equipment. “Both grey water and
compost systems generate cost for
the energy and chemicals they use
to convert the food. There is also a
long list of food that cannot go into
these machines such as bones, fibrous
materials such as pineapple tops, oils
and fats and liquids, which means you
need to separate them out, creating an
extra labour requirement.” He says that
operators that may not have enough of a
volume to justify buying a full handling
solution can still massively cut costs
and labour by using ‘old’ technology
such as dewatering systems, which can
cut waste volume by up to 80%.
The power of transparency
Many of the latest food waste
solutions use technology to monitor
and record the level of food waste that
kitchens produce. In order to start
reducing food waste, businesses need
technologies that offer transparency
about what is being disposed so
potential wasteful behaviour can
be modified, according to Lisa
Giovannielli, director of corporate
communications and marketing at
BioHiTech. “Food waste is being
generated in every step of the supply
chain, and by collecting that data in
real time we can identify opportunities
to prevent it in order to make a
positive environmental impact.
On-site aerobic digester technology
is a proven disposal solution for
businesses that generate food waste
— regardless of current regulations
that may be in place. BioHiTech’s
technology-based solution comes with
an industry-leading data package for
FOOD WASTE
PREVENTION
NEEDS TO GO
HAND IN HAND
WITH TREATMENT
TECHNOLOGY AS PART
OF ANY SUSTAINABLE
WASTE MANAGEMENT
STRATEGY”7
customers to access their food waste
generation in real time.Getting staff buy-in
Specifying the right food waste
management solution for a particular
operation is only half the job. It’s
equally important to ensure staff
buy-in and create a culture where
staff understand the significance
of good food waste management
practices. “While space is always at
the top of most operators’ lists when
determining if a specific piece of food
waste equipment will fit in, it’s more
important to outline the operator’s
goals and how to communicate them
with the staff,” says Lisa Giovannielli
at BioHiTech. “Staff education, buy-
in, and in some cases incentive, will
separate the successful programmes
from the failures. Choosing the right
solution takes some trial and error,
there is not one solution that fits all.”Economics and
the environment
Operators keen to choose the best
economic and environmental solution
to re-process end-of-life food for each
site need to examine all factors, says
Peter Galliford, commercial director
at Mechline. “There are numerous
considerations to factor in such as
evaluation, including transportation
costs, carbon emissions, pollutants
and particulate discharges, storagecosts and facilities, labour costs, energy
consumption and costs, hygiene, ease
of operation, waste recovery awareness,
and segregation and undertaking.
While recycling end-of-life food off-site
is an option, there will still be a cost
associated with this and, in some cases,
it is not much cheaper than general
waste disposal costs. Transportation
of end-of-life food waste may not
represent the best environmental
and economic options when the nett
value of the waste product reprocessed
output is fully evaluated.”Size and layout will shape
specification
Foodservice operators need to
think carefully about kitchen size
and layout. With kitchen space at a
premium, many operators see waste
management systems as bulky pieces
of equipment that won’t fit. However,
there are lots of compact, efficient
products available, with flexible layout
options. “For customers with space
issues, we recommend having a waste
inlet station in the kitchen itself, which
then pumps food waste to another
location to be dewatered. This can be
to another part of the kitchen, or even
to another part of the building,” says
Martin Venus at IMC.1089http://www.foodserviceequipmentjournal.com August 2019 | Foodservice Equipment Journal | 35
FOOD WASTE