APPLICATION OF LEAN AND SIX SIGMA TOOL TO

WASTE REDUCTION IN INDUSTRIES

Syed Hasib Akhter Faruqui

Abstract:

With rising environmental concerns from consumers to stakeholder’s groups, environmental

management has become an important responsibility for today’s manufacturers. It’s no surprise
people are always looking for products that leave a minimal environmental impact. Thus less
thought and hard analysis has been given to develop a logical operational approach that can be
used to minimize environment and that also makes sense from a business perspective. In this
paper concern has been put on Food and Drink industries. This manuscript assesses the current
operational and management practices of these industries. Studies focusing on waste across the
supply chain. Data were collected through reviewing different manufacturing processes. The
Data collected and supplementary documentation were analyzed using Value Stream Map.
Applying Lean Six Sigma (LSS) methodology and waste management in the food and drink
industry leads to many of the improvements demonstrated in other sectors-energy efficiency,
reduction of raw material use, reduction in water consumption and increasing reuse and
recycling on site. Such improvements in environmental performance produce a directly
beneficial effect on the profitability of business. It is to be noted the literature doesn’t involve
an in-depth case study of six sigma rather involves the use of lean and six sigma in processes.

Keywords: Green Waste, Waste Management, Lean, Six Sigma, LSS, Quality Improvement,
MSW, Food Industry, Drink Industry.

1.0 Introduction:

There is an increasing concern about industrial solid waste as most of the manufacturers
are going green. Going green is nice, but not if it hinders one’s ability to compete in the realities
of the marketplace. With proper steps, defined goals and tools like lean and six sigma; green
manufacturing holds potential economic benefits including long term process efficiency
benefits, cost saving, waste reduction. Manufacturers should always look for systematic
opportunity to eliminate energy and other environmental wastes, cutting unnecessary materials
and regulatory overheads. In industries creation of garbage waste is one of the concerns.
Garbage waste generally comes from paying for something that will be thrown away and may
cause negative environmental impact. Garbage waste may be a result of the value stream
activities or processes and support system for all processes for manufacturing. In this paper for
convenience from now on garbage waste will be referred as waste/green waste.

Waste generation in the European Union is currently estimated at about 1.3 billion tonnes
per year, approximately 3.5 tonnes per capita per year. This includes waste from manufacturing
(338 million tonnes), mining and quarrying (377 million tonnes), the construction sector (286
million tonnes), municipal solid waste (182 million tonnes) and hazardous waste (27 million
tonnes) (EC, 2003). In general, waste generation in the EU is increasing at rates comparable to
economic growth. For example, both GDP and municipal solid waste grew by 19% between
1995 and 2003, while these upward trends in waste generation are expected to continue (EC,
2005). Again if we consider for the municipal solid waste (MSW), a term rose out of local
communities caring from public health, maintaining outdated infrastructure, avoiding
epidemic, advancing public health, transportation as a result of the circumstances of the times.
(Louis GE, 2004). As for the materials it makes sense to first identify the material under
consideration in all sections and the operations used to manage them. A chart containing the
MSW average percentage waste is given in Table-1.

Table-1: MSW average percentage waste types for U.S. and average amount of each type for
100,000 people (U.S. EPA, 2014c)

The quantity of solid waste generation is typically linked with the economic status of a
society. Consequently, Table 2 shows GDP, together with waste generation rates and alignment
for some of the largest Asian countries. It can readily be seen that waste generation rates are
worse for developing economies that have inferior GDP. (Ashok V. Shekdar, (2009))

Table-2: Information on GDP, waste quantity and composition for some Asian countries

Growing consumption can be identified as one of the main causes of increased amounts of
waste. This problem was first recognized in 1970s, but not till the 1990s it became a matter of
concern. Thus organizations like European Environment Agency (EEA), US Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) have emerged. These organizations set’s the target and thus forms
the basis of waste management. The European Union has been an active force pursuing
sustainable development, launching the Community Environment Policy in 1972 and the EU
Waste Management Policy in 1975 (Johnson SP, Corcelle G. (1997)). At present, the main
guiding principle for solid waste infrastructure in the EU are defined in four directives (Council
Directive 1975, Council Directive 1991, Council Directive 1996, Council Directive 1999 and
the Directive 2000.), all of which follows the Waste Hierarchy Principle. This Principle
prioritizes waste reduction to waste recovery as material and energy, and has waste disposal in
landfills as the last priority. The directives also categorize solid waste into household and
industrial waste according to their dumping location. Prioritizing sustainable commercial,
production and consumption through cyclic system in which resources are recovered from the
waste stream at the end-of-life cycle (EOL) of a product. (Wendy Kerr a, Chris Ryan, (2001)).
Aside from recycling raw materials; returning and reusing manufactured components or
subcomponents may always be a better eco-efficient pathway, provided those components can
be reused in manufacturing another product. (Kimura F. (1999)). A generic remanufacturing
system shown on figure-1:

Product of Assembly

Product Purchase or Lease

Production of Cores Servicing & Repair

Product is Returned to a
Remanufacturer

Remanufacturing

Disassembly of the product into cores

Cleaning of all parts

Inspection & Sorting of Cores

Reconditioning or Repair of cores

Product Reassembly

Remanufactured Additional Use as

Sale or Lease Products Cores Spare Parts
Waste
Sale on less
Developed
Markets Use in New Products
Disposal of Waste Sale for
Material & Which is not reusable Alternative Uses
Energy Recovery Or recyclable

Figure-1: A generic remanufacturing Process (Wendy Kerr a, Chris Ryan, (2001))

Now, for process improvement and waste reduction Lean Production offers several
tools. It is out of the scope of this paper to explore in what means these tools affect the wastes.
The most key Lean Production Tool is Value Stream Mapping (VSM) for identifying the
wastes in the plant layout (Rother, M., Shook, J., 2003). Single Minute Exchange of Die
(SMED) for reducing machine set-ups (Shingo, S., 1989.). Every time a Lean tool or principle
is applied, there are also assistances regarding environmental management. However, it is not
clear exactly what kind of relationship exists between a specific Lean tool and the
environmental impacts and whether or not this relationship can be measured. (Andrea Chiarini,
(2014)). If we go through literatures, we will found a number of papers dedicated to lean
production and its different tools but all of this is beyond the scope of this paper. While this
paper will investigate how lean and six sigma can be used to avoid one of the green waste
Garbage. there are few papers which directly explore the connection between Lean Production
and environmental or green management. In the 1990s some authors (Romn, J., 1994; Vickers,
I., 2000.) started investigating the subject. King and Lenox (2001) (King, A.A., Lenox, M.J.,
2001) demonstrated that Lean Production can diminish the expenses of pollution and in
particular it is complementary to waste and pollution reduction. Their paper is based on a
quantitative analysis carried out within a number of US companies from 1991 to 1996. The
results confirmed theories which correlated the Lean Production efforts of a company to its
environmental management practices. Nonetheless, the research did not consider in what way
and through which Lean tools a company can advance its environmental performance.

