Glass Waste

C H A P T E R

15 Glass Waste John H. Butler, Paul D. Hooper Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, United Kingdom

O U T L I N E 1. The Glass Industry 1.1 Glass Production 1.2 Environmental Issues

307 307 309

2. Glass Reuse and Recycling 2.1 Container Glass Recycling 2.2 Flat Glass Recycling 2.3 Summary of Glass Waste Streams

312 313 314 316

3. Container Glass Recycling Processes

316

1 THE GLASS INDUSTRY Glass is in the background of the daily lives of most people. It is manufactured from plentiful raw materials and can be readily reused as feedstock in glass production. Between 80% and 85% of the mass output from the worldwide glass industry is either in the form of containers for the food, beverage, and pharmaceutical industries, or flat glass for building construction or for motor vehicle manufacture [1]. Other product segments, while only constituting about 15% of the mass output, produce high value technical and consumer products by comparison with container and flat glass. However, the potential for glass recycling comes largely

Waste https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-815060-3.00015-3

4. The Future for Glass Production and Recycling 4.1 Introduction of Container Deposit Schemes 4.2 Infrastructure Maintenance and Change

318 318 319

5. Conclusion

319

References

319

from the container and flat glass sectors, because of their dominance in terms of mass, and their relatively uniform chemical composition, with soda-lime-silica glass accounting for virtually all the container and flat glass produced. Hence this chapter will focus on these categories of glass when discussing the environmental issues arising from glass production and consumption.

1.1 Glass Production The demand for glass containers, being mainly dependent on sales of beverages and food, does not fluctuate greatly with business cycles, by contrast with flat glass demand. Annual production has increased over the past decade, but not at

307

Copyright # 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

308

15. GLASS WASTE

TABLE 15.1

Global Container Glass Production Reported Data

Europee

Reference Year

Unit of Measurec,d

Total

Conversion Rate

Production Tonnes 2014a,b

2014

Tonnes

22,128,328

1.00

22,130,000

2014

Tonnes

7,000,000

1.00

7,000,000

g

2014

Tonnes

13,230,000

1.00

13,230,000

h

South America

2014

US$ million

1980

1.59

3,154,000

h

Russian Federation North America

f

2014

US$ million

1666

1.59

2,650,000

h

2014

US$ million

1671

1.59

2,660,000

i

China

2014

US$ million

10,872

1.59

17,320,000

h

2014

US$ million

865

1.59

1,380,000

2014

US$ million

48,300

1.59

77,000,000

Mexico Japan

India

Sub total Rest of world Totalj,k a

Europe Market Share—29% of total global tonnage, Research MOZ, 2015, Global Glass Bottles/Containers Market—By Regions and Vendors. Mordor Intelligence 2016, Global Glass Bottles/Containers Market, Hyderabad APAC region leads the market with a market share of 34% in 2016 while, on the other hand, Europe had a share of 29%. c Conversion units to tonnes based on Faraday packaging and glass technology services 2006, light-weight glass containers—The Route to Effective Waste Minimisation, WRAP, Banbury, UK. d Conversion of US$ million to tonnages based on ratios in United Nations Statistics Division, 2016, “industrial Commodity Statistics Database” Bottles, Jars and other Containers of Glass. e FEVE European Container Glass Federation, 2015, for container glass statistics “EU Container Glass Production Growth shows Industry Resilience,” Brussels. f Glass International, Redhill, U.K. 2015, “Russian industry stays positive ahead of Mir Stekla 2015” http://www.mirstekla-expo.ru/common/img/uploaded/ exhibitions/mir_stekla/press_about_us/GlassInternational_March2015.pdf. g Business Wire, San Francisco, 2016, “North America Glass Containers Market—By Countries and Vendors, Market Trends and Forecasts (2014–20)” USD https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20160120005823/en/North-America-Glass-Containers-Market. h United Nations Statistics Division, 2016, “industrial Commodity Statistics Database” Bottles, Jars and other Containers of Glass. i Statista, Hamburg, 2017, https://www.statista.com/forecasts/414675/china-glass-container-manufacture-operating-revenue-forecast-icnea-3055. j Future Market Insights 2016, Glass Container Market, London, https://www.futuremarketinsights.com/reports/container-glass-market. k Research and Markets, 2015, “Global glass bottles and containers market 2014–20,” Dublin. b

the same rate as growth in demand for packaged beverages and food, because of competition from other packaging materials. Based on the sources cited in Table 15.1, and here [2–4] we have calculated that global production of glass containers in 2014 was 77
106 t (77 million tonnes). Table 15.1 analyses production for 2014 by regional groupings. While the source data and other assumptions for the Europe Union and the USA can be quoted with some confidence, those for other regions are subject to varying degrees of accuracy through incomplete data collection.

Over the decade to 2016, the global glass container market has maintained a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) in the region of 3.5% in terms of value and the number of containers produced [4]. However, due to container light weighting [5–7] CAGR in terms of mass is more in the order of 1%. By contrast with container glass, the demand for flat glass can be very cyclical, depending on the level of activity in the building construction and automotive industries. Following the financial crisis of 2008 and the knock-on effect in the

2. WASTE STREAMS (AND THEIR TREATMENT)

309

1 THE GLASS INDUSTRY

construction, motor manufacture, and other industries, there were significant capacity reductions in flat glass manufacturing among many of the traditional producing countries. Thus, the North American float glass industry went from 44 working glass lines in 37 plants to 34 lines in 25 plants between 2005 and 2015. Similarly, several countries in Western Europe also witnessed reductions in capacity from 2005 to 2015. By contrast, the growth in China’s flat glass production capacity has more than made up for the reductions in capacity. In 2015 China produced and consumed about 50% of the total flat glass produced globally. Global flat glass production for 2015 is presented in Table 15.2. As in the case of container glass, we believe that the figures for the European Union and USA are more reliable than some of the data for some of the other regional groupings.

glass is by burning fossil fuels above a bath of batch material, which is continuously fed into, and then withdrawn from the furnace in a molten condition. Heat is provided mainly by radiative transmission from the furnace crown, which is heated by the flames to up to 1650°C, with some coming also from the flames themselves. The molten glass in the furnace is held at a constant temperature for approximately 24 h for production of containers and 72 h for float glass [8]. In general, the energy necessary for melting and mixing the batch components accounts for over 75% of the total energy requirements of glass manufacture [8] with the raw material procurement and formation of life cycle stages accounting for the other 25%. While pure silica can be made into high quality glass, this requires the batch to be heated to a temperature of around 2300°C, at which point its viscosity is reduced to a liquid state suitable for the subsequent formulation stage, the ‘melting point.’ By adding sodium oxide (Na2O) obtained from the addition of soda ash (Na2CO3), the melting point is lowered to about 1500°C [9]. However, the soda makes any glass produced water soluble. To overcome this calcium oxide (CaO), obtained from limestone (CaCO3) is

