Page 162 - Shaping A Sustainable Future

Figure 7: Comparison of electricity and water consumption before and after the proposed implementation,
with the percentage reduction

Overall consumption was reduced, with electricity
and water consumption at 13.82 % and 20.55 % less,
respectively, after the ice was limited to 50% of the cup
volume. Based on Singapore’s electric and water charges,
this will save $61.89 and $8.58 per month, respectively,
for the two phases. This calculation is based on 21.43
cents per kWh of electricity and 274 cents per m of
3
water.

The team also checked with the stall management as to
the sales of drinks for the two phases. As the sales figure
was sensitive information, the team only managed
to obtain a verbal verification. It was found that sales
between the two phases were similar. Therefore, the
team concluded that by implementing a reduction in Figure 8: Budi and Nurul Ernisah doing the calculation and
ice, the SME saved operating costs through a simple evaluation for the project.
green eco-solution.
The reduction in electricity consumption equates to CO 2
The critical environmental benefit was an improved emissions, based on Singapore’s data (Based on 0.4188
efficiency on operating costs with associated kgCO /kWh) (3). The saving in terms of CO equivalent
2
2
environmental benefits. Figure 8 shows the team emissions for Phase 2 of the trial was 120.949 kgCO .
2
performing the calculation and evaluating the vital Therefore assuming no variation in operations for
environmental benefits. a whole year, i.e. 52 weeks (4) saving in terms of CO
2
equivalent emissions will be 2,096.46 kgCO 2.

160