CARE Report on automotive glass recycling

2004 Update

by

Kelly Brinkler
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank Peter Stokes (CARE Group) and the other members of the CARE Group for their support
continued support and guidance throughout this project and the constructive feedback received. Finally I would
like to thank Peter Pennells, Rebecca Cocking and the members of WRAP for their valuable input and feedback
in finalising the report.

2
 Table of Contents

Executive Summary....................................................................................................................5
Executive Summary....................................................................................................................5
INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................................7
Types of Glass.........................................................................................................................7
Glass Production – the process...............................................................................................7
Container glass....................................................................................................................7
Flat glass.............................................................................................................................7
Glass Production – the figures................................................................................................8
Figure 1 – UK Glass Production figures by sector.....................................................................8
Waste Glass and Glass Recycling.............................................................................................10
UK Waste Arisings................................................................................................................10
Why Recycle Glass?.............................................................................................................10
Packaging waste regulations.............................................................................................10
End-of-Life Vehicles Directive.........................................................................................10
How is glass recycled?..........................................................................................................10
Waste Glass processing.........................................................................................................11
Benefits.............................................................................................................................11
Problems associated with recycling glass.........................................................................11
Figure 2 – Production v recycling: the UK’s colour imbalance................................................12
Economics and fluctuations in market price instability....................................................12
The markets...............................................................................................................................13
Existing and Potential markets for waste glass.....................................................................13
Figure 3 – Potential routes for waste glass...............................................................................13
Glass Markets........................................................................................................................13
Figure 4 – Present cullet use by glass sectors...................................................................14
Table 1 – Cullet Contamination Specifications for re-use in the glass sector...........................14
Table 2 – Cullet colour contamination specifications for re-use in the glass sector.................14
Alternative Markets...............................................................................................................15
Aggregates........................................................................................................................15
Table 3 – Aggregates: current status with respect to glass cullet use........................................15
Table 4 – Aggregate Specifications...........................................................................................17
Table 5 – Specifications for filtration applications...................................................................18
Table 6 – Abrasive specifications..............................................................................................19
Bricks and Ceramics.........................................................................................................20
Table 7 – Brick specifications...................................................................................................20
Niche Markets and Other potentials..................................................................................21
Table 8 – Niche market company products...............................................................................21
Summary of Volume Potentials and market routes...............................................................22
Figure 5 - recycled glass market – current players and market dominance..............................22
Figure 6 - recycled glass market – the potential picture...........................................................22
Barriers to Entry....................................................................................................................23
Glass and the Automotive Industry...........................................................................................24
Why glass?............................................................................................................................24
Table 9 – Composition of an average automobile.....................................................................24
Automotive Glass..................................................................................................................24
Structure and Function......................................................................................................24
Standards and Specifications............................................................................................24
Automotive Glass as Waste...................................................................................................25
ELV glass..........................................................................................................................25
Figure 7 – ELV disposal routes.................................................................................................25
Dismantling in the UK......................................................................................................26
3
 Shredding in the UK.........................................................................................................26
Technical and Economic Barriers to recovery ELV glass.....................................................26

4
 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

In 1999 (published Feb 2000) CARE produced a report which looked at the challenges for industry in the
recycling of automotive glass, against the backdrop of competing glass waste streams and limited recycling
opportunities. Since Glass approximates to 3% of an average vehicle’s weight and is relatively easy to remove,
store and transport, it is viewed as an important material en-route to the attainment of the End of Life Vehicle
Directive targets. Four years have passed since the original report and this second report is designed to ascertain
how that backdrop has changed and to flag up the challenges yet to be overcome, as well as emerging
opportunities.

Glass still remains a significant contributor to the UK’s waste stream and as such is still a primary focus in
nationwide initiatives for recycling and re-use. In recent years, however, the adoption of new legislation into the
UK has increased the mandatory requirements on certain industries to recycle this material. The Packaging
Waste Directive and the ELV Directives impose set targets to the applicable industries for recycling and recovery
rates.

The technologies associated with the variety of glass types made remain relatively unchanged in recent years.
Glass manufacturers are becoming increasingly aware of the pressure on them to accept recycled glass cullet and
as such investments in newer technologies are occurring. The process of re-processing glass to form cullet and
the removal of contaminants also remains relatively unchanged with the main advances and research effort in the
separation of the fine fractions of materials in the mix.