1.2 Environmental Issues The main environmental impacts in glass making are the high energy use in batch melting, resulting in emissions of combustion gases and the heat reaction of components of the batch mix. The usual way of providing heat to melt TABLE 15.2

Global Flat Glass Production Million Tonnes Europea Russian Federationb

North Americac

South Americac

Japand,e Chinaf–h Sout East Rest of Asia Worlda

Totald,e

Flat Glass Capacity 9.50 (2015)

1.55

8.60

1.85

1.70

42.50

3.10

20.00

85.00

Flat Glass Production (2015)

1.13

6.00

1.60

1.50

36.60

2.80

14.78

73.20

8.80

a

Glass for Europe, Brussels 2015, “Industry Facts and Figures),” http://www.glassforeurope.com/en/industry/. Glass International 2015, Redhill, U.K., “Russian industry stays positive ahead of Mir Stekla 2015.” Devklin, K., 2016. National Glass Association and Glass Magazine, “How shifting markets and new players are transforming the float glass industry,” https://glassmagazine.com/article/commercial/world-glass-1614774. d Glass Global Community 2017. Tokyo, “Updated worldwide glass market study 2018.” e Statista, Hamburg 2018, “Market volume of flat glass worldwide,” https://www.statista.com/statistics/697139/flat-glass-market-volume-worldwide/. f China Statistical Yearbook 2016, “Output of Industrial Products,” http://www.stats.gov.cn/tjsj/ndsj/2016/indexeh.htm. g Cision PR Newswire 2013, “Research Report on China’s Glass Industry 2012–17,” https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/research-report-on-chinasglass-industry-2012-2017-211167351.htm. h Converted from weight boxes where 1 weight box ¼ 50 kg of glass. b c

2. WASTE STREAMS (AND THEIR TREATMENT)

310

15. GLASS WASTE

added to the batch to render the glass chemically durable. Magnesium oxide (MgO) and aluminum oxide (Al2O3) may also be used to enhance the chemical durability, while other materials are added to provide color. The resulting glass contains about 70%–74% silica, 12%–15% sodium oxide, and 10%–15% calcium oxide by weight, plus a small amount of coloring and other material and is called silica-soda-lime glass. It accounts for about 90% of manufactured glass. Fuel oil and natural gas are the predominant energy sources for melting, with a small amount of electricity also used. The theoretical energy requirements for soda-silica-lime glass are given in Table 15.3 [9]. The calculation assumes all available heat is fully utilized and has three components: • the heat required to raise the temperature of the raw materials from 20°C to 1500°C • the latent heat required to enable the reactions between the batch components to form the glass • the heat content of the gases (principally CO2) released from the batch during melting The delivered process energy actually needed is higher than the theoretical figures [9] due to waste gas and structural heat losses, and depends on the furnace efficiency. Large modern cross-fired regenerative furnaces (capacity >500 t d1 where d refers to day) operating with a typical energy efficiency of 50% would result in energy use of approximately 5.5 GJ t1 for a container batch containing virgin feedstock only.

The principal emissions to air from the batch melting process result from the combustion of fuel and decomposition of the soda ash and limestone as they heat up. Once limestone is heated to above 850 °C, it will start to decompose as in the reaction: Heat + CaCO3 ! CaO + CO2 : Similarly, soda ash decomposes to produce sodium oxide (Na2O) as in: Heat + Na2 CO3 ! Na2 O + CO2 : Emissions of gaseous outputs from other additions to the batch produce oxides of sulfur and nitrogen. Based on an input of 150 and 190 kg of limestone and soda ash into the batch mix, 145 kg of process CO2 per tonne of glass would be produced. Emissions from combustion per unit of energy will vary depending on the energy source, the most common of which for batch melting is methane processed from natural gas, with fuel oil making up an ever decreasing proportion of the fuel mix based on relative costs. Thus in the USA and European Union it is reported that methane is the predominant fuel, with some electricity in the proportion of 80:20 [10, 11]. NSG Group reported that in 2011 the mix of its fuel use in its glass production operations as methane:oil:electricity ¼ 67:18:15, with oil continuing to make up a decreasing proportion of the total [12]. Emissions from methane combustion follow the reaction:

TABLE 15.3 Theoretical Secondary Energy Requirements in Batch Melting Using Virgin Feedstock Soda-Lime-Silica Glass GJ t21 Endothermic melting heat (Hmelt)

1.89

Latent heat of fusion of materials (Hchem)

0.49

Heat of gases emitted (Hgas)

0.30

Total energy use

2.68

2. WASTE STREAMS (AND THEIR TREATMENT)

1 THE GLASS INDUSTRY

CH4 + 2O2 ! CO2 + 2H2 O, and that for fuel oil: C14 H30 + 21:5O2 ! 14CO2 + 15H2 O Based on a delivered energy use of 5.5 GJ t1 in the batch melt, and converting this to the mass of methane and fuel oil consumed, CO2 emissions would be 280 and 415 kg t1 of glass, respectively, due to the different combustion carbon outputs for given masses of methane and fuel oil with the same energy content. As all the inputs are in powder or granular form there may also be releases of particulates into the atmosphere. The principal emissions from container glass furnaces to air are summarized in Table 15.4 and include upstream fuel production CO2 emissions of 50 and 80 kg t1 for natural gas and fuel oil, respectively. There are three broad approaches to reducing the environmental impacts of glass production;

TABLE 15.4 Principal Emissions to Air From SodaLime-Silica Glass Batch Melting (kg t1 of Container Glass Produced) Typical Atmospheric Emissions (kg t of Glass Melted) CO2 using natural gas CH4

480

CO2 using fuel oil

640

NOx

2.4

SOx

2.5

Dust (without secondary abatement)

0.4

Dust (with secondary abatement)

0.024

HCl (without secondary abatement)

0.041

HCl (with secondary abatement)

0.028

HF (without secondary abatement)

0.008

HF (with secondary abatement)

0.003

H2O (evaporation and combustion)

1.8

Sources: European Commission 2001, Reference Document on Best Available Techniques in the Glass Manufacturing Industry Tables 3.6–3.17; Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, 2017 Government GHG Emission Factors for Company Reporting, Table 4.