In this paper the author will investigate several industries to review the waste being
produced in supply chain of food and Drink industries and will propose a plan based on Lean
Six Sigma methodologies based on green intention. However, the main problem is to decide at
which stage of the manufacturing process, the methodology implementation had to start. This
will change from industry to industry thus the implementation methods may have to be
modified accordingly.

2.0 Identifying Garbage Waste in Industries:

Most waste material can be viewed as unused resources, environmentally sound waste
management entails the reduction of waste in production and distribution process and the
enhancement of reuse and recycling. So how can we define Garbage? Garbage can be defined
as all the things we throw out as a result of our value stream activities & all the support for
those activities. It can be the packaging of the raw materials to chips created from over
processing of metals. Again if we throw something out, there is a high chance that for that
material the manufacturer paid then again paid for it to be thrown away. Thus elimination of
garbage ends saving resources and money. Over the few decades the idea of garbage being an
environmental waste has allured environmentalists.

The first step to identifying garbage can be from value stream maps. It’s necessary to know
in which steps of the production cycle garbage is being created. Not only the location will do
but statistics of amount created should also be noted. It should be noted that it’s important to
notice in which of the following category the garbage falls on. Depending on the classification
the minimization procedure may vary. The Garbage identified may fall into categories of-
a) Re-usability
b) Hazardous/ Non-Hazardous
c) Material

2.1 Burden Caused by the Garbage Waste:

Decision makers must take into account the implications of MSW management
alternatives for public health and environmental quality. Poor collection or disposal practices
attract and promote the breeding of insects, rodents, and pathogens that can cause and transmit
diseases, particularly several of the diseases in the tropical cluster: South American
trypanosomiasis, schistosomiasis and Bancroftian filariasis. The World Bank estimates the
burden to developing countries from these diseases alone was 8 million disability-adjusted life-
years in 1990, or about two life-years per 1,000 populations. An estimated 25 percent of these
might have been averted through "feasible interventions" (World Development Report 1993),
such as covering the waste delivered to a dumpsite with fifteen to thirty centimeters of soil at
the end of each day. (Doing so sacrifices landfill capacity, but this cost could be lessened by
using relatively low-quality composted MSW as the daily cover (Tchobanoglous, George,
Hilary Theisen,and Samuel Vigil. 1993). Although the direct contribution of inadequate
management of MSW to the Burden of disease in developing countries is modest, the indirect
contribution is larger. For example, waste may clog open drains, creating breeding grounds for
malaria- and dengue-transmitting mosquitos (Mensah,Joseph, and HerbertA. Whitney. 1991.),
or causing floods in rainy seasons, which may increase human contact with pathogen-infected
feces contained in the waste. causing floods in rainy seasons, which may increase human
contact with pathogen-infected feces contained in the waste. Cleaning up MSW landfills
contaminated by hazardous waste appears to be substantially costlier than placing the waste in
specially designed hazardous waste landfills at the outset. The experience of the United States
is instructive. Closed MSW Landfills in the United States account for a large share of
hazardous-waste sites that have been targeted for cleanup under the 1980 Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, also known as Superfund (U.S.
Congress, Office of Technology Assessment. 1989). Soil contaminated by hazardous wastes
may include not only the remnants of waste deposited on the site in the past, but also
neighboring soil that has soaked up leachate from the waste. In the United States, household
hazardous waste accounts for less than 1 percent of MSW by weight, suggesting that industrial
and commercial hazardous wastes were the main contaminants at old landfills (More recently,
regulations that restrict the disposal of hazardous waste in MSW landfills have led to lower
concentrations of harmful compounds in leachate in new landfills; see Tchobanoglous, George,
Hilary Theisen, and Samuel Vigil. 1993)

Landfills may also contribute to the accumulation of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change estimates that between 20 million metric tons
and 70 million metric tons of methane (about 6 percent of estimated global annual methane
emissions) are emitted annually by the anaerobic decomposition of organic waste at landfills
worldwide (U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration,1993).
Developing countries contribute relatively little to global methane emissions, but that could
change with a shift toward sanitary landfill practices. (The accumulation of greenhouse gases
could be reduced if the methane was collected and flared or used as fuel; an estimated 940,000
metric tons of methane were recovered for fuel use in the United States in 1990; see U.S.
Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration,1993).

3.0 Concept and Methodology:

3.1 Concept:

With fast changing economic the competition for high quality products has increased.
Product variety, high lead time, minimal waste, green manufacturing adds a major impact to
manufacturing industries. Thus methods like Enterprise Resource Planning, Business Process
Reengineering, Just in Time (JIT) manufacturing and Lean Management have been developed.

3.1.1 Quality Management and Improvement:

Quality can be defined as the fitness for use or purpose at the most cost-effective level.
It is an essential part of the process of design, manufacturing and assembly. It can be assured
by having effective processes and controls at several stages. Certainly in manufacturing
industries, to overcome the competition & to retain the share of the market, it is constantly
required to improve the quality of the product without the increase in the price. The price is
subjective to the cost of production, which in turn is affected by waste, rework, rejection and
downgrading rates. Consideration to quality assurance can subsequently diminish the process
waste, which results in a quality production and company’s growth, productivity and
profitability (Mohamed K. Hassan,2013).

