Design for sustainability: turning waste into profit

Similar to Design for sustainability: turning waste into profit (20)

More from Samuel Bautista Lazo

More from Samuel Bautista Lazo (6)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Design for sustainability: turning waste into profit