311

firstly, reductions in energy use; secondly, “end of pipe” emission abatement measures; and thirdly, for glass containers, product ‘light weighting’ referred to previously [5–7]. Energy intensity efficiencies are achieved through more energy-efficient furnace design and substituting recycled glass cullet for virgin raw materials. Furnaces using natural gas and purified oxygen (gas-oxy furnaces) are largely replacing traditional furnaces heated by using gas and the oxygen present in the air. This results in lower energy consumption and resultant emissions because it is not necessary to heat the atmospheric nitrogen constituting 79% by mass of the air to the temperature of the flames. Less combustion air has to be heated and therefore less energy is lost with the furnace waste gases [13]. It has been estimated that for large efficient regenerative furnaces, energy savings would be between 5% and 20%: see Worrell et al. p. 64 [14]. Further reductions in energy consumption can be obtained through the use of cullet which avoids the use of heat in thermal reactions between batch components and loss of heat in gaseous emissions, and provides additional liquidity at lower temperatures in the batch reducing the energy used to heat the components. Compared to the theoretical energy requirements of 2.7 GJ t1 for batch melting primary of raw materials, the energy required to simply melt glass is 1.9 GJ t1 and it is commonly estimated that substituting 10% of cullet for a similar weight of requisite virgin raw material mix can save 2.5% of energy. Container glass typically has a short life cycle, being primarily used to package beverages and food. Production and use are often within the same country or region, though they may be distant from one another in the case of specialist products, for example, estate bottled wines or pharmaceutical products. By contrast, flat glass, principally used in motor vehicle manufacture and in the construction industry, has a long in-use life span. In the case of buildings, production of the glass used may be distant from its

2. WASTE STREAMS (AND THEIR TREATMENT)

312

15. GLASS WASTE

point of use, though usually within the same national or regional boundaries, while the glass used for motor vehicle windows may well be shipped across national and regional boundaries to its point of use. However, the two types of glass each present their own set of recycling challenges, which will be reviewed separately.

2 GLASS REUSE AND RECYCLING Within the waste management hierarchy, reuse is considered before moving to the next option down, recycling. In the case of flat glass, because of the dispersed nature of its use, lack of homogeneity, and its long life span, reuse is often not a viable option financially or environmentally. By contrast, the glass used for manufacturing containers has a similar raw material mix, apart from coloring agents, and has a short in-use life. Furthermore, production and use of the containers often take place within the same country or administrative region. For glass containers, the reuse option is therefore considered before that of recycling. Supermarket retailers are the most influential decision makers in determining the viability of reuse of primary packaging, including glass. Supermarket chains have accelerated the development of distribution systems on the basis of a one-way packaging flow from producer to consumer, and this trend has been further stimulated by the increasing globalization of retail supply chains. Even in supermarket chains in those countries with retake systems, underpinned by container deposit legislation, recycling rather than refill is becoming the norm. In effect, packaging recovery costs have very largely been externalized into the recycling route, where the burden is picked up by consumers, city and regional government recycling infrastructure, and the waste management industry. For refill systems, the environmental and financial transport burdens of the collect and return system and the cleaning and sterilization

process prior to refill have to be measured against the burdens of cullet collection, processing, and batch melting. This has been the subject of numerous studies demonstrating the significant environmental benefits of reusing rather than recycling glass packaging [15–18]. Even given globalized markets and the current dominance of supermarket and hypermarket chains in retail distribution, there may still be opportunities for smaller scale glass container reuse, for example, in the rapidly growing microbrewery sector serving localized markets in the UK, New England, and Canada. There are also a number of countries and market segments where the refillable glass bottle is used extensively, in many cases supported by container deposit legislation. The Beer Store of Ontario reports that for the year to April 2011, of the 1.2 billion bottles of beer that organization sold wholesale to retail outlets, 88% of the bottles were refillable, with a return rate of 96% [19]. The PALPA Recycling System in Finland reports that 24% of beverage containers in 2016 were refillable, with a return rate of 97% compared with the return rate of 88% for bottles recycled into cullet [20]. The 2008 Annual Report of Dansk Retursystem A/S showed that, while in Denmark the one-way packaging share of the beverage market is increasing year on year, refillables still accounted for 53% with a 100% return rate [21]. By 2015 this proportion had fallen to 20% [22]. In Germany, reuse of beverage containers has been underpinned by a 72% quota for refillable containers, but here again reuse is under threat from the new packaging regulations in Germany (Verpackungsgesetz) which will become effective from 1 January 2019, whereby the quota is replaced by “promotion” of reusable packaging aiming for a target of 70% [23]. A project led by Glass Technology Services to introduce viable container glass recycling schemes in the Russian Federation indicates that, contrary to previously reported data, nearly all used glass containers are currently disposed of to landfill rather than being refilled or used as cullet [24]. Starting from 1 January 2015 amendments

2. WASTE STREAMS (AND THEIR TREATMENT)

313

2 GLASS REUSE AND RECYCLING

to Federal Law No. 89-FZ of 24 June 1998 “On Production and Consumption Waste” (“Waste Law”) established extended producers’ responsibility with regard to recycling waste from use of goods, with a 2017 target of 20% for glass containers [25]. In 2015 the State of California achieved a refillable glass bottle recycling rate of 14% compared to 62% for cullet [26]. In other countries the refillable glass container lives on for locally produced beverages or for niche markets, for example, in the UK the refillable milk bottle delivered to and collected from the doorstep. Finally, in some developing nations like India and Brazil, the cost of new bottles often stimulates the informal collection and refill of glass bottles for selling carbonated and other drinks.

2.1 Container Glass Recycling In theory container glass can be made from 100% cullet, and there is no limitation on the number of times that used container glass can

Estimated Global Glass Container Consumption and Recycling Rates

RE-USE

72%

34%

29%

SANITARY LANDFILL

45%

28%

66%

3%

Other

Japan

China

India ≤ 70%

45% 55%

ASIA

TOTA L

≈ 4%

68%

RECYCLE

Other

SUB SAHARAN AFRICA

South Africa

Other

Egypt

MENA

Other

Russian Federation

EUROPE

Eu 27 + NOR, CH, Turkey

Other

LATIN AMERICA AND CARIBBEAN

Brazil

NORTH AMERICA

Cananda

Other (excl Hawaii)

New Zealand

GLASS WASTE MANAGEMENT HIERARCHY

Australia

AUSTRALASIA/ OCEANIA

U.S.A.