Although advances in the technological side of glass making and re-processing may appear slow in terms of
enhancing the ability to consume increased amounts of variable quality cullet, the developments in the market
place for recycled material have been steadily ongoing. In 1999 the dominant route for recycled glass cullet
would have been back into the glass sector, with the container sector consuming the main proportion of total
recycled glass. However, at that time the emergence of the aggregates sector was beginning, using glass cullet as
an aggregate substitute, primarily for highway construction. There is now a changing picture of the market
structure for recycled glass. Although the container sector still remains the dominant consumer of glass cullet,
the flat and fibre glass sectors are increasingly conscious that they need to increase their use of post-consumer
glass. In addition to this the aggregates sector (ranging from top end use in Glassphalt to bottom end use as a
substitute for gravel) has grown and new market entrants include niche markets such as decorative glass
products, filtration and abrasives.

Although the market situation is looking stronger than in past years with an increasing number of routes for glass
cullet the increasing production of glass continues to put pressure on these recycled markets to consume more
recycled material. The container sector at this point in time is probably the only sector that consumes a
significant proportion of the total possible and this is primarily due to the green glass making industry, whilst
there is still room for improvement in the amber and particularly clear glass making sectors. The other glass
sectors are severely limited by quality specifications and as such tend to source recyclate from downstream
processing rather than post-consumer supplies but continually aim to increase this where possible. There is
significant potential for the aggregates sector to consume far more of the UK’s waste glass stream than it does at
present potentially making this sector the dominant waste glass consumer in the recycled glass markets, followed
by the container glass sector and filtration. The abrasives market is also already established in the UK offering
another significant potential to consume waste glass. There are likely to be new entrants into the recycled glass
market soon and in future years as technologies continue to advance and raw materials become scarce. There is
significant future potential from the brick and ceramics industries, not only due to the replacement of raw
materials, but similar to the glass sector, the energy and emissions saving advantages of using waste glass. This
has led to increasing research in these areas to assess the economic advantages.

With regard to automotive glazing the recent adoption of the End-of Life Vehicle Directive has now brought the
potential issues considered in the 1999 report into sharper focus and although prior to adoption the recycling
industry was already recycling a significant amount of the material from post-consumer vehicles, the new
Directive sets specific mandatory targets.

By January 1, 2006
• Reuse and recovery: Min. 85% by weight on average
• Reuse and recycling: Min. 80% by weight on average

By January 1, 2015
• Reuse and recovery: Min. 95% by weight on average
• Reuse and recycling: Min. 85% by weight on average

5
The industry is arguably already on target for reaching the figures set out for 2006; however, it is necessary that
the distinction between recovery and recycling is adhered to in reaching these targets. These targets are very high
and therefore require a high percentage of the material that makes up an automotive vehicle to be recycled.
Current estimates for the percentage recycled material are anywhere between 72% (EMR/SIMMS study 2003)
and 77+% depending on the data source (ACORD annual reports.) and therefore include the main components of
the vehicle, for example metals, and those which are easily removed, for example tyres and batteries. However,
the industry now has to look into the ways and means of recycling the more difficult components such as glass
and plastics in order to continue to increase the recycled and recovered weights to reach future targets.

Increasing research and feasibility experiments have been ongoing in the automotive sector in terms of removing
the vehicle glass. Though some advances have been made, it is still the case that the cost of removing the glass
from vehicles at the dismantling stage (which ultimately gives the higher value product as quality is higher)
mean it is still an uneconomic process. The cost of removing the glass from one vehicle ranges between £2.50
and £3.50 and with the current market price for cullet ranging from £5/tonne to £45/tonne (dependent on quality)
ELV glass generated at the dismantling stage (i.e. high cost stage requiring high cost end markets) is
economically infeasible at present. The resultant cullet would have to fetch a minimum price of £102/tonne to
make the process economically feasible. However, this figure is based on potential ELV waste glass arisings
from dismantling all ELV vehicles in a year. This figure is unrealistic due to the loss of glass in removal and
ELV’s only suitable for immediate shredding and so with dismantled vehicles and glass tonnages only a
percentage of the total the realistic figure is likely to be significantly higher between £278/tonne and £389/tonne.
Such high prices would require high value end markets often found in the niche market areas such as decorative
aggregates. However, these often only require small tonnages (100’s to 1000’s) and demand is intermittent.
Alternatively, the cost of removing the glass must fall to at least half of the current ‘best case’ dismantling cost
and that is only if increasing volumes can be removed. More realistically the cost of glass removal must fall to
less than 1/5 of the present day costs to be become viable for the higher priced end markets. But, again, the
problems of contamination in this source often render the cullet only suitable for lower priced end markets such
as use in the aggregates sector as a substitute for gravel, as the glass can be left in the vehicle and separated at a
later stage.

