Water Conservation in SMEs through GP Dr. Suporn Koottatep Department of Environmental Engineering Faculty of Engineering, Chiang Mai University Chiang.

Water Conservation in SMEs through GP

 Dr. Suporn Koottatep

Department of Environmental Engineering

Faculty of Engineering, Chiang Mai University

Chiang Mai 50200, Thailand

E-mail: [email protected]

Importance of Water in the Manufacturing Processes

Water Use in Manufacturers as:Primary products: beverages, water

related drinks, canning etc.Means to obtain products, washing

process, cleaning operation, heat treatment, cooling operation etc.

Wastewater generated from manufacturing process

High amounts of wastewater with low pollutant loads.

Low amounts of wastewater with high pollutant loads.

High amounts and high pollutant load from their processes.

Lack of water conservation policy in SMEs

Water is considered cheap.Some washing process and cooling water

do not need treated water.Without environmental regulations or

weak enforcement

Wastewater Generated in the Selected Factories Amount Wastewater Treatment

MethodRaw Materials

Canning Factories

M3/day M3/Ton RM

Fruit Salad 8.93 4.72 AL 1.89Fruit Salad 86 4.35 LT 19.77Corn Cob 89 4.45 AL 20Lychee 82 3.73 AL 22Pineapple 134 1 AL 133Corn Cob 238 5.29 AF+AS 45

Wastewater Generated in the Selected Factories (Cont.)

Amount Wastewater Treatment Method

Raw Materials

Fruit Preservation Factories

M3/day M3/Ton RM

Preserved Fruit

3 3 LT 1

Preserved Fruit

5 1.47 ST 3.4

Preserved Vegetables

83 4.37 AL+LT 19

Ginger 550 7.43 OP 74Ginger 800 2.15 OP 372

Water Conservation through GP

Water conservation in large scale factories was normally taken into consideration during the planning and design stage.

SMEs are neither equipped with new technology, nor properly planned during the design stage, water conservation seems to be a difficult task for them.

GP methodology for implementation in manufacturing organization.

Getting startedPlanningGeneration & Evaluation of GP optionsImplementation of GP OptionsMonitoring and ReviewSustaining GP

Water consumption monitoring

Water meters installation Direct measurement like stop watch and

volumetric flask.Direct measurement in the tanks (containers)Spillages may be measured by using containers

shaped like pans or other specific shapes.In some areas, weir notch could be a good

method to measure wastewater flow instead of water used.

Level of monitoring there are 4 levels of monitoring in industries

1.Plant level this will show the overall input and overall output of the plant itself

2. Department level or process level in many SMEs,, we may need to dig deeper into areas, departments or processes to obtain information on water use.

3. Sub-department level that will need to go further in each process for clarification of water used.

4. Machine level In each process, some particular machines may have a greater and more significant water consumption than other machines.

1. Plant Level

PlantInput Output

2. Department Level

Storage Process 1 Process 2 Offices

3. Sub-Process Level

Washing Canning Sterilizing Storage

4. Machine Level

Washing Machine 1 Machine 2 Tank 3 To Specific

From General

GP options for water conservation

With proper information obtained from GP methodology, options for water conservation could be identified. The following are few examples of GP options for water conservation.

Problems Identified GP Options Generated

Water consumption

1 No recycle facility for cooling water

2 No recycle machine for can washing process

3 Too big water hose for floor cleaning

1 Build storage tank for recycle & floor cleaning

2 Install recycle can washing machine

3 Change hose size from big to smaller hose

Examples of GP options for water conservation in food industry sector

Problems Identified GP Options Generated

4 No valve at the end of water hose

5 No jet floor cleaning

6 Pipe leakage

7 segregation of wastewater

4 Install valve at the end of water hose

5 Install spray gun for floor cleaning

6 Change pipe connection

7 Separate brine wastewater from normal waste

Examples of GP options for water conservation in food industry sector (Cont)

Problems Identified GP Options Generated

8 Spillage of syrup

9 Hot wastewater discharge directly into sewage drain

10 Worker s had no awareness on good house keeping

8 Install syrup collection system

9 Use heat exchanger in recycling hot water

10 Training course required

Examples of GP options for water conservation in food industry sector(Cont)

Case study of Food Industry

Water conservation from food industry sector in northern Thailand is as shown in table. Significant amount of wastewater reduction could be obtained through GP implementation.

Factory

Before Implementation

waste / unit RM. (m3/ton)

After Implementation

waste / unit RM. (m3/ton)

1.Lychee factory

1.1 Saving chemical through soaking process

1.2 Changing washing process

1.3 Maintenance of washing machinery

1.38

5.55

0.38

0.96

3.10

0.20

Wastewater reduction through GP

Factory

Before Implementation

waste / unit RM. (m3/ton)

After Implementation

waste / unit RM. (m3/ton)

2. Pineapple factory

Change whole process

2.45 1.01

Wastewater reduction through GP ( Cont )

Factory

Before Implementation

waste / unit RM. (m3/ton)

After Implementation

waste / unit RM. (m3/ton)

3. Palm seed factory

3.1 Adding valve at the end of water hoses in soaking process

3.2 Training of good house keeping for workers in washing process

0.79

2.54

0.38

2.02

Wastewater reduction through GP ( Cont )

In some cases, attempting in water conservation might give other benefit for factory. In a demonstration project of a ginger factory in Thailand, water monitoring in the factory is as

shown in table

Water Use Amount (m3/day)

Amount (L/tonRM)

BOD (mg/l)

SS

(mg/l)

1.Fresh ginger

washing water

2. Floor washing

water in raw

material area

3. Water in salting

well

4. Wash water for

QC test

360

100

13.4

14.4

4,702

1306

175.7

9,527

91

-

-

-

6,533

-

-

-

Water use and its characteristics of each process.