TABLE 15.5

be fed back into the raw material input cycle. Consequently, the total potential for recycling is all the container glass used in a given period, which, given its short life cycle, is for all practical purposes the amount produced. There are, however, practical limitations to this theoretical 100% use of cullet. Firstly, given the dispersed nature of the waste stream, the marginal environmental and financial burdens of collecting increasing fractions of the postconsumer waste (PCW) container glass waste stream may increase to the point where they exceed the marginal benefits. Secondly, production waste cullet normally contributes about 10% of the batch mix, which limits the amount of PCW cullet that can be used. Having said that, a review of the current status of PCW glass recycling across the world reveals that any theoretical limits on using PCW sourced cullet in container glass production are far from being reached. Based on public domain information we have estimated worldwide glass container consumption, reuse, and recycling, the results of which

3% to 10%

74%

36%

20%

≤ 25%

55%

≈ 25%

80%

≥ 75%

45%

≈ 30% ≈ 75%

22% 55%

90% to 97%

19%

81% 64%

DISPOSAL SITES Year (tonnes million) 2015 Waste Generated Recycle/Re-use

1.10 0.60

2014 0.30 0.22

2007 0.30 NO DATA

2013 10.00 3.40

2013 1.12 1.09

2014 1.40 0.63

2015 NO DATA AVAIL- 15.94 ABLE 11.00

2014 7.00 1.40

2007 NO DATA AVAIL- ≥ 1.9 ABLE

≤ 0.50

2015 NO DATA AVAIL- 1.12 ABLE 0.62

2. WASTE STREAMS (AND THEIR TREATMENT)

2017 NO DATA AVAIL- 2.34 ABLE 1.64

2015

2014

20.00

1.50

≈ 5.00 0.36

2014 NO DATA AVAIL- 77.00 ABLE 27.35

314

15. GLASS WASTE

are presented in Table 15.5. Principal data sources are shown in the Annexure to Table 15.5, at the end of this chapter. Where numerical data has not been available, we have made an assessment of the waste disposal options being used in a region or country, based on reviews of the municipal waste management practices obtained from press and industry articles and web sites. These appear as shaded areas in the table. As there is no national or local government infrastructure for municipal waste management and recycling for many developing countries, there is a consequent lack of reliable data in these regions. This does not mean, however, that no recycling or reuse takes place. On the contrary, high rates of urban recycling in many countries are tied in with poverty, so that the very poor, such as the Kabari in India, find a source of income by picking recyclable material from waste left in streets or on municipal dumps [23], though the viability of informal recycling in that country has been negatively impacted by the imposition of a Goods and Services Tax which also applies to recycled products [27, 28]. Calculated consumption amounts to 64
106 t for those regions and countries for which data are available and for the years quoted. This compares to the global production of 77
106 t presented in Table 15.1. The difference between the two figures is largely due to the lack of consumption data for some regions and the limitation of some data to beverage containers only. In developing countries in particular, there is a huge annual increase in beverage container use, up to 15% p. a. in the case of China [29], but glass takes an increasingly lower share of the total, with predictions for the growth in global container glass consumption in the region of 3%–5%.

2.2 Flat Glass Recycling The recycling of flat glass largely depends on the way in which construction and demolition wastes (C&DW) and end-of-life vehicles (ELVs) are treated. Approximately 70% of global flat glass production is used in the building and

construction industries, 10% in motor vehicle manufacture [30], and the remainder for other uses. Recycling of such glass is largely dependent on the management of the C&DW and ELV waste streams. 2.2.1 Flat Glass Construction and Demolition Waste In spite of construction and demolition (C&DW) waste being one of the largest waste flows in the world, there is a significant lack of consistent data about the total waste stream and its management. One estimate for China is that urban C&DW has reached 30%–40% of the total urban waste generation because of the continuing large-scale construction and demolition activities resulting from the accelerated urbanization and city rebuilding. Estimates for China and some other countries/regions are presented in Table 15.6, which also includes the source references. Two studies characterizing the composition C&DW estimated the proportion of flat glass in C&DW to be 0.4  0.2%, and 0.2%, respectively [31, 32]. These ratios are also applied to the estimated C&DW to indicate the size of flat glass waste arising from that source. Currently there is little recycling of glass by demolition companies due to financial viability. Much brick and concrete C&DW is reused on the construction sites in the form of hard core once it has been crushed to an acceptable particle size. Given that glass is an insignificant part of total C&DW, it is frequently absorbed into the hard core, or any material removed from site for further processing. The exception to this occurs in buildings where glass is a significant part of the external or internal construction. The reader is referred to Chapter 19 for a fuller description of C&DW processing. If flat glass can be collected without contamination it can be recycled to be incorporated new flat glass production. St. Gobain Glass UK claims that it uses 30% flat glass cullet in the manufacture of its float glass, amounting to

2. WASTE STREAMS (AND THEIR TREATMENT)

315

2 GLASS REUSE AND RECYCLING

TABLE 15.6

Flat Glass C&D Waste in Selected Countries

Tonnes Million

Europea,b

USAc

Chinad–f

Japang

Brazilh

Indiai

Year

2010

2014

2014

2011

2016

2015

850

534

2500

75.4

70

12

Glass proportion

0.50%

0.50%

0.50%

0.50%

0.50%

0.50%

Glass mass

4.3

2.7

12.5

0.4

0.4

0.1

C&DW a,j

Principal Data Sources: a European Environment Agency, “Europe’s Waste Streams” 2015, https://www.eea.europa.eu/media/infographics/europe2019s-waste-streams-1/view. b Guy Van Marcke de Lummen and Niels Schreuder’ Recycling of Glass from Construction and Demolition Waste’, AGC Glass Europe 2013 http://agcflattoflat.eu/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Recycling-of-Glass-from.pdf. c Statista, “Volume of waste generated during construction and demolition in the United States in 2014,” https://www.statista.com/statistics/504120/ construction-and-demolition-waste-generation-in-the-us-by-material/. d Beijia Huang, Xiangyu Wang, Harnwei Kua, Yong Geng, Raimund Bleischwitz, Jingzheng Reng, Construction and demolition waste management in China through the 3R principle Resources, Conservation and Recycling Volume 129, February 2018, Pages 36–44, Elsevier. e Weisheng Lu, “Estimating the amount of building-related construction and demolition waste in China,” Proceedings of the 18th International Symposium on Advancement of Construction Management and Real Estate Springer Verlag, Berlin, 2014. f Huabo Duan, Jinhui LiConstruction and demolition waste management: China’s lessons Waste Management and Research, 2016. g Japanese Ministry of the Environment, 2011, in Hideko Yonetani Construction and Demolition Waste Management in Japan, Japan Federation of Construction Contractors. h M. Contreras, S.R. Teixeira, M.C. Lucas, LC.N. Lima, D.S.L. Cardoso, G.A.C. da Silva, G.C. Grego´rio, A.E. de Souza, A. dos Santos, Recycling of construction and demolition waste for producing new construction material (Brazil case-study), Construction and Building Materials, Volume 123, 1 October 2016, Pages 594–600. i Markandeya Raju Ponnada and Kameswari P, “Construction and Demolition Waste Management—A Review,” International Journal of Advanced Science and Technology, Vol. 84 (2015), pp. 19–46. j Glass for Europe, “EU waste legislation and building glass recycling,” Brussels 2014 http://www.glassforeurope.com/images/cont/187_55590_file.pdf.

