Radical Plans for Waste Could Herald a Big Clean-up -By Joanna Collins

1. Briefly compare and contrast any two waste disposal schemes (eg. zero waste and landfilling, landfilling and using incinerators or any other methods you know) and decide which one might be more suitable for your country.

As the state of technology advances, standards of living have improved, along with the larger increases in production and consumption of goods and materials. This results in the great generation of waste, which in turn causes soil contamination, the depletion of natural resources, air and water pollution, global warming and a generation of stench. Domestic, commercial and industrial waste, along with littering and illegal dumping, places enormous pressure on the natural environment. It has been predicted that the amount of rubbish contributed from households will be doubled by the year 2020 to approximately 40 million tones per year (Collins, 2002). Such an enormous figure would definitely shock many who are still unaware of the amount of waste that they are producing. Thus, there is certainly a need to adopt a disposal scheme to reduce waste dramatically, in order to save the world from adverse impacts.


There are two waste disposal schemes – zero waste and landfilling. Each may be suitable for a country to solve their waste disposal problems. Zero waste is a waste disposal scheme that aims to guide people in recycling materials, such that waste is reused to reach the aim of reducing waste to zero. Another method of waste disposal is landfilling. A landfill is a site for the disposal of waste materials by burial and it is the oldest form of waste treatment. Landfills are often constructed in low lying areas and built in cells that may encompass from 50 to 150 acres, thus, creating a landfill is generally unsuitable in Singapore due to the limited area of land. Moreover, building a landfill in Singapore is typically unattractive as the waste generates odor that can often be detected outside the boundaries. This leads to the unwanted attraction of birds, insects and other wildlife to the site and creates a negative tourist image. On the other hand, the recycling of materials does not require large amount of land and does not create pollution to the environment. Dry recyclables such as bottles, cans and plastics are much easier to carry out and provides a clean and green image. Thus, with regards to the limited land of Singapore and to reduce pollutions for better tourist attraction, the zero waste disposal scheme would be more appropriate.


Besides recycling materials, creating public awareness by reducing waste is necessary by encouraging the participation of Singaporeans in the zero waste scheme. For example, getting customers to engage in a shopping centre’s recycling program could mean that they are encouraged to avoid getting multiple plastic bags or paper bags. This can help to reduce the use of non-biodegradable plastics which is harmful to the Earth’s ozone layer. Moreover, such programs are cost effective and yet there are funds to be made too. According to Robin Murray, a leading zero-waste economist in Britain, “resource recovery facilities and exchange networks were found to be turning waste into an asset, creating small business opportunities and employment in struggling communities.” (Collins, 2002) It would means that a zero waste scheme is able to create more employments in the country. Alternatively, the development of landfill infrastructure and maintenance of the land is cost effective. Furthermore, there is a need to train landfill staff to operate such a system. Therefore, in terms of financial and employment side, zero waste disposal scheme proves to be a better option to a country.

Most of the new landfills are designed and built to store waste, which is thought to be a safe containment of garbage. The landfill can accommodate large amount of waste which can be cleared in a short period of time. However, zero waste disposals take a longer time to recycle the waste. The landfills that are closed have certain beneficial such as sites for golf-courses and ski-mountains. Therefore, in order to clear a large amount of waste in a short time, adopting a landfilling scheme is more appropriate.

In conclusion, there are pros and cons of developing a zero waste scheme or landfilling scheme. The zero waste disposals scheme is inexpensive, clean and environmental friendly but slow and provides lesser output as compared to the use of landfilling or incineration. On the other hand, the landfilling scheme is fast and efficient but cost effective, land consuming and creates pollution. However, to adopt a waste disposal scheme in Singapore, the best option is still the zero waste disposals scheme. Singapore is a small country with limited land and does not produce large amount of waste as compared to other bigger countries like Britain, New Zealand and Canada. In addition, it can reduce pollution, making Singapore a better tourist attraction site.

Reference
Collins, J. (2002, Oct 3rd). Radical plans for waste could herald a big clean-up. TheGuardian Weekly. P25.

W9T2: Difficulties Faced in Engineering Classes

What difficulties do you have writing in your engineering classes? How will you continue to improve? Use approximately 300 words.

I have difficulty in writing my lab report for one of my module, Introduction to Biotransport. Most of the time, I could think of the answers to a question but I could not express myself well enough to write out a flowing paragraph. For example, “What is the limitation to this viscosity experiment?” In my mind, I could think of the necessary answers such as the equipment provided is not high-tech enough, parallax error, human recording errors etc. I could list out the points contributing to this limitation but to explain it in a reporting style, I always have a hard time figuring out what to write and elaborate on and most of the time, my sentences for report writing are very choppy.

To resolve this difficulty, I will normally list out my answers in point form and then, I will try to link one or two points together and form it into a sentence. After that, I will try to think of the possible consequences to the points mention in the sentences. Next, I will reconstruct the sentences formed previously such that the consequences are linked with the main reason. To link most of the points together smoothly, I will have to use a few transition signals to make the sentences less choppy and more flowing.

An example of an answer to the above question showing the reason, cause and consequence, ‘due to the weak attachment of the stopcock to the bottle cap, there might be possible water leakage from the point of attachment and thus the flow rate Q calculated will be lower than the actual value. Hence, the calculated value of the viscosity will be higher than the accurate value.’

To improve my writing further, I will read up reports online and try to learn the technique and tone of writing a good report. I will improve my writing by going through the report a few times. As the lab report for the module is done in a group of four, I will then send to everyone and ask for their comment before doing a final edit. Some times, they will help me to correct some of my commonly made grammatical mistakes.

W7T1: Summarising a Word Article

Read and summarise a 500-1000 word article related to the 14 grand challenges for engineering.

Article :

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2008/feb/15/technological.challenges

Summary

The human race will be facing some of its biggest challenges in the predicted next 50 years. The prediction by futurologists on the rapid rate of progress which will increase by 30 fold in the next 50 years will be the catalyst for challenges such as reversing the effects of ageing, reprogramming genes to prevent diseases and producing clean energy. Also, such rapid rate of progress will have much impact on the condition of living of us humans. To name a few, better understanding of our genes leading to personalization of medicines and thus longer, healthier lives and more environmentally sustainable ways of living. A group of scientists, entrepreneurs and thinkers convened by the US National Academy of Engineering (NAE) to identify future life changing problems believes that the growing and expending population is causing an immediate problem in sustaining life in the continuing advancement while taking into consideration the improvement of the quality of life. The topic of the usage of clean energy was a priority. The group has identified as sunshine being the most feasible energy for us to tap and they believe that it is possible for us to meet 100% of our energy needs by only capturing one part in 10,000 of the sunlight that falls on Earth. Besides clean energy, clean water and personalization of medicine is a top issue. The insufficient supply of water in many regions of the world is still a problem. And the discussion of how we should use the recent success in sequencing of the human genome to develop methods such as enabling doctors to forecast the benefits and side effects of potential treatments or cures of individuals. As said by Ray Kurzweil, the technique of modifying behavior of genes will enable us to control progression of disease and ageing. Lastly, the advancement of computer intelligence would enable automated diagnosis and prescriptions for treatment as they predict that non-biological intelligence will surpass that of human intelligence. However, experts said that economic and political will, will be the main drive in meeting the challenges.