Water Use Amount (m3/day)

Amount (L/tonRM)

BOD (mg/l)

SS

(mg/l)

5. Wash water of

salted ginger

6. Wash water of

salted well

7. Wash water

during trimming

19.4

3.5

35.6

320

57.5

584

9,400

10,520

196

37,157

22,850

396

Water use and its characteristics of each process. ( Cont )

• Major use of water was from fresh ginger washing and floor washing. (460 cubic meters per day)

• Other uses combined were about 80 cubic meters per day

• The main cause of using high wash water was that the raw ginger contain too high soil content. (12.11%)

• In the brainstorming , the suppliers should be instructed to reduce soil content in raw materials.

To apply the greening the suppliers, the

factory divided the suppliers into 3 groups.

Group 1 : the control group,

the suppliers should deliver raw ginger that have the soil content < 10%

this group was neither given any awareness nor incentive programs.

Group 2 : this group would be given a series of awareness program,

how the quality of raw ginger would effect the water use. The meeting was called four times to convince the suppliers to agree to co-operate with the factory

Group 3 : the group that would be offered the incentive program.

Those who delivered raw materials with soil content less than 8%, the purchasing price will be 0.10 Baht per kg higher than market price. Those with soil content less than 5%, the price will be 0.20 Baht higher per kg.

After the greening the suppliers program was monitoring Soil contents in raw materials in first group group 2 and 3 were 12.11 % , 10.76 and 9.01 respectively. With the awareness program the average value of soil content did not meet the factory’s requirement (10%). However, the soil content was reduced by 1.35%. Similarly to the incentive group, the average soil content was not lower than the incentive level (8% and 5%). The reduction obtained was about 3.10 %.

Group 1

No change

Group 2

Awareness

Group 3

Incentive

Soil content, %

12.11 10.76 9.01

Reduction 1.35 3.10

Soil contents of each group

The comparison of samples that met the required standard is as shown in table. For the aware ness group, about 48% of suppliers were still sending raw materials higher than the required specification. Fifty two percent could meet the requirement. About 2% of this group could reach the incentive levels. In the third group, about 17% of the suppliers still did not meet the specification requirement. Only 26 % of the supplier met the incentive requirement. However more than 80% of this group could deliver raw materials with less than 10% of soil content.

Number of soil contents according to the required specification.

Level of Soil Content

Group 2 Awareness

Group 3 Incentive

Number % Number %

Higher than 10%

Between 8 - 10%

Below 8% and 5%

12

11

2

48.00

44.00

8.00

6

19

9

17.65

55.88

26.47

Total 25 100 34 100

Production information before and after implementation is as shown in table . Raw ginger purchased during the year 1999 was 4,232 tons while in the year 2000 it was 4,610 tons. The amounts of soil in raw materials were 480 tons and 414 tons respectively. Percent soil contents was reduced from 11.37% to 8.95%. Products increased from 57,695 cases to 71,836 cases. Groundwater used was reduced from 5,524m3 to 4,439m3 or equivalent to 19.63% reduction. Electricity consumption was reduced from 131,581 kWh to 121,287 kWh or equivalent to 7.82 reduction. It could be easily seen that with GP implementation, production could be increased and raw materials and energy consumptions could be reduced.

Production Information Before and After GP Implementation

Item Year 1999 Year 2000 Change

Increase Reduce

1.Raw Ginger.

(kg.)

Ginger+Soil

Soil

Ginger for

production

2.Products (Cases )

3.Working days

4,232,107

480,213

( 11.37 % )

3,742,894

57,695

112

4,610,688

414,575

( 8.95 % )

4,196,133

81,836

117

65,638

(2.95%)

Production Information Before and After GP Implementation ( Cont )

Item Year 1999 Year 2000 Change

Increase Reduce

4.Groundwater use ( m3 )

5.Electricity

( kWh )

5,524

131,581

4,439

121,287

1,084

(19.63%)

10,294

(7.82%)

Financial monitoring and evaluation was performed and shown in table . The total expenses before and after were 144.814 US$ and 163,786 US$ respectively. Compare to the products, expenses per case would be 2.51 US$ and 2.28 US$ respectively. The saving cost of 0.23 US$ per case was obtained in the year 2000. Compare to the number of production at 71,836 cases. The saving of expenses would be 16,522.28 US$.

Financial Monitoring and Evaluation

Item Year 1999 Year 2000

Change

Increase Reduce

1. Labor Cost (US$)

2. Groundwater (US$)

3. Electricity (US$)

 126,945

458

7,061

151,937

368

7,045

90.06

(19.63%)

15.99

(0.23%)

Financial Monitoring and Evaluation ( Cont )

Item Year 1999

Year 2000

Change

Increase Reduce

4.Maintenances (US$)

5.Total expenses (US$)

6. Expenses per case (US$/Case)

 9,965

144,814

2.51

 4,438

163,786

2.28

5,526.54

(55.46%)

0.23

The investment on GP implementation was as shown in table . It could be concluded that he benefit from the lower operating cost were about 11,686.96 US$.

Expense for GP Implementation

Item Expenses (US$)

1. Greening the suppliers

Awareness Program

Incentive Program

2.Equipment Improvement

Raw material washing

Process 

3.Training

151.71

2,788.10

676.25

585.82

633.44

Total 4,835.32

Summary

Water conservation could be obtained from GP implementation in SMEs. Water may be considered as cheap resources but without proper management it could turn to an expensive resources in the manufacturing process. With proper monitoring program, water could be effectively utilized and the SMEs would in turn obtaining benefits from GP implementation.