3.1.2 Six Sigma:

Six Sigma is a practice for quality improvement of the products. The Six Sigma
methodology was first introduced in the early 80’s by Motorola due to two reasons. First cause
was the nature of mass production and second purpose was the threat of the Japanese products
in the American market. (Mohamed K. Hassan,2013) The implementation of Six Sigma is
always done using DMAIC approach where,
D: Define; what problem needs to be solved?
M: Measure, what is the capability of the process?
A: Analysis, When and where do faults occur?
I: Improve, How the process capability can be improved?
C: Control, What control can be put in place to withstand the gain?

3.2 Methodology:

As a methodology for refining both factory output and quality, Lean Six Sigma (LSS) has
gained widespread popularity. The methodology, which aims to help companies create leaner
manufacturing systems and boost product quality to no more than 3.4 defects per million
opportunities reducing the amount of garbage waste being created, has brought significant
developments and cost savings at companies. A traditional five-step Lean Six Sigma DMAIC
process, that is- Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve, and Control on the focused areas of
supply chain. A full diagnostic should include of the following steps-

3.2.1 Enterprise Value Stream Map (VSM):

The first step is to develop a plan along with a map of the operation’s processes and the
costs associated with them. The goal is to understand what activities are performed and where
inefficiencies might exist in the company that adds to the creation of garbage. Once the VSM
map is being formed identifying each step with process inadequacies are noted. The survey
team should move around the floor to collect data. Random samples are to be taken to perform
analysis.

3.2.2 Benchmarking:

Determining just how much performance can be improved is the goal of the second step.
Benchmarking can be done with respect to local Government Environment policy, or other
cleaner manufacturing system. It will totally depend on the target to be achieved. In addition
to gauging its performance against these external benchmarks, its important to look inside its
own walls for relevant internal benchmarks.

3.2.3 Prioritizing:

The final phase is to decide which problems are to solve in which order. This is described
in details in section 5.0.
4.0 Green Waste in Industry:

The aim of this section is to provide a constant idea for the consideration of waste in food
& drink manufacture and to define a number of analytical methodologies for the minimization
of waste in convenience foods. The major sections detail a waste model to identify the generic
waste types in food manufacture, together with three waste analysis methods which are
developed to monitor and minimize waste generation in food sector. While surveying through
several food industries it was found that around 25% to 50% food produced is wasted along
the supply chain (Prins AG, et al. (2009)).

This is one of the significant problem in global perspective for several reason. Firstly, there
are environmental impacts associated with the inefficient use of natural resources, such as
water, energy and land (e.g. causing deforestation and land degradation) (Forkes J(2007),
Lundqvist J, de Fraiture C, Molden D. (2008) , Prins AG, et al.(2009); Stuart T. Waste).
Secondly, wasting food while millions of people around the world suffer from hunger raises
moral question (Henderson G.(2004)). Finally, there exists an economic impact of throwing
away food which eventually affects all the organizations and individuals involved in the supply
chain, including the consumers (Ventour L.). One of the major problem associated with food
waste is that it costs are often undervalued and underreported and hence they will remain
unpublished and hidden. Given the importance of the problem, researchers in the field has
focused on waste generated at specific stages of the supply chain.

4.1 Waste in Food Supply Chain:

Consumer spending on food, as defined by the Key Note UK Food Market Review (Howitt
S, 1998) was £42.5bn in 1997. Around 420,000 industries are involved in farming, food
production and food services in the UK; roughly 59% of these are in food processing and
farming, while the remainder include retailing, wholesaling and supplying. There is an yearly
trade deficit in the food sector that has been estimated to be in surplus of £7.25bn in 1997. Food
sales in 1997 comprised 28.1% meat and meat products; 18.2% bread and bakery products;
4.8% fish and fish products; 26.3% fruit and vegetables; 17.3% milk and dairy products 4.7%
other food products, and 0.7% sugar.

Processing this food retail in excess of demand needed to setup a supply chain. As we know
waste arises in every stage of food supply chain, the causes of the waste may vary greatly
depending on the stage of the chain. Some of the stages have received attention over the years
thus were able to reduce considerably. the main reasons for food waste generated during
distribution are examined in the literature, including poor handling, inappropriate packaging
and transportation, failures on forecasting and storage (Kantor LS (1997)), Waste at the
consumer end has received less attention over the years; however, a recent research has shown
a comprehensive interpretation of consumer waste in the UK (Ventour L.(2008)). In the UK it
has been assessed that the food and retail industries produce about a third of all industrial and
commercial waste in the UK and bulk figures range between 18 and 22 mt per annum. Waste
is generated at different stages in the chain. UK homes alone cause 6.7 mt of food waste and
an additionally 5.2 mt of food-related packaging (Favoino E, 2007). For the retail sector this
figures range within 0.4 mt per year and 12 mt (Envirowise, 2002) with a mid-range figure of
1.5 mt was reported. Less information is available from Spain; however, it has been estimated
that waste rising from the food industry sums to around 4.8 mt and total industries waste has
been projected at around 61 mt in 2007 (INE,2009).
 To identify waste properly a hierarchical model has been established. It’s called the IDEF0
representation. IDEF0 representations have been utilized to generate the waste model as they
are easy to comprehend and their hierarchical tactics enables systems and processes to be
designed in many levels of detail (Dorador, J.M., Young, R.I.M., 2000.). The developed model
e on the physical flow through the various stages of food manufacture and supply, as a sample
model depicted in Figure. 2, with inputs (raw materials) and outputs (wastes) for each stage
being identified separately. These classifications of considered waste are described in details
below.

4.1.1 Bulk Wastes:

Bulk wastes are allied with the preparation of ingredients and thus may include inedible parts
of the constituent, such as stems, excess animal fat, leaves, bones etc., along with tainted
materials or ingredients, such as outer layers of vegetables that are ruined and even soil or
debris on the ingredient that is removed by washing or mechanical means. The costs of
managing these wastes are very low, the mechanisms by which they are collected being their
primary expense. Provided they are disposed of responsibly; they impose slight environmental
hazard.

Figure 2: IDEF0 representation of the waste model through life cycle

4.1.2 Waste Water:

Water is used in large amounts in food processing, mostly in the preparation, cleaning
and cooking phases of the product life cycle. The waste water as described in this context is
the water domesticated at the end of the process either as a carrier for dirt and contaminant or
as a by-product from the cooking or processing operations. In some cases, it may be possible
to reprocess the water after filtration, for example in Sous-vide manufacturing, the product is
not in contact with the water throughout processing (Ivor J. Church & Anthony L.(1993)).
However, in most applications the largest debris are cleaned out from the waste water by
methods of filtration and the remaining contaminated water is disposed of to the drain or round
water. Which may need further processing.