Although the situation remains complex and costly at present there are emerging markets that not only are able
to produce high value products but also use lower quality cullet. One of these markets is the foam glass market
which at present does not penetrate the UK. However this product is ideally suited to consume contaminated
glass which would include glass from ELV sources. It is estimated that a 1% penetration into the UK market
would allow this industry to consume 50,000 tonnes/annum (t/a) of waste glass. There has been increasing
research on the feasibility of penetration of the foam glass market into the UK and there is significant potential
for this to occur in the near future although currently there is no manufacture in the UK as the cost of setting up a
facility is too high.

In summary, the advances made since 1999 have been significant in the overall glass recycling arena although
for the automotive sector the quality restrictions and costs of dismantling are still problems that need to be
overcome. At present, the main route for ELV glass is into the aggregates sector which is steadily increasing in
size in terms of cullet use. However, the low price value of this end market in conjunction with the high costs of
glass cullet production from ELVs will be such that the process may remain uneconomic. New markets are
continually emerging and research is ongoing in many areas particularly concentrated in fields where
contaminated cullet can be used. Here, the foam glass market has extreme potential and it only requires a small
penetration in the UK for this market to be able to consume even the maximum potential quantities of ELV glass
produced.

6
 INTRODUCTION
The 1999 CARE Report on Glass Recycling
addresses several issues to establish the situation at
that time for automotive glass recycling. Five years
on, the following report aims to re-address the
situation highlighting developments in technology
associated with glass production and glass
recycling, the change in market structure for
recycled glass, new and potential market entrants
and the up to date situation in the ELV disposal
chain with respect to overcoming the problems
raised in the 1999 report.
The report is in four main sections:
SECTION 1: Focuses on re-establishing the basic
types of glass, glass production processes and
associated volumes in the UK.
SECTION 2: Focuses on glass recycling.
SECTION 3: Focuses on the current market
situation and potential entrants.
SECTION 4: Focuses on the role that ELV glass
can play in the automotive industry’s attempt to
reach mandatory recycling targets and minimise
disposal.
TYPES OF GLASS
There are several types of glass distinguished by
their chemical composition. The alteration of the
chemical constituents in the glass making mix
allows manufacturers to alter the properties of the
glass to suit the required function of the end
product.
There are three main categories of what is termed
‘commercial glass’ the most common of which is
soda-lime glass. This is used in the majority of
applications within the container and flat glass
sectors typically for bottles, jars, automotive and
structural glazing among others. Soda-lime glass
tends to dominate the market in terms of glass
made, however, the other two types of commercial
glass are:
Lead glass – more commonly know as lead crystal,
this is used for decorative objects and is the second
most common type of commercial glass
Borosilicate glass – commonly used in ovenware
and heat resistant ware this glass type is more
commonly know under the trade name Pyrex
In addition to these, there are numerous small
volume alternative glass types used in applications
including glass fibre, filtration, television screens,
glass ceramics, sealing, optical and technical
applications.
Although the chemical composition of these
various types of glass varies the most common
commercial glasses including the dominating soda-
lime glass have similar chemical compositions in
the following proportions:
7
70-74% silica (sand)
12-16% sodium oxide
5-11% calcium oxide
1-3% magnesium oxide (higher in flat glass)
1-3% aluminium oxide
These proportions may alter slightly for the
alternative glass types and in some cases additional
components are added for special effects such as
colouring the glass. For lead glass the calcium
oxide is replace by lead oxide to give the final
product a high refractive index creating the
characteristic sparkle of crystal when cut.
GLASS PRODUCTION – THE PROCESS
The four basic stages of the glass making process
remain the same in all types of glass production
which are1:
Melting
Refining
Working
Annealing
The general glass making process has remained
relatively unchanged in present years. However, it
is necessary to briefly understand the different
mechanical principles behind the production of the
final products that distinguish the form of the final
products.
Container glass
Container glass is predominantly made by the
automatic process which may more commonly be
known as the ‘press and blow’ or ‘blow and blow’.
In these processes a ‘gob’ of glass is delivered into
the respective mould for creation. In the former
process a plunger presses the ‘gob’ into the mould
whilst the latter uses compressed air to blow the
‘gob’ into the mould. The second stage in each
process uses a blast of compressed air to form the
pre-formed shape against the mould walls, hence
the second term is ‘blow’ in each case. This process
is now the dominantly used process in container
glass manufacture and delivery of two ‘gobs’ at the
same time is the most common. There is an increase
in the use of triple and quadruple gob machines
which ultimately aids production efficiency.
Flat glass
The two main processes involved in the production
of flat glass are the float and rolled processes. The
float process allows the production of clear, tinted
and coated glass for buildings and clear and tinted
glass for vehicles. There are 6 integrated stages that
allow the formation of the end product which are as
follows:
1
For more information on these processes please
refer to the British glass website at
www.britglass.co.uk/
1. Melting and refining – raw materials enter the with the container sector dominating the glass
furnace and through a series of complex flow market with nearly two thirds of the total market
patterns the molten glass becomes free of inclusions share and the majority of the remainder in the flat
and bubbles and passes smoothly and continuously glass sector (Figure 1).
to the next stage.
2. Float bath – the molten glass is literally floated
along a bed of molten tin and although the principle
of this process remains unchanged developments
now allow variations in thickness and a marked
improvement in the optical quality of the final
product.
3. Coating - the most significant advance in the
coating process is the on-line chemical vapour
deposition (CVD) that allows a variety of coating
less than a micron thick to be applied to the ribbon
of glass. These can have varying functions
including reflection of light of specified
wavelengths. Further developments in this area
could replace the present day method of carrying
the optical properties of the float glass.
4. Annealing – the glass ribbon undergoes
secondary treatment to relieve stresses to avoid
breakage on cutting.
5. Inspection – advances in the inspection
technology aid the efficiency of the float process
allowing avoidance of imperfections undetectable
by the human eye whilst avoiding excess waste.
6. Cutting to order – this helps to minimise waste.