36,000 t per annum [32] which would include production waste. Nevertheless, the incorporation of flat glass C&DW into building aggregates for substrate is likely to remain the main recycling option. 2.2.2 Flat Glass End-of-Life Motor Vehicle (ELV) Waste Within the European Union the management of ELV waste is regulated by Directive 2000/53/ EC, which aims, inter alia, “to increase the re-use, recycling and recovery of materials from ELVs.” Total ELV waste for 2007 was calculated as 6,119,842 t with 5,024,414 t being reused or recycled [33]. According to a report submitted by GHK to the European Union DG XI [34] the average weight of glass per ELV was calculated as 21.2 kg, which applied to the 2007 ELV waste

data would give a figure of 130,000 t of ELV glass waste in that year. In the United States the objectives of the Automotive Recyclers Association’s include “to promote automotive recycling.” A report published in the United States [35] calculated that the number of vehicles taken out of use in the period 1989–98 was 11,374,000 (Table 1–2 of the report, reference [35]) with an average glass weight of 39 kg (86 lbs) out of a total average vehicle weight of 1.44 t (3165 lbs). This would amount to 445,000 t of glass waste per annum. In Japan, roughly 5 million cars are disposed every year, with around a million of these exported as secondhand vehicles. Of the 4 million remaining it is claimed that nearly 100% are subject to recycling, with recycling rate of 75% by vehicle weight [36, 37]. Based on the

2. WASTE STREAMS (AND THEIR TREATMENT)

316

15. GLASS WASTE

EU average of 21.2 kg of glass per vehicle, flat glass waste from ELVs would amount to approximately 85,000 t per annum. By the end of 2007, there were 43 million vehicles with an average life of 15 years on the roads of China. It is estimated that each year up to 2010 4.8 million vehicles will be scrapped [38]. Using an average of 21.2 kg of glass per vehicle, ELV flat glass waste would amount to around 100,000 t per annum. There is little, if any, collection of ELV glass for feeding back into the flat glass production loop, and the glass is generally treated as a waste product from the metal and other materials recovered from ELVs (see Chapter 10 of this handbook for a description of ELV recycling).

2.3 Summary of Glass Waste Streams Based on data presented in the preceding sections, the relative importance of the three principal glass waste streams in terms of mass is summarized in the following table. Despite the variation in the source years and assumptions for the data presented, the many orders of magnitude difference between the three waste streams illustrates the dominant position that recycling container glass, compared to flat glass, can play in the recycling challenge to reduce the environmental and resource impacts of glass production (Table 15.7). TABLE 15.7

While waste recycling has become regarded as the waste management option of choice, it has to be recognized that it carries its own environmental and financial burdens [39]. Conceptually, converting postconsumer glass into cullet is a straightforward process of collecting material and removing contaminants, followed by color separation and crushing to feedstock size ready for inclusion in the batch melt, but in practice this is often difficult to achieve. Furthermore, in the drive to achieve high levels of recycling, sight is often lost of the aim of optimizing the environmental gains, or at least this becomes of secondary importance. In Table 15.8 some key characteristics of container glass recycling have been classified according to the end use of the cullet. Using cullet to produce containers is the most environmentally benign option, not only because of the energy saved in the batch melt, but also because the used glass containers can be fed back into the product loop continuously. The ability to do so depends on their being sufficient demand, which in turn requires that the cullet supplied meets the manufacturer’s specification for color mix and purity, for example, in the U.K. the WRAP PAS 101 specification and in the United

Relative Mass of Four Glass Waste Streams

Container Glass

Flat Glass

3 CONTAINER GLASS RECYCLING PROCESSES

C&DW

ELVs

Proportion flat glass of total

EU 28

USA

Japan

China

Year

2015

2013

2014

2015

Tonnes million

15.94

10.00

1.50

20.00

Year

2010

2014

2011

2014

Tonnes million

2.6

1.6

0.2

7.5

Year

2016

2015

Pre 2005

2007

Tonnes million

0.15

0.25

0.08

0.10

15%

16%

16%

28%

2. WASTE STREAMS (AND THEIR TREATMENT)

317

3 CONTAINER GLASS RECYCLING PROCESSES

TABLE 15.8

Characteristics of Container Glass Recycling and Cullet End Use Glass Container Cullet Closed Loop Market Demand

! !

Open Loop Regulatory driven

Type of recycling

Product to product

Material to material

Material substitution

Type of use

Used in container glass production

Used in other glass production

Used in nonglass applications

Typical end products

Glass bottles

Fiber glass insulation

Aggregates and substrate

Secondary energy saving/t (batch melt)

1.5 GJ

1.5 GJ

0

CO2 emissions avoidance kg t (batch melt)

215–250

200–230

0

Maximum cullet proportion

90%

50%

10%–20%

Continual loop recycling

Yes

No

No

Sources: Enviros Consulting Ltd., 2003. “Glass Recycling—Lifetime Carbon Dioxide Emissions,” British Glass Manufacturers Confederation, Sheffield; Butler and Hooper, 2005. “Dilemmas in optimising the environmental benefit from recycling: A case study of glass container waste management in the UK,” Resources Conservation and Recycling 45, 331–355.