4.1.3 Processing Wastes:

Processing the wastes as considered here may be due to a number of different sources,
and may be further explained as being due to poor housekeeping procedures, poor conformity
or inherent process losses. Spillages, damages and contamination of the products may be
caused by operator negligence, poor handling procedures, forming apparatus making improper
seals on packs, etc. By-product wastes are waste materials that are created by the manufacturing
process, such animal fats or as juices, which are removed and disposed to give the desired
product quality and consistency. Finally, waste due to poor conformity may be created at any
time for any ingredient or product failing to sufficiently conform to specification’s, quality,
appearance, flavor or aroma etc.

4.1.4 Packaging Wastes

Packaging is extensively used in the food industry to prevent any contamination or

spoilage of foods that are often packaged to guard them from their immediate environment.
Packaging can differ from outsized paper-based sacks for bulk ingredients, to various plastic
bags, pouches and sheets, depending on the various product and their application. The material
properties and specific nature of the packaging are normally engineered for each application,
though unfortunately they are all often disposed together by means similar to commercial waste
disposal.

4.1.5 Overproduction Wastes:

Overproduction wastes constitute noteworthy cost to the company as materials and

resources in manufacturing are wasted given, the finished (prepared) product no-longer has an
end consumer. OPW may be used to label batches of ingredients that have been prepared before
order authorization and cannot be re-directed before expiry. In such cases the ingredients will
typically be scuffled to commercial waste and send to landfill as many own-label producers
cannot re-direct the product to different consumers in keeping with their contractual
agreements with the vendors. The authors contend that the generation of OPW is the most
unmaintainable practice in the food industry as significant resources such energy, water and
raw material are wasted and therefore a organized approach to reduce such waste needs to be
studied.

4.1.6 Putrescible and other raw material waste

Product manufacturing, raw material yields normally fall within the range 60–70% of
the gross raw material input. Raw material wastage normally falls between 30–40% of the gross
raw material input, although in some cases up to 50% has been detected as wastage during the
project run. These amount of wastage have been observed during the preparation of raw
vegetables for supermarket shelves in convenience, prepacked and prepared salads and
chopped vegetables. Where many thousands of tons of raw material are processed per day,
thousands of tons of raw material waste are produced as a result. The importance of such figures
is supported by the fact that the effect to total waste arising in 1993/1994 from food
dispensation waste and vegetable waste was 11% of all wastes logged [Norfolk County
Council,1996].

Mena et al conducted (Carlos Mena, B. Adenso-Diaz , Oznur Yurt, 2011 ) a survey in

UK and Spain with the food vendors and summarized their result based on causes of waste and
categorized it by country and product type. The comments attained presents a range of
reasoning for food and packaging waste. A deep study reveals that the causes are
interconnected and appears to be an indications of a wider problem. Table-3 shows the data
attained by them and figure 3 shows the waste ranges by product and category in their survey.
Figure- 3 shows six product types having levels of waste greater than 7%: two ambient products
(bread and oils) and four chilled products (beef, sandwiches, yoghurt and bagged salads).
Perhaps the most obvious cohesion across these products is that they tend to have a short shelf-
life. In some cases, like bread (Spain – 1 day) and sandwiches (UK – 2 days), shelf-life

Table-3: Main causes of waste for each category and country according to data gathered.

is tremendously short, and any minor prognosis error can cause waste. Other products such as
beef and yoghurt have a couple of weeks’ shelf-life which leaves no or little more room for
maneuver for the companies working in these supply chains; however, meat products also have
very volatile demand depending on the weather and this can also create waste. Oils, on the
other hand, have a long shelf-life (12–18 months), but are packaged in delicate bottles which
can break at any stage of the supply chain if not handled with care. In the middle ranges for
waste (3–7%) we found products such as fruit and vegetables, fish, cooked poultry and
margarines. Again, Products in this region also incline to have a short shelf-life. Fish only has
a few days of shelf-life and many fruits and vegetables tend to have less than two weeks and
in some cases only 2–3 days (e.g. raspberries). Figure- 3: also shows that frozen products tend
to have low levels of waste. This result was predictable as freezing is used as a method of
preservation which greatly extends the shelf life of products, reducing waste as a consequence.
Similar cases are found for some ambient merchandises such as beverages and pasta sauces
which tends to have a prolonged shelf-life (i.e. more than six months).

4.2 Waste in Drink & Brewing Supply Chain

Brewers are very anxious that the techniques they use are the best in terms of product
quality and cost effectiveness. During production, beer consecutively goes through three
chemical and biochemical reactions (puréeing, boiling, fermentation and fruition) and three
solid liquid separations (wort separation, wort elucidation and rough beer clarification) [Moll
M. Bieres, 1991]. Consequently, water consumption, wastewater and solid liquid separation
constitute real economic opportunities for developments in brewing. Every brewery tries to
keep waste disposal costs low whereas the legislation imposed for waste disposal by the

Figure 3: Waste ranges by product and category

authorities become more rigorous (Knirsch M, Penschke A, Meyer-Pittroff R.,1999). Water

feeding in a brewery is not only an economic parameter but also a tool to determine its process
performance in association with other breweries. Furthermore, the position of beer as a natural
product leads the brewers to pay thought to their marketing image and take waste (wastewater,
spent grains, Kieselguhr sludge, yeast surplus) treatment into account.
 Figure 4: Brewing Process and waste Created (Shaded Area)

4.2.1 Spent Grains:

The puréeing process is one of the initial operations in brewery, rendering the malt and
cereal grain content soluble in water. After abstraction, the spent grains and wort (water with
extracted matter) are called purée and need to be separated. The amount of solid in the mash is
usually 25 -30%. At present, spent grains (often mixed with yeast surplus and cold break (trub
parting after cooling of wort)) are sold as livestock feed with an average profit close to 5 V/ton
(min, 1 V/ton; max, 6 V/ton).