The rolled glass process is used for the manufacture

of patterned flat glass and wired glass. The former
of the two is formed in a single pass process
involving an imprinted roller. The latter involves a
double pass process in order to sandwich the wire
mesh between two equal thickness ribbons prior to
the final rolling between water-cooled rollers.
There are also specific processes for the making of
glass fibre, optical fibre, glass tubing and glassware
although these are not discussed in detail here as
there is a limited use in these sectors for external
cullet2.
After the initial processing most glass undergoes
secondary processing in order to relieve the strains
and stresses created as the liquid cools non-
uniformly. These include annealing, toughening,
coating and decorating3.

GLASS PRODUCTION – THE FIGURES

The 1999 estimates for total glass production in the

UK were in excess of 2 million tonnes per year.
More recent figures show this to have increased to
an estimated production of greater than 3 million
tonnes per year (WRAP 2002). Although the actual
tonnages appear to be on the increase the market
proportions have remained relatively unchanged

2
For more information on these processes please
refer to the British Glass website at
www.britglass.co.uk/
3
For more information on these processes please
refer to the British Glass website at
www.britglass.co.uk/

8
9
 WASTE GLASS AND GLASS RECYCLING
UK WASTE ARISINGS
Household packaging waste forms the dominant
proportion of the UK glass waste stream. Reports
estimate waste glass arisings in the container sector
to be in excess of 2.4million tonnes per year. With
the addition of the commercial waste streams,
automotive arisings estimated at 80,000 tonnes per
year (45,000 tonnes of ELV waste plus 15,000
tonnes of windscreen replacements) and up to
500,000 tonnes per year of flat glass from end-of-
life buildings it appears that waste glass arisings in
the UK have increased from those recorded in the
1999 report. This in addition to the 180,000 tonnes
of process scrap per year and glass arisings from
other sources such as lighting, cahode ray tubes and
tableware result in total UK waste glass arisings in
the region of 3.4million tonnes per year.
WHY RECYCLE GLASS?
Glass is a significant contributor to the UK’s total
waste particularly as the majority goes to landfill.
Although glass poses no significant problems in
terms of decomposition it does require significant
amounts of void space which is very limited in the
UK. As one of the less problematic waste streams it
has therefore been a primary target in recycling
strategies to reduce the UK’s waste. Voluntary
initiatives have been encouraged in the past but it is
the increasing pressure from legislation at a
European level that necessitates the UK to advance
in re-use and recycling initiatives in order to meet
mandatory targets set out in directives such as the
Packaging and Packaging Waste Directive
(94/62/EC) and the End of Life Vehicles Directive.
Producer responsibility has always been a key part
of the Government initiatives and remains as such
in these European wide Directives.
Packaging waste regulations
Current figures specify an overall target of 60%
recovery as a minimum by weight with overall
recycling at 55% (maximum 80%). Glass specific
recycling targets are set at 60% and targets are to be
achieved by December 31st 2008.
End-of-Life Vehicles Directive
The ELV Directive (2000/53/EC) was adopted by
the EU in September 2000 and in summary imposes
responsibility for End-of-Life vehicles onto vehicle
manufacturers. The key aspects of Directive are as
follows:
1. Establishes Extended Producer Responsibility for
ELV Management – manufacturers and importers
of automobiles are responsible for the costs of end-
of-life management. Specifically, producers are
responsible for the costs of recycling vehicles put
on the market after July 1st 2002. They will not be
responsible for the recycling of vehicles put on the
market before July 1st 2002 until January 1st 2007 at
10
which time they will be responsible for recycling
all vehicles regardless of age.
2. It sets recycling requirements as follows:
By January 1st 2006
• Reuse and recovery: Min. 85% by weight on
average
• Reuse and recycling: Min. 80% by weight on
average
Reuse specifies materials or components for the
same purpose for which they were made; recycling
refers to the reprocessing of the original or an
alternative use; recovery includes recycling with
energy recovery (i.e. combustion).
By January 1st 2015
• Reuse and recovery: Min. 95% by weight on
average
• Reuse and recycling: Min. 85% by weight on
average
All vehicles post December 31st 2004 must:
• Be reusable and/or recyclable at a minimum of
85% by weight
• Be reusable and/or recoverable at a minimum
of 95% by weight
3. It requires the established phase out of certain
heavy metals and those elements exempt from
phase-outs must be labelled so that they can be
stripped before shredding.
4. Other provisions:
• Member states must encourage Design for the
Environment (DFE) practices
• Vehicle manufacturers and their suppliers must
code components and materials to facilitate
product identification for material reuse and
recovery
• Producers must provide dismantling
information for every vehicle they build
• Producers and member states must report on
ELV management and product design measures
that enhance reuse and recycling
• ELV management systems must be upgraded in
accordance with more stringent environmental
standards that call for:
o Registration of collection and
treatment facilities
o Improvements in treatment facility
design
o Removal of fluids, hazardous
materials and recyclable materials
from ELV’s before shredding
HOW IS GLASS RECYCLED?
The general recycling of glass involves a strategic
network incorporating four main aspects
(collection, delivery to the processors, processing
and deliver to the consumer), although specific
glass waste streams can involve an increased
number of steps e.g. ELV Glass.
The container industry is probably the best
established sector for recycling at present due to the
vast network of bottle banks situated across the UK.
These are then routinely emptied and transported by
various companies on a contract basis for delivery
to the glass re-processors. In some cases the waste
glass is re-used in the same plant as the generated
waste or in larger operations primary glass
producers will possess the necessary re-processing
equipment for waste glass therefore excluding the
final delivery stage. However, in some instances the
waste glass may not be suitable for re-use in the
glass sector and so will be transported to other
