A Study on Industrial Ecology of Glass in Taiwan

• Main Authors: Yang,Chia-Shen, 楊家馨
• Other Authors: Lee, Yuh-Ming
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2004
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/94722183040585488237

碩士 === 國立臺北大學 === 資源管理研究所碩士在職專班 === 92 === In general, glass can be said to be nearly 100% recyclable. This study, therefore, selects glass as the investigation target. The objectives of this study are thus to conduct an industrial ecology study on glass as well as to discuss the recycling policies implemented here in Taiwan. Glass products can be generally classified as: containers, flat glass, glass fiber and those with specific uses. Nevertheless, the most daily-life used glass is containers. This study thus focuses on glass container only. From industrial-ecological point of view, the life cycle (including production, use and recycling) of container glass in Taiwan can be defined as a pseudo-closed industrial ecological system (nearly Type III hypothetical eco-systems discussed in Industrial Ecology). Take the investigation of industrial ecology of glass container industry in 1993 as an example, there is only 27.1% of glass that can not be tracked firmly. That is, since the stage of raw materials acquisition through the recycling procedures a very high recycling rate is achieved. The reuse rate is estimated as 2.4%. Some portion of the container glass is shattered to gullets and then mixed with raw materials to produce new products in a glass kiln. The recycling rate with regeneration is estimation as around 58%. The rest of the container glass also can be mixed as aggregates of asphalt or for making bricks. The ‘disposal’ rate of the measure for waste container glass treatment is about 12.5%. Since some of the waste container glass is not completely reused or recycled, the industrial eco-system of container glass in Taiwan can only be defined as a pseudo-closed system. Regarding the recycling strategies for the management of waste glass containers, we suggest further assessment on reuse should be conducted to discuss the issue of water usage. Secondly, the disposal measure of mixing waste glass into asphalt concrete or bricks seems not a ‘sustainable’ approach for waste treatment. We suggest that the authority should investigate the measure further.