4.2.2 Kieselguhr sludge:

The conventional dead-end filtration with filter-aids (Kieselguhr) has been the standard
industrial practice for more than 100 years and will be increasingly scrutinized from economic,
environmental and technical stand points in the coming century (Hrycyk G. (1997).).
Approximately two thirds of the diatomaceous earth production are used in the beverage
industry (fruit juice, beer, wine and liqueurs). The conventional dead-end filtration with filter-
aids uses up a large amount of diatomaceous earth (1-2 g/l of elucidated beer) and carries
serious environmental, hygienic and economic implications (Fischer W, 1992) At the end of
the separation process, diatomaceous earth sludge has more than tripled (thrice the amount of
normal) in weight. From the green point of view, the diatomaceous earth is recovered from
open-pit mines and constitutes a natural and limited resource. After use, recovery, recycling
and disposal of Kieselguhr are a major difficulty due to their contaminating effect. From the
health perspective, the used diatomaceous earth is classified as ‘perilous or hazardous waste’
before and after filtration (The World Health Organization defines the crystalline silica as a
cause of lung disease, health risk and earth pollutant) and its use requires ensuring safe working
conditions.
4.2.3 Yeast Surplus:

Maturation and fermentation tank bottoms constitute another source of sludge. Low
fermentation beer is produced through two fermentation steps, the primary fermentation being
when 90% of the fermentable matter is consumed. A rapid cooling of the tank stops this
fermentation and causes the flocculation of insoluble particles and the sedimentation of yeast.
The tank bottom becomes full of yeast and ‘‘green beer’’. At present, the fermentation tank
bottom generates a beer loss of around 1-2% of production (Reed R, 1989)

4.2.4 Waste Label:

Waste label disposal is related to product decoration and design and the waste label
mass fluctuates greatly. On average, a weight of 282 kg/1000 hl of produced beer has been
calculated. Waste labels should be avoided or at least limited since they are not simple papers
but wet-strength paper impregnated with caustic solution. The average disposal cost is 38
V/ton (min, 0; max, 92 V/ton). (Luc Fillaudeau, 2006)

Table-4: Disposal Methods for Brewery waste

5.0 Waste Management:

The waste management system consists of the whole set of activities related to handling,
treating, disposing or recycling the waste materials. to handling, treating, disposing or recycling
the waste materials. The purpose of waste management system is to make sure that the waste
materials are removal from the source or location where they are generated and treated,
disposed of or recycled in a safe and proper way. While managing the waste can be categorized
based on priority hierarchy. The waste hierarchy remains the cornerstone of most waste
minimization strategies. The aim of the waste hierarchy is to extract the maximum practical
benefits from products and to generate the minimum amount of waste. The hierarchy of best
waste management exercise is illustrated in Figure-5.

Figure-5: Waste Management Hierarchy

There is a requirement to prioritize the range of wastes otherwise waste treatment of waste can
be very costly to the business as they may require significant investment in operation
technologies.

5.1 Waste Analysis:

The minimization of waste in the food sector requires an organized approach to identify the
source of waste, observe its generation and develop adaptable resolutions for their elimination
and minimization. Hence, this research has investigated a waste analysis methodology tailored
to the specific requirements of food manufacturing which consists of:
(1) Waste inventory analysis is to be highlighted and monitored by the sources of waste
throughout the production processes,
(2) Cost and environmental impact analysis to perform a cost analysis and to prioritize
the importance of cost management,
(3) Reduce–Reuse-Recycle-Disposal analysis to highlight a detailed step-by-step
solution for reducing, reusing and recycling and safe disposal of the waste.

5.1.1 Waste inventory analysis:

This type of analysis basically summarizes the waste at various stages of VSM and
highlights the data relating to each form of waste. A waste inventory diagram is created to
summarize every waste created from the start of the production to final product. A sample
waste inventory diagram showed in Figure-6 (R. Darlington , T. Staikos, S. Rahimifard, 2009).

5.1.2 Cost and environmental impact analysis:

Waste is regarded as a financial waste to the manufacturer. It may also be accounted for by
a physical measurement by weight or volume with accompanying environmental implications
for landfill and disposal. Whilst it is instinctive that the weight of waste is the simplest and
quickest measure to obtain through use of scales in the production environment, in practice
manufacturers may prefer to collect information relating to the costs of materials that are being
disposed.

5.1.3 Reduce–Reuse-Recycle-Disposal Analysis:

A waste analysis method should be setup such that it can perform analysis on waste being
created simultaneously considering three activities- Reduce, Reuse, Recycle and if no other
processing method is found then disposal. This approach is based on the commonly adopted
waste hierarchy in which the reduction of the sources of wastes is followed by the recycling of
materials where possible in order to minimize the amount of waste that must be disposed.
 Figure-6: Sample Waste Inventory Diagram
The primary focus of the ‘Reduce–Reuse-Recycle–Disposal (3RD) analysis is to minimize the
creation of any waste and thus to improve its impact on the environment. This include lessening
the volumes of wastes created through more accurate or efficient supply and manufacture
operations and ideally, where possible, eliminating the wastes entirely. For the system
described in figure 2, the waste created can be judged according to figure-7.

5.2 Waste Minimization Methods:

5.2.1 Composting:

There is a growing concern about food waste recycling after looking at the perspectives
of the environmental load-reducing and effective use of biomass. In Japan, the Preferment of
“Utilization of Recyclable Food Waste Act” (Food Recycling Law) was recognized in 2001,
which requires food industries to reduce their food waste and to promote recycling. The prime
recycling method in Japan is composting (JORA, 2003).

(a) (b)

(c) (d)
Figure-7: The 3RD Diagram for (a) Waste Water (b) Packaging Waste (c) Process Waste
(d) Overproduction waste (OPW)

However, the demand for recycled compost was low, due to competition from chemical
fertilizer (Aye L, Widjaya ER, 2006). However, food waste recycling increased over the years
in Japan. The data statistics is shown in Table-5 and the recycling method is shown in figure-
8.