markets such as aggregates, or if completely
unsuitable, to landfill.
The main companies involved in the collection and
processing are T Berryman & Son and Glass
Recycling UK although some alternative markets
are introducing their own reprocessing capabilities.
WASTE GLASS PROCESSING
Benefits
It is always the case that in the absence of
mandatory legislation the benefits of recycling any
waste product must at least equal the cost of
recycling to make it economically feasible.
However, the benefits of glass recycling are not
purely economic but also very beneficial
environmentally and socially. Glass recycling
therefore has a multitude of benefits for those
companies aspiring to sustainable business. The
following are some of the benefits associated with
glass recycling:
• The use of cullet in glass production saves
energy as the melting temperature is reduced.
This therefore lowers the costs associated with
fuel for the virgin producers.
• The use of cullet increases the furnace load by
up to 15% and as such either results in an
increased efficiency or an increase in overall
capacity.
• The reduction in fuel and raw materials used
reduces carbon emissions not only beneficial to
the environment but also helping business to
11
reduce expense in carbon taxes and to achieve
the standards required by them for carbon
reducing initiatives.
• Using recycled materials reduces the burden on
landfills particularly in this case as glass takes
up a considerable amount of void space.
• Reduces the use of raw materials and so the
depletion of natural resources and degradation
of the land – for each 1 tonne of cullet used an
approximate equivalent of 1.2 tonnes of raw
materials are saved.
Problems associated with recycling glass
The glass recycling process, at first, appears fairly
straightforward. However, there are certain
problems associated with this waste stream that
must be eliminated in order for the final product
(‘cullet’) to be of use. There are three main
problems associated with glass re-processing:
1. Contamination from other waste sources
During the collection process it is easy for non-
glass products including plastics, stones, metals and
ceramics to be included within the glass waste
stream. Although technologies have been developed
to minimise these in the final cullet product any
excess presence can lead to load rejection during
processing and then landfill. However, if the waste
stream is significantly crushed then some
contaminants can be so small that the technologies
for removal can be ineffective and unless a high
degree of certainty can be given for the level of
contamination of the final product the cullet will be
rendered useless to the glass sector at least, and
potentially to the alternative markets. In the event
that such contaminants enter the glass production
stage they can lead to a severe loss in production
and therefore wasted costs detrimental to business.
This is one of the primary reasons for the reluctance
of float glass manufacturers to introduce external
sources of cullet into the production process.
2. Colour contamination
The UK’s major glass production is in clear glass
(66% clear, 16% brown, and 18% green in 2001)
although as a significant importer of bottled
products from Europe which are dominantly green
glass there is a colour imbalance in the colours of
products versus waste (Figure 2).
 Figure 2 – Production v recycling: the UK’s colour imbalance
Green
Amber
Clear
Colour Production
Green 328600
Clear 1199400
Amber 270100
Improvements in treatment quality in conjunction
with encouraging clear imports, alternative green
glass markets and the education of consumers in
recent years has resulted in a large increase in the
re-use of the excess green glass during the period
from 1999-2000. At present it is estimated that up
to 85% green cullet use occurs in green glass
production in the UK with some figures quoting as
high as 90%. Although the inclusion of clear and
amber cullet in their respective glass production is
not feasible at this level it is thought that in the
presence of existing technology there is room for an
increase in cullet incorporation in these to 50%.
The major issues regarding colour contamination
are that colour separation is difficult and costly if
mixed at waste source and the only route for mixed
colour cullet within the glass sector is in green glass
production, already approaching its maximum in
terms of recyclate inclusion. The maximum colour
contamination levels in clear glass are 4% whilst
this can increase to only 5% for coloured glass.
Recent developments in technology using state-of-
the-art laser separation can reduce colour
contamination levels to 0.5g/tonne of cullet
(£4.5million investment by Rockware Glass) which
is a vast improvement on the ‘normal’ cullet
standards which fall between 20g and 50g/tonne.
Contamination from organic material, ferrous
metals and non-ferrous metals currently accepted
by the glass industry are 0.5%, 0.1% and 0.2%
respectively by mass. Inorganic material
contamination is subject to agreement between
processor and collector.
12
Shaded area represents recyclate %
of the respective glass colour
Recycled
302300
249350
65100
3. Glass breakage and glass mix
The greater the degree of breakage the more
difficult it is to assess the degree of contamination
within the waste stream and therefore reflects back
onto the problems associated with non-glass
contamination. In addition to this it is important
that different types of glass are not mixed as they
too may act as contaminants in the alternative glass
processing. This requires an increase in consumer
awareness of the difference in glass types as well as
increasing the awareness of how and where to
recycle these alternative glass products.
Economics and market price instability
In addition to the three main technical problems
associated with glass recycling there is always the
consideration of the economic feasibility of
recycling. The primary influence on cullet price
with respect to the glass industry is the relative
prices of sand or soda ash. Cullet prices are
influenced by fluctuations in these market prices
and as such market conditions can affect the
volume of cullet processed. However, in addition to
this the formation of markets and their subsequent
stability relies on a continual source of specified
quality and in some areas this is still not
guaranteed. Emerging markets must be able to rely
upon a steady market price for the cullet used in
addition to a steady supply, whilst severe
fluctuations in both could imbalance the current
market situation to the disadvantage of the recyclate
market.