States the Glass Packaging Institute’s ‘High Quality Cullet’ guide. A key dependency for optimizing environmental benefit is the achievement of a balanced flow of material through the system. For this to happen it is essential to have the necessary capacity at each stage, without an over or undersupply of material. In practice, the different motivations of the actors in the system can, and often do, prevent this system balance being achieved and may result in open-loop recycling, for example, using cullet as a substrate in road construction. This situation arises where there is insufficient demand for cullet of a specific color and grade for glass container production. One reason for this may result from there being an imbalance between regulatory recycling targets and commercial demand. Replacing virgin feedstock with cullet avoids the Hchem and Hgas energy use presented in Table 15.3. Based on a furnace thermal efficiency of 50%, a theoretical saving of the energy used in the glass container batch melt from 100% cullet

rather than 100% virgin feedstock would be in excess of 1.5 GJ t1 of delivered (secondary) energy. Table 15.8 shows that, as a result of the reduction in energy use and avoidance of heat reactions with soda ash and limestone, CO2 emissions from the batch melt are reduced by 215–250 kg t1 if a theoretical 100% cullet is used in place of virgin feedstock in container production. As there is no limit to the number of times glass can be recycled, these savings can be repeated, depending on the efficiency of the recycling regime in keeping waste container glass within the loop. Although a similar one off energy saving is obtainable from using cullet as raw material for producing fiberglass, it is not possible to then recycle fiberglass as feedstock into further production cycles [39]. At the other end of the spectrum, it has been shown that reductions in the energy burden through the use of cullet in aggregate production are largely dependent on the reduced transport resulting from using locally produced cullet rather than more distant virgin raw

2. WASTE STREAMS (AND THEIR TREATMENT)

318

15. GLASS WASTE

materials. In some cases, using cullet may actually increase the energy burden compared to using virgin feedstock [40].

4 THE FUTURE FOR GLASS PRODUCTION AND RECYCLING Within the glass making industry segments there have been significant energy efficiency improvements arising from two main sources— light weighting of glass containers, and the widespread installation of oxy-fuel combustion systems in furnaces. The possibility of reducing the weight of various types of beverage and good container without any deterioration in product quality was demonstrated in a research project undertaken by WRAP in conjunction with the Co-operative Retail Group in the UK [41]. Light weighting has been implemented across many segments of glass container production, put particularly in the case of beer, where it is claimed that bottles being produced today may be half the weight of bottles produced 20 years ago [42], while significant reductions in the weight of wine bottles are also claimed [43]. Assuming the commonly quoted compound annual growth rate of 2%–3% for the production of glass container units during the years 2008–15, we calculate that global production in 2015 would have amounted to between 84 and 91
106 t, rather than 77
106 t in reported in Table 15.1, with the consequent savings in energy consumption and emissions. Oxy-fuel combustion is the process of burning a fuel using pure oxygen instead of air as the primary oxidant. In essence, this avoids using heating the 78% of the inert nitrogen in air, with only oxygen being heated [41]. Allied to enhanced energy efficiency per tonne of glass produced there are downstream reductions in oxides of nitrogen, while the gases produced by combustion are largely CO2 and H2O which can be sequestered. For large efficient regenerative furnaces, it has been estimated that

energy savings would be between 5% and 20% [44–46]. In spite of the energy efficiencies outlined previously, there are clear environmental and financial benefits accruing from using glass cullet rather than virgin feedstock in glass production. Based on the data in Tables 15.1 and 15.5, we estimate that 35  5% of the container glass consumed globally enters the recycling loop, leaving room for significant enhancements in recycling rates in order to meet the demand of glass container manufacturers for quality cullet. Some initiatives to enhance container glass recycling are considered as follows.

4.1 Introduction of Container Deposit Schemes Container deposit schemes have been shown to be very effective in motivating householders to recycle food and beverage containers. Thus, the 11 US states with container deposit legislation consistently return glass container recycling rates of between 66% and 96%, compared to the 35% average for those states without such provisions [47]. Similar differences between those member states with container deposit legislation and those without are found in the European Union [48]. An enhancement to deposit schemes is the provision of conveniently located reverse vending machines, often in supermarket stores, where bottle deposits are returned once the empty has been deposited in the machine. Regulatory systems where the target is to maximize the amount collected for recycling without the need to take into account maximizing environmental benefit may encourage the easy option of open-loop recycling. In the UK, from year 2011 the Department of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) set differentiated glass packaging recycling targets for businesses based on whether material was recycled into open- or closed-loop processes [49]. However, the challenge to meet recycling targets based on mass means that open-loop

2. WASTE STREAMS (AND THEIR TREATMENT)

REFERENCES

recycling still accounts for a significant proportion of the total. From 2016 onwards the overall glass packaging recovery target is 77% by mass, split between aggregates and remelt (closed loop) in the ratio 33%:66%. The effect of this is that nearly 50% of the potential for use as cullet is still not encompassed within the recycling target. In some countries, in order to minimize city and local government collection costs and maximize recycling, there is a move away from collecting color-separated glass containers at source, to collecting mixed color glass containers or even mixed material recyclate. This passes the sorting and cleaning burden on to cullet processors. One development in overcoming the problem of mixed colored cullet is the introduction of color separation systems to identify and remove glass cullet of different colors.

4.2 Infrastructure Maintenance and Change In the case of rapidly developing countries and regions, there will be an increasing movement from unregulated to city and local government regulated systems, financed by local taxes and other financial stimuli. During this transition, it will be important to ensure that regulatory systems take over from market-driven ones, without there being a void created by lack of financial motivation for those at the picking and sorting end of the cycle, due to the availability of better employment opportunities. The challenge for the regulatory systems found in developed countries and regions is to ensure that all the links in the cycle from household to glass producer are in balance in terms of the flows of material through the system.

5 CONCLUSION The core challenge for environmentally and cost-effective recycling of container glass continues to be the dispersed nature of its sources, principally households, and the consequent

319

need for an environmentally and cost-effective infrastructure providing for its color separation, collection, and transportation to processors to produce furnace ready feedstock. In assessing the scope for increasing the amount of glass recycled, there is an overall need to quantify the resultant energy and other environmental burdens to allow valid comparisons to be made with the burdens of using virgin feedstock. Nevertheless, based on the data in Table 15.8, overall significant environmental and cost benefits can result from substituting cullet for virgin feedstock in container glass production. Assuming a global glass container recycling rate in the region of 35%, there is a huge potential for energy savings and resultant reduction in carbon emissions by increasing the proportion of postconsumer waste (PCW) sourced cullet used in container production. Based on the 2014 figure of 77
106 t of container glass produced globally, and assuming an overall 50% thermal efficiency in the batch melt, an 80% use of cullet would result in about 58
106 GJ of energy saved per annum compared to the energy consumed using 30% cullet. Reductions in CO2 emissions using the same cullet/virgin feedstock ratios would be about 8.8
106 t per annum, based on the same assumptions. These potential reductions represent a very strong case for striving to enhance the proportion of PCW cullet used in container glass production into the future.