Table-5: Food Waste Recycling rate (Toda et al., 2012)

A modern system has been advanced where composting is done within the machine. A
self-implicating system where the waste produced in the main production course are transferred
to machine incorporating composting system. the food waste is discharged into lattice-shaped
containers after being crushed and mixed. A moisture conditioner is mixed with the food waste
at a ratio of 4:1 by weight. The containers are then piled up on shelves and aerobically digested
(Figure- 9).
 Figure-8: Food Re-cycling method

There are a total of 2000 containers, and the temperature and moisture conditions of each
container are maintained by a computer. Bio-gasification system was also included in the system
for system development. The bio-gasification facility has a cohesive system that includes a hopper,
methane fermentation tank, solubilisation tank, de-sulfuriser, and wastewater treatment tank to
meet the Japanese environmental condition of wastewater (Figure-9). The fermenter is modeled &
designed in the form of a wet thermophilic assimilation system.

Figure-9: Flow diagram of the machine integrated composting and bio gasification system

5.2.1.1 Vermicomposting:

This is another way of composting organic materials. Food processing industries, livestock
and poultry farms, brewing industries generate huge quantities of liquid and semi-solid wastes.
Treatment, disposal and management of these wastes is a challenge for industries, scientists and
engineers. These organic wastes contain valuable plant nutrients and organic matter which are
essential for soil fertility and crop production. (Bertoldi, V. et al., 1981). In vermicomposting
process worms alter and stabilize organic wastes into nutrient rich humus-like material called
vermicomposting. In this process earthworms action on organic wastes is as physical as
biochemical. The physical action includes the mixing, aeration and grinding of organic waste,
while the microbes are responsible for biochemical degradation of organic waste (Aira, et al,
2008.). During the transit of material through worms’ gut, some important plant metabolites like
NPK present in the biodegradable wastes are converted into such biochemical forms which are
more suitable to plants.

5.2.2 Landfill:

A landfill is not a normal ecological condition, though, nor it is intended to be. Instead, a
landfill is more like a compact sealed storage container. A landfill is designed to inhibit waste
degradation to protect the environment from harmful pollutants. Deprived of air and water, even
organic wastes like paper and grass clippings degrade deliberately in a landfill. (Kan A et al, 2009).
Landfill leachates contains a large number of mixtures, some of which can be expected to create a
threat to health and nature if released into the environment. Landfill leachate treatment has
received substantial attention in recent years, especially in municipal areas. The generation of
MSW has increased in parallel to rapid development & industrialization. Approximately 16% of
all discarded MSW is burned (EPA,1994). the remainder is disposed of in landfills. Effective
management of these wastes has become a major social and environmental concern (Erses AS,
Onay TT., 2003). On the otherhand in the landfill Anaerobic digestion of the materials can be
carried out physically, Chemically and Biologically. This digestion produces high quality biogas,
suitable as renewable energy. Typical analysis of raw landfill gas is given in Table 6 (Demirbas
A. (2006)).

Table-6: Typical analysis of raw landfill gas.

Figure-10 shows the characteristics of biogas production with time, in terms of the biogas
components. From the figure we can interpret that the economic exploitation of methane is
worthwhile after one year from the start of the landfill maneuver. The main constituents of landfill
gas are byproducts of the decomposing organic material, usually in the form of domestic waste,
by the action of naturally arising bacteria under anaerobic environments.

5.2.3 Incineration:

Incineration is a method of disposal that involves combustion of waste material. Incineration

and other high temperature waste treatment processes are sometimes described as ‘‘thermal
treatment”. As stated by Yang et al. (Yang W, Nam H, Choi S, 2007) a solid waste incinerator is
a type of facility which is designed, built, and operated at particular design conditions. A typical
incinerator processes wastes that have been collected as input material, and attains its goal, i.e.,
processing of waste material and as secondary benefit recovers heat energy from the process of
combustion.

Figure-10: Production of Biogas Components with time in landfill.

5.2.4 Remanufacturing:

Theoretically, remanufacturing can surely contribute to more eco-efficient and sustainable

manufacturing systems. However, the contribution that remanufacturing can make will be limited
by the appropriateness of products for remanufacturing. The suitability of a product for
remanufacturing depends on various aspects of the product system, such as product design, product
frequency, volume and condition of product that has been returned, transportation distances and
costs, the value of remanufactured products and the demand for these products, and the cost of
remanufacturing in comparison to the cost of other alternatives for dealing with EOL products. A
typical remanufacturing model is shown in Figure-1.

5.2.5 Green Packaging:

Almost all of the industries use packaging for their products. Going green on the packaging
can ominously reduce cost of production and environmental hazards. Since inter-organizational
green packaging design is comparatively a new research area, a case study method is suitable as
its ability to generate the type of know ledge that cannot be assembled from purely analytical or
statistical investigation (McCutcheon and Meredith 1993). It is especially preferred for studying
singularities in highly complicated circumstances (Stuart et al. 2002). Employing the case study
approach provides a unique understanding of the packaging practices of the case organization in
their entirety without necessarily segregating them from their own perspective (Hartley 1994). The
analysis was conducted on a booster production company. The design and improvement of
packaging material can have a noteworthy effect upon an organization’s environmental
performance but may not be a simple undertaking. This case indicates that the design choices can
be highly complex and affect operational and quality performance as well as environmental
performance. In addition to legislative requirements, efforts to improve packaging can be
subjective to many internal and external forces. Through the interviews with the operations
manager, quality manager, warehouse manager and operators of the case company, the choice of
product packaging designs can be categorized according to four major concerns including
customer-imposed requirements, governing and legislative requirements, operational objectives
and environmentally motivated initiatives. Moreover, key criteria within each evaluation category
were identified. Table-7 shows a draft Categorized model. Whereas table-8 describes the key
features of the packaging option.

Table-7: A hierarchical model for the evaluation of alternative packaging options in the case
company.

Table-8: Key features of the packaging options

The packaging guidelines themselves require that eligible organizations minimize the materials
that they present into the packaging supply chain and promote the reuse, recycling, recovery,
composting or biodegrading of materials. Furthermore, there are limitations upon the nature of
materials that may be used, in particular heavy metals, and the organization is required to report
the materials that they reclaim, recycle or remove to landfill. Currently researchers have invented
certain kind of packaging materials which can bio-degrade over the time. Although the process of
biodegradation for this kind of treatment takes longer period of time, it’s still under development.
And from this analysis (Gareth et al, 2014) it was found that Inter-organizational green packaging
design approach in which packaging materials like base plates, ropes, wires which can be re-used
be sent over to the suppliers can reduce cost of the manufacturers and also makes it environment
friendly option. Careful restructure of packaging is necessary to minimize packaging, whilst at the
same time guaranteeing that the packaging still meets its practical and legislative requirements.