Figure 3 – Potential routes for waste glass
Glass
Markets
Cullet
Alternativ
e Markets
GLASS MARKETS
The main sectors in the glass market are container,
flat and fibre glass manufacturers as the other types
of glass are only small in quantity and often the
specifications are too high to enable the re-use of
alternative glasses such as container glass in their
production. Within the three main sectors the
primary user of recycled glass is the container
industry where current cullet use is approximately
80% in green bottle production with the potential to
increase by a further 10%. This is slightly lower in
the other colour production lines due to the colour
imbalance in the UK (ref: Problems associated with
recycling glass) and the contamination
specifications (). The fibre glass sector also
consumes a significant proportion of container
cullet but uses a larger proportion of flat glass cullet
as this is often better quality due to decreased
13
THE MARKETS
EXISTING AND POTENTIAL MARKETS FOR WASTE GLASS
At present there are two potential routes for
recycled glass; primary markets i.e. use back in the
glass making sector and secondary (or alternative)
markets (Figure 3). All of the markets currently
available to the waste glass industry and those
potential markets currently undergoing trials have
particular specifications for the cullet quality that is
of increasing importance as the demand on these
markets to use recycled materials increases.
Container
Flat
Fibre
Other
Aggregates
Filtration
Abrasives
Bricks & Ceramics
Niche Markets
contamination at collection. The flat glass sector at
present is still reluctant to use external cullet of any
type due to the potential losses incurred in the event
of any slight contamination. However, they do
source from downstream processing where possible
as much as 20%. The entrance of companies such
as St. Gobain and Guardian (yet to start production)
into the flat glass market in the UK and so a
changing market and competition structure may
encourage this sector to look more closely into
tackling these problems.
Volume potential
At present the three main markets (container, flat
and fibre glass) consume an estimated 727,000t/a of
waste glass (a significant increase from 2002
figures) of which 617,000t/a is from container
sources and 110,000t/a from flat glass. Most of the
glass used comes from container or flat glass
sources and whilst the flat glass sector at present made and the respective specifications. The
only uses flat glass sources (of which it presently proportions of container and flat glass consumed by
uses 40,000t/a and has the potential to increase this the container and flat glass sectors are illustrated
to 70,000t/a) the proportions used by the other two below (Figure 4).
sectors varies in accordance with the product to be
Figure 4 – Present cullet use by glass sectors