References [1] FEVE European Container Glass Federation, EU Container Glass Production Growth Shows Industry Resilience, Brussels, 2015. [2] Research MOZ, Europe Market Share—29% of Total Global Tonnage, Global Glass Bottles/Containers Market, Regions and Vendors, Albany, USA, 2015. [3] Mordor Intelligence, Global Glass Bottles/Containers Market, Hyderabad, 2016. [4] Future Market Insights, Glass Container Market: Growing Demand in the Beer and Alcohol Packaging Industry, London, https://www.futuremarketinsights.com/ reports/container-glass-market, 2015.

2. WASTE STREAMS (AND THEIR TREATMENT)

320

15. GLASS WASTE

[5] WRAP, Container Lite Light-Weight Glass Containers—The Route to Effective Waste Minimisation, Banbury UK, 2006. [6] WRAP, Container Lite—Opportunities for the Co-op to Lightweight Glass Packaging, Banbury UK, 2007. [7] Glass Pack Solutions, Lightweight Glass, Pontypool, http://www.glasspacksolutions.com/ httpwwwglasspacksolutionscomcontact-usshtml. shtml, 2016. [8] J.E. Shelby, Introduction to Glass Science and Technology, 2nd ed., The Royal Society of Chemistry, Cambridge, UK, 2005. [9] ETSU, Energy Use in the Glass Industry Sector, AEA Environment and Energy, Abingdon, Oxfordshire, UK, 1992. [10] US Energy Information Administration, Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey 2014, Table 3.2, Washington, 2017. [11] Marcu A., Roth S. and Stoefs W., Final\Report for a Study on Composition and Drivers of Energy Prices and Costs in Energy Intensive Industries: The Case of the Flat Glass Industry s. 1.6, Centre for European Policy Studies, Brussels, 2014. [12] NSG Group, Energy and Resource Use, Tokyo, http://www.nsg.com/en/sustainability/ performancesummary/energyandresourceusage, 2012. [13] B.M. Scalet, M. Garcia-Mun˜oz, A.Q. Sissa, S. Roudier, L. Delgado Sancho, Best Available Techniques (BAT) Reference Document for the Manufacture of Glass, European Commission, Brussels, 2008. [14] E. Worrell, C. Galitsky, E. Masanet, W. Graus, Energy Efficiency Improvement and Cost Saving Opportunities for the Glass Industry, Berkeley National Laboratory Environmental Energy Technologies Division, 2008. [15] V.R. Sellers, J.D. Sellers, Comparative Energy and Environmental Impacts for Soft Drink Delivery Systems, Franklin Associates, Kansas, 1989. [16] G. Hartmann, F. Coffey, Moving up the Ladder: The Place of Re-Use and Refill in Canadian Waste Management Strategines, Toronto Environmental Alliance, Toronto, 1994. [17] R. Lanoie, P. Lachance, Refillable and Disposable Beer Containers—An Analysis of the Environmental Impacts, Ecole des Hautes Etudes Commerciales, Montreal, 1999. [18] E.P.A. Danish, Life Cycle Assessment of Packaging Systems for Beer and Soft Drinks, Danish Ministry of Environment and Energy, Copenhagen, 1998. [19] The Beer Store, Setting the Standard in Materials Management, Mississauga, Ontario, 2012. [20] PALPA, The Finish Reuse System for Beverage Packages, Helsinki, 2016. [21] Dansk Retur System, Annual Report of the Dansk Retur System for 2008, Dansk Retur System, Copenhagen,

[22]

[23]

[24]

[25]

[26]

[27]

[28]

[29]

[30]

[31]

[32]

[33]

[34]

2009. http://www.dansk-retursystem.dk/content/us/ news/. Dansk Retur System, Management Report for 2015, http://www.danskretursystem.dk/wp-content/ uploads/2016/11/UK_august_2016.pdf. German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Building and Nuclear Safety (BMUB), Neues Verpackungsgesetz passiert den Bundesrat, 2017. Glass Technology Services, Russian Federation: Assessment of Glass Recycling and Energy Efficiency in Glass Production, 2012. Russian Federation Government Decree No. 249, Amendments to Federal Law No. 89-FZ of 24 June 1998 “On Production and Consumption Waste” 2015. California Environmental Protection Agency Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery, Biannual Report of Beverage Container Sales, Returns, Redemption, and Recycling Rates, 2015. K-Fair Steele, The Human Scale of Recycling in India, https://www.theartblog.org/2009/04/the-humanscale-of-recycling-in-india/, 2009. S. Dandapani, India’s Recycling Industry Is Collapsing, The News Minute, Bangalore, 2017. https://www. thenewsminute.com/article/india-s-recycling-industrycollapsing-ignoring-it-will-land-us-urban-nightmare70151. Statista, Operating Revenue of Glass Container Manufacture (ICNEA 3055) in China From 2008 to 2020 (in Million U.S. Dollars), Hamburg, https://www. statista.com/forecasts/414675/china-glass-containermanufacture-operating-revenue-forecast-icnea-3055, 2017. Pilkington Group, Pilkington and the Flat Glass Industry, http://www.pilkington.com/pilkington-information/ downloads/pilkington+and+the+flat+glass+industry +2009.htm, 2007. Cascadia Consulting Group, Detailed Characterization of Construction and Demolition Waste, California Environmental Protection Agency Integrated Waste Management Board, Sacramento, 2006. St Gobain Glass UK, “More-Is-Less” With Unique Cullet Recycling Scheme, http://uk.saint-gobain-glass. com/node/199, 2009. GHK in Association With Bio Intelligence Service, A Study to Examine the Benefits of the End of Life Vehicles Directive and the Costs and Benefits of a Revision of the 2015 Targets for Recycling, Re-use and Recovery Under the ELV Directive, GHK, Birmingham, UK, 2006. GHK in Association With Bio Intelligence Service, A Study to Examine the Benefits of the End of Life Vehicles Directive and the Costs and Benefits of a Revision of the 2015 Targets for Recycling, Re-Use and Recovery Under the ELV Directive, GHK, Birmingham, UK, 2006.