6.0 Future Scope:

The main concern of this article was to apply LSS tools to improve process steps in food and
drink industry while reducing one of the green waste garbage which affects both the manufacturer
economically and environment. Further study can be done on several industries like Electronic
Industries, Packaging Industries, Metal Industries, Wood Industries, Chemical Industries, Oil and
Gas Industries etc. While perusing to investigate one can follow the steps shown in Figure-11.

Green Waste

Identification of Industry

Commercial &
Food Industry Electronic Industry Packaging Industry Metal Industry Wood Industry Chemical Industry Oil & Gas Industry Industrial
Machinary Industry

Hazardous/ Non
Reusability
Hazardous

Identification of Waste

Material Quantity

Measurement of the Waste (Total Amount by weight or Quantity)

Minimization Procedure
Re-using of material
whenever possible

Re-Usability /
Bio-Degradability
Use of Procedures to
Bio-degrade the garbage
Total Elimination /
Other Management Plan

Future Management
Plan

Figure-11: Methodological Steps of Investigating using LSS Method

7.0 Conclusion:
By going green manufacturers can realize savings and increased profits beyond wildest
imagination. Again reducing garbage waste also includes keeping our environment clean. This is
a rep for the manufacturing industry that they are producing products in a greener way. As we
know garbage is a double edged knife, costing the manufacturer for excess raw material, material
waste then again costing for taking care of them to throw away. Again a third impact is the
incineration methods may affect environment. Now waste management in food and drink
industries remains as critical as it was. As both industries shows a wide variety of production
capacities there exist a strong difference in managing the waste for different aspects. Legal
legislations have already been taken by different countries like U.S.A, U.K. Germany. Biological
alternatives are proficient treatments if the effluents please strong and specific properties and use
conditions. If more sustainable production and consumption
is to be achieved the author recommends:
a) All sectors of this industry to actively pursue and disseminate policies based on a resource
efficient supply chain that include the whole system of production;
b) Manufacturers must give greater priority to reducing raw material wastage as far as
practically possible, and to finding good alternative uses or composting solutions for
wasted raw material;
c) The balance between human, animal and environmental health needs to be researched
further and properly addressed.

Reference:

Andrea Chiarini, (2014), Sustainable manufacturing-greening processes using specific Lean