800000
Flat
700000 Container
600000
Cullet Use (ta)

500000

400000

300000

200000

100000

0
Container Flat Fibre Other

Flat 110000 70000 40000 10000

Container 617000 0 15000 0

Sector

Economics in production results from contaminated sources. It

An average estimated value for the current price of
flat glass cullet is £25/tonne as although prices
appear confidential it is thought to follow similar
price determinants as container cullet. The financial
advantage to the flat glass industry of consuming
waste glass if they increase cullet use to the
potential 70,000t/a per year is substantial equating
to a cost saving of £1.4million/year. However, in
the laws of economics this benefit must equal or
better the costs of cullet production to the required
specification in addition to the cost incurred if loss
is for this reason that the primarily flat glass
supplier in the UK, Pilkington’s, estimates these
costs to be too high to include cullet from external
sources.
Specifications
The tables below ( and Table 2) highlight the
specific concentrations of contaminants and
colours, respectively, allowable in any batch of
cullet for it to be suitable for use in the respective
glass sector.

Table 1 – Cullet Contamination Specifications for re-use in the glass sector

Container Cullet
Standard Limits
0.1% by mass Grade A
Ferrous Metals
0.2% by mass Grade C
0.2% by mass Grade A
Non-ferrous metals
0.4% by mass Grade C
Inorganic material subject to agreement between
(Ceramics & Stones) processor and collector
0.5% by mass Grade A
Organics
1% by mass Grade C
Moisture Shows no drainage
Particle size <50mm
Table 2 – Cullet colour contamination specifications for re-use in the glass sector
Principal Colour
Clear Amber <2% Green <2%
Float Cullet Fibre Glass
Limits Limits
Particles >0.5g:none
similar to container
Particles <0.5g:2g/t
Particles >0.1g:none
similar to container
Particles <0.5g:none
Ceramics 30g/t
No particles >0.2mm
(container 50g/t)
Particles >2g:none
120g/t
Particles <2g:45g/t
similar to container
<10mm
Amber negligible Green 0.5%

14
 Amber Green <10% Clear <12% Green 0-10% Clear 2-8%
Green Amber <10% Clear <12% Amber 0-10% Clear 0-10%

ALTERNATIVE MARKETS and would help to alleviate the burden of waste

AGGREGATES
The main alternative market for the re-use of cullet
is the aggregates industry. There are a variety of
applications within the aggregates sector for the use
of waste glass including highway construction and
its associated features (it is estimated that 240
tonnes of glass would be used per kilometre), as a
basic concrete additive and in decorative
applications. There has also been extensive research
into the use of cullet as a replacement for the vast
quantities of sand used in sports turf applications
and golf courses. These two combined consume in
excess of ½ million tonnes per year of sand in a
combination of new, rebuilt and redressed surfaces,
tees and bunkers. This is clearly a significant
proportion of the market potential discussed below
glass on the UK considerably.
Market Potential
The total present use of waste glass in the
aggregates industry is estimated at around
150,000t/a whilst potential volume calculations
estimate that the aggregates sector en mass could
consume in excess of 1 million tonnes of waste
glass cullet per year. The main problems associated
with achieving this figure are highlighted later (ref:
Barriers to entry) but sourcing consistent qualities
has also been a problem. Many of the key market
players in the aggregates industry can be seen
below () along with a brief description of their
current status with regards to cullet use and their
respective applications.