2. WASTE STREAMS (AND THEIR TREATMENT)

REFERENCES

[35] J. Staudinger, G.A. Keoleian, Management of End of Life Vehicles (ELVs) in the US, Center for Sustainable Systems, University of Michigan, Michigan, 2001. [36] K. Koshiba, The Recycling of End-of-Life Vehicles in Japan; Newsletter No. 50 (October 2006), S.L., Japan for Sustainability Mail Magazine, 2006.http://www. japanfs.org/en/mailmagazine/newsletter/pages/ 027816.html. [37] Japan Automobile Manufacturers Association. End-ofLife Vehicle Recycling and Disposal. Tokyo: JAMA. http://www.jama.org/library/bro_EnviroFriendly/ enviro_6.htm. [38] M. Chen, F. Zhang, End-of-Life Vehicle Recovery in China: Consideration and Innovation Following the EU ELV Directive, vol. 61, Springer, Boston, 2009, 3 Journal of the Minerals, Metals and Materials Society. [39] B. John, D. Hooper Paul, Factors Determining the Postconsumer Waste Recycling Burden, vol. 43(2), Carfax Publishing, 2000, pp. 407–432. [40] B. John, D. Hooper Paul, Dilemnas in Optimising the Environmental Benefit from Recycling: A Case Study of Glass Container Waste Management in the UK, Vol. 45, Elsevier B.V, 2005, pp. 331–355 (Resources Conservation and Recycling). [41] WRAP, Container lite: opportunities for the co-op to lightweight glass packaging, 2007, https://www. glass-ts.com/userfiles/files/2007%20-%20WRAP% 20Project%20-%20Container%20Lite%20–% 20Opportunities%20for%20the%20Co-op%20to% 20lightweight%20glass%20packaging.pdf. [42] R. Cocking, Lightweighting has Cut the Weight of a 330 ml Beer Bottle in Half Compared to 20 Years Ago, Beverage Daily, 2016. [43] Owens-Illinois, O-I Launches New Line of Lightweight Wine Bottles, http://www.o-i.com/Newsroom/O-ILaunches-New-Line-of-Lightweight-Wine-Bottles/, 2010. [44] S. Bianca Maria, G. Mun˜oz Marcos, S. Aivi Querol, R. Serge, D.S. Luis, ‘Best Available Techniques (BAT) Reference Document for the Manufacture of Glass’, Joint Research Centre of the European Commission, Seville, (2013). [45] Owens-Illinois, The Most Sustainable Package on Earth – 2014 Sustainability Report, (2015) 20. [46] Glass Worldwide, Oxy-Fuel Glass Melting Trends in Asia, http://www.airproducts.com//media/Files/ PDF/industries/glass/glass-worldwide-70-2017Oxy-fuel-glass-melting-trends-in-asia.pdf, 2017. [47] Container Recycling Institute, Waste and recycling trends: conclusions from CRI’s 2008 beverage market analysis, 2008, http://www.container-recycling.org/ assets/pdfs/reports/2008-BMDA-conclusions.pdf. [48] Eurostat, Packaging Waste Statistics, http://ec.europa. eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/ Packaging_waste_statistics, 2017.

321

[49] DEFRA, Packaging Waste: Producer Responsibilities, London, https://www.gov.uk/guidance/packagingproducer-responsibilities, 2014.

Annexure: Sources for Data Presented in Table 15.5 [1] UN Data, Industrial Commodity Statistics Database, http://data.un.org/Data.aspx?q¼glass+containers& d¼ICS&f¼cmID%3a37191-0. [2] OECD 2009, Environmental Data: Compendium 2006–2008—Waste, OECD, Washington. [3] Randell Environmental Consulting, Australian National Waste Report, 2016. [4] Glass Packaging Forum, New Zealand Glass Recycling Rate Hits New High and Matches EU Average for the First Time, http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/SC1506/ S00061/new-zealand-glass-recycling-rate-hits-newhigh.htm. [5] Glass Packaging Institute, Glass Recycling Fact’s, Arlington, Virginia, http://www.gpi.org/recycling/glassrecycling-facts, 2015. [6] US Department of Commerce Export.Gov, Brazil— Environmental Technologies, https://www.export. gov/article?id¼Brazil-Environmental-Technologie, 2017. [7] World Bank Urban Development Series Knowledge Papers, What a Waste; A Global Review of Solid Waste Management, http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/ en/302341468126264791/pdf/68135-REVISED-What-aWaste-2012-Final-updated.pdf, 2012. [8] FEVE, Glass Recycling Hits 73% in the EU, http://feve. org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Press-Release-EU. pdf, 2015. [9] Packaging Stratefies, Demand for Beverage Containers in China to Exceed 469 Billion Units in 2015, https://www. packagingstrategies.com/articles/85874. [10] F. Hao, China is Sorting its Household Waste Problem, Chinadialogue, 2017.https://www.chinadialogue.net/ article/show/single/en/9812-China-is-sorting-itshousehold-waste-problem. [11] M. Pla, Municipal Solid Waste Management in Beijing, http://www.wiego.org/sites/default/files/ resources/files/Pla-Solid-Waste-Management-China. pdf, 2016. [12] Hindusthan National Glass & Industries Limited, ’Evolution of Glass Industry in India: http://aigmf.com/ Evolution%20of%20Glass%20Inds-Mukul%20Somany. pdf. [13] The Indian Express, GST Effect: Why Are Delhi’s Waste Collectors Refusing Glass Bottles?, http:// indianexpress.com/article/delhi/gst-effect-why-arecapitals-garbage-collectors-refusing-glass-bottles4765652/.

2. WASTE STREAMS (AND THEIR TREATMENT)

322

15. GLASS WASTE

[14] The Statistical Handbook of Japan, Table 14.2, “Waste Generation and Disposal,” Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, Tokyo. [15] The Japan Containers and Packaging Recycling Association, (Recycling) Statistics, Tokyo, http:// www.jcpra.or.jp/english/tabid/612/index.php, 2016. [16] C. Yolin, Waste Management and Recycling in Japan—Opportunities for European Companies, EU-Japan Centre for Industrial Co-Operation, https://www.eu-japan.eu/sites/default/files/

publications/docs/waste_management_recycling_ japan.pdf, 2015. [17] Brazilian Packaging Association, ABRE/FGV Macroeconomic Study on Packaging, http://www.abre.org. br/eng/sector/presentation/market-data/, 2017. [18] N. Wintour, The Glass Industry: Recent Trends and Changes in Working Conditions and Employment retlations’, International Labour Recent Trends and Changes in Working Conditions and Employment Relations, International Labour Office, Geneva, 2015.

2. WASTE STREAMS (AND THEIR TREATMENT)