Production tools: an empiric al observation from European motorcycle component
manufacturers, Journal of Cleaner Production 85 (2014) 226-233
Aye L, Widjaya ER. Environmental and economic analysis of waste disposal options for traditional
markets in Indonesia. Waste Manag 2006;26:1180–91.
Ashok V. Shekdar,(2009) Sustainable solid waste management: An integrated approach for Asian
countries, Waste Management 29 (2009) 1438–1448
Aira, M., Sampedro, L., Monroy, F., Domínguez, J., 2008. Detritivorous earthworms directly
modify the structure, thus altering the functioning of a micro decomposer food web. Soil
Biol. Biochem. 40, 2511–2516.
Carlos Mena, B. Adenso-Diaz , Oznur Yurt, The causes of food waste in the supplier–retailer
interface: Evidences from the UK and Spain, Resources, Conservation and Recycling 55
(2011) 648–658
Council Directive 1975. 75/442/EEC. Council Directive of July 15,1975 on waste. OJ L 194, July
25, 1975.
Council Directive 1991. 91/156/EEC. Council Directive of March 18,1991 amending Directive
75/442/EEC on waste. OJ L 078, March 26, 1991
Council Directive 1996. 96/61/EC. Council Directive of September 24, 1996 concerning integrated
pollution prevention and control. OJ L 257, October 10, 1996
Council Directive 1999. 99/31/EC. Council Directive of April 26, 1999 on the landfill of waste.
OJ L 182, July 16, 1999
Demirbas A. (2006) Energy priorities and new energy strategies. Energy Edu Sci Technol
2006;16:53–109
Dorador, J.M., Young, R.I.M., 2000. Application of IDEF0, IDEF3 and UML methodologies in
the creation of information models. International Journal of Computer Integrated
Manufacturing 13 (5), 430–445.
Directive 2000. 00/76/EC. Directive of the European Parliament and the Council of December 4,
2000 on the incineration of waste. OJ L 332, December 28, 2000.
EC, 2003. Communication from the Commission. Towards a Thematic Strategy on the Prevention
and Recycling of Waste [COM (2003) 301 final]. European Commission, Brussels
EC, 2005. Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the
European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. Towards
Sustainable Use Resources Forward: A thematic strategy on the prevention and recycling
of waste [COM (2005) 666 final]. European Commission, Brussels.
EPA. Characterization of potential of municipal solid waste (MSW) components. Municipal solid
waste in the United States: 1992 Update. EPA/530-R-94-042, NTS #PB 95-147690. Solid
waste and emergency response (5305), Washington. DC: US Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA); 1994.
Erses AS, Onay TT. In site heavy metal attenuation in landfills under methanogenic conditions. J
Hazard Mater B 2003;99:159–75
Envirowise. Profiting, from waste reduction in retail stores, Envirowise 66325; 2002
Fischer W. Reprocessing or disposal of kieselguhr sludge? Brauwelt International 1992;(1):60-5.
Forkes J.(2007), Nitrogen balance for the urban food metabolism of Toronto. Resour Conserv
Recy 2007;52(1):74–94.
Gareth R.T. White, Xiaojun Wang & Dong Li, Inter-organisational green packaging design: a
case study of influencing factors and constraints in the automotive supply chain,
International Journal of Production Research, 53:21, 6551-6566, DOI:10.1080/00207543.
2014.975854
Hartley, J. F. 1994. “Case Studies in Organizational Research.” In Qualitative Methods in
Organizational Research: A Practical Guide, edited by C. Cassell and G. Symon, 209–229.
London: Sage.
Henderson G. (2004), ‘Free’ food, the local production of worth, and the circuit of decom
modification: a value theory of the surplus. Environ Plann D: Soc Space 2004;22(4):485–
512.
Hogg D, Barth J, Scheliss K, Favoino E. Dealing with food waste in the UK. London: Eunomia
Research and Consulting; 2007
Hrycyk G. (1997) The recovery and disposal of diatomaceous earth in breweries, MBAA
Technical Quarterly 1997;34(1):293-8
Howitt S, editor. UK food market. Key note market review. 10th ed. 1998. ISBN 1-85765-846-9
INE. Spanish National Statistical Institute; 2009, Availableat:http://www.ine.es [last visited:
11/19/15]
Ivor J. Church & Anthony L. Parsons, Review: Sous vide cook-chill technology, International
Journal of Food Science and Technology (1993)28.563-574
Johnson SP, Corcelle G. (1997) The environmental policy of the European Communities. 2nd ed.
London, Kluwer Law International;1997
JORA (Japan Organics Recycling Association). Composting manual; 2003a. p. 47[in Japanese].
Kantor LS, Lipton K, Manchester A, Oliveria V. Estimating and addressing America’s food losses.
Food Rev 1997;20(1):2–12.).
Kan A. 2009.General characteristics of waste management: a review. Energy Educ Sci Technol
Part A 2009;23:55–69.
Kimura F. (1999), Life cycle design for inverse manufacturing. In: Proceedings of the IEEE
 International Symposium on Environmentally Conscious Design and Inverse
Manufacturing. IEEE, February 1999
King, A.A., Lenox, M.J., 2001. Lean and green? An empirical examination of the relationship
between lean production and environmental performance. Prod. Operat. Manag. 10 (3),
244-256.
Knirsch M, Penschke A, Meyer-Pittroff R. Disposal situation for brewery waste in Germany e
results of a survey. Brauwelt International 1999;(4):477-81.
Louis GE 2004. A historical context of municipal solid waste management in the United States.
Waste 2004; 22:306–22
Lundqvist J, de Fraiture C, Molden D. (2008) Saving water: from field to fork – curbing losses
And wastage in the food chain. SIWI Policy Brief. SIWI; 2008, Available at:
https://center.sustainability.duke.edu/sites/default/files/documents/from_field_to_fork_0.
pdf [last visited: 11/20/2015];
Luc Fillaudeau, Pascal Blanpain-Avet, Georges Daufin, Water, wastewater and waste management
in brewing industries, Journal of Cleaner Production 14 (2006) 463-471
Management: Engineering Principles and Management Issues. New York: McGraw Hill
McCutcheon, D. M., and J. R. Meredith. 1993. “Conducting Case Study Research in Operations
Management.” Journal of Operations Management 11 (3): 239–256
Mensah,Joseph, and HerbertA. Whitney. 1991. "Some Third World Environmental Perceptions
and Behaviors Concerning Urban Waste: A Survey of Techiman, Ghana." The
CanadianGeographer35:156-65.
Miki Takata , Kazuyo Fukushima , Noriko Kino-Kimata , Norio Nagao , Chiaki Niwa , Tatsuki
Toda, The effects of recycling loops in food waste management in Japan: Based on the
environmental and economic evaluation of food recycling, Science of the Total
Environment 432 (2012) 309–317
Moll M. Bieres et coolers e definition, fabrication, composition. Paris: Tech & Doc Lavoisier;
1991. chap. III, pp. 15-263
Mohamed K. Hassan, “Applying Lean Six Sigma for Waste Reduction in a Manufacturing
Environment.” American Journal of Industrial Engineering 1, no. 2 (2013): 28-35. doi:
10.12691/ajie-1 -2-4.
Nellman C, MacDevette M, Manders T, Eickhout B, Svihus B, Prins AG, et al. The environmental
food crisis –the environment’s role inverting future food crises. Norway: United Nations
Environment Program (UNEP); 2009.
Norfolk County Council, Planning and Transportation. A waste management plan for Norfolk,
1996
R. Darlington , T. Staikos, S. Rahimifard, Analytical methods for waste minimization in the
convenience food industry, Waste Management 29 (2009) 1274–1281
Reed R. Advances in filtration. The Brewer 1989; September:965-70
Rother, M., Shook, J., 2003. Learning to See. The Lean Enterprise Institute, Brookline, MA.
Romn, J., 1994. Lean and Clean Management: How to Boost Profits and Productivity by Reducing
Pollution. Kodansha International, New York, NY.
Stuart, I., D. McCutcheon, R. Handfield, R. McLachlin, and D. Samson. 2002. “Effective Case
 Research in Operations Management: A Process Perspective.” Journal of Operations
Management 20 (5): 419–433.
Stuart T. Waste: uncovering the global food scandal. London: Penguin Books; 2009. USDA.
Global food markets: global food industry structure. United States Department of
Agriculture; March 2008, Available at: http://www.ers.usda.gov/Briefing/
GlobalFoodMarkets/ [last visited 11/20/2015].
Shingo, S., 1989. Study of the Toyota Production System: from an Industrial Engineering
Viewpoint. Productivity Press, New York, NY.
Tchobanoglous,George,Hilary Theisen,and Samuel Vigil. 1993. Integrated Solid Waste
U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment. 1989. Facing America's Trash: What Next for
Municipal Solid Waste/OTA-0-424. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.
U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration.1993. Emissions of Greenhouse
Gases in the United States: 1985-1990. DOEIEIA-0573. Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office
U.S. EPA, 2014c Municipal solid waste generation, recycling, and disposal in the united states:
facts and for 2012. In: EPA-530-F-14-001. Washington, DC: Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response; 2014c
Ventour L. The food we waste: food waste report v2. WRAP; 2008
Vickers, I., 2000. Cleaner production: organizational learning or business as usual? An example
from the domestic appliance industry. Bus. Strategy Environ. 9 (4), 255-268.
Wendy Kerr a, Chris Ryan, (2001) Eco-efficiency gains from remanufacturing: A case study of
photocopier remanufacturing at Fuji Xerox, Journal of Cleaner Production 9(2001)75-81
World Development Report 1993: Investing in Health. New York: Oxford University Press
Yang W, Nam H, Choi S. Improvement of operating conditions in waste incinerators using
engineering tools. Waste Manage 2007;27:604–13.
Zucconi, F., Pera, V., Forte, M., De Bertoldi, V., 1981. Evaluating toxicity of immature compost.
Biocycle 22, 54–57.