Table 3 – Aggregates: current status with respect to glass cullet use

Company Name Current Status Application
Reprocess ~ 20-25,000 tonnes of waste glass
Lafarge 2003. View to use more under stable supply Road Aggregate
conditions and increase sites from 3 to 5.
Reprocess bottle bank glass since 2000
Glass Sharp paving sand as
Day Aggregates ~20,000t/a glass cullet used with success enough
bedding sand for block paving
to consider opening new plant.
30% natural aggregate substitute. Trialling ready
RMC mixed Glasscrete for non-structural concrete Glasphalt (asphalt products)
products (no plans to actively market)
20% glass substitution. 2002 usage of 11,500 Pre-cast concrete products.
FM Conway Ltd. tonnes of glass although the project is currently Small use in pavers and non-
on hole for commercial reasons. structural products
Decocrete Small quantities used at present Driveways
Acquired permission for 6000t plant crusher
Hanson Aggregates operational April 2004 with estimated 2000t/a Asphalt products
use initially with the potential for other sites
Small use in wearing courses
Tarmac Trialling
for lightly trafficked roads
Present use <1000 tonnes due to sourcing
Foamix – sub base product for
Foster Yeoman problems. Can use 60,000 tonnes if problems
road construction
eliminated. Approval to use up to 10% glass
M & W Mineral Increased use to 7-8000 tonnes of recycled glass Non-structural concrete blocks
Calch Ty-Mawr lime Trials plan to 100% replacement ~ 600 tonnes
Ltd. per year but only 50t in the first year
Trialling 100% substitution with glass sharp
Spartan Tiles Concrete decking tile
sand v. successful. Potential to use 8000t/a
Potential in one plant for 10,000t/a although
Marley Building
project halted due to lack of cost competitive Concrete roofing tiles
Materials
supplies. Cheaper supplies are being sourced.
Exposed glass aggregate with
Custom 21 Trialling
‘Terrrazzo’ effect
Sports Turf Cost and technical performance to be verified Use primarily in golfing
Golf Green construction – 140,000t applications but potential use
Tees – 23,000t/a for other sports turfs e.g.

15
 Bunkers – 9,000t/a
Golf Course top dressing – 111,000t/a hockey
Fairways – 160,000t/a

16
Economics
The typical costs of aggregates are between
£5/tonne and £10/tonne. In 2002 an Aggregates Tax
of £1.60/tonne was introduced to encourage use of
recycled materials, which also applies to quarried
material. Cullet of low grade (often higher in
contamination) is able to compete with these prices
as reduced quality in cullet reflects on the price
fetched per tonne.
Specifications
The main consideration of the glass cullet used in
these applications is that it can rival or better
traditional aggregates in terms of its mechanical
and chemical properties set out below ().

Table 4 – General Aggregate Specifications

Standard Specification Glass substitute Notes
Size distribution measured
Sand < 5mm
GRADING No Problem according to BS812 Section
Gravel 5-70mm
103
Refers to particle shape where
Cuboid/ Rounded Larger glass fractions are
FLAKINESS a high index is a plate like
preferred likely to be flakier
particle
SHELL CONTENT No Problem
Minimum Ten Percent Fines Value as
MECHANICAL
50kN-150kN specified in BS812 pt. 3:1990

Sulphate unlikely to pose a

SOLUBLE problem with glass although
MINERALS chlorides form food stuffs
may be.

NB Although the above highlights the basic property requirements of glass, specifications are often
application dependent and therefore it is necessary to refer to the specific British Standards applicable. Some
of these give reference to the use of specific materials and therefore if glass is not listed it may not be used.
Others list performance criteria and therefore if glass proves suitable it may be used.

17
FILTRATION
Research into the use of glass as a substitute for
sand in filtration systems such as those used for
drinking waster and waste water purification
processes continues to address the feasibility of this
method on a commercial basis and waste glass is
now being used extensively in these applications. In
addition to basic waste purification, research has
also shown that waste glass provided a suitable
substitute in swimming pool filtration systems and
there is also potential in the aquaculture and fish
farming industries.
Volume Potential
Although at present there is only a small market in
this field for glass cullet (current sales of a few
hundred tonnes per year) the volumes of sand used
for which glass might act as a substitute were
estimated to be between 45,000 and 67,000 tonnes
in 2002. However, it is anticipated that the volumes
of glass required for such applications could be
even greater ranging from 175,000 as far as
220,000 tonnes per year.
Specifications
The main specification of critical importance is the
particle size. The other specifications are detailed
below () but generally it is important that the glass
achieve the ultimate results of clean and purified
water to the required standard.

Table 5 – Specifications for filtration applications

Standard Specifications
Contamination
Agreed between processor and customer
limits
Grade 0 - 0.63mm (95% passing), 0.25mm (10% passing), 0.25mm (5% passing) Grade
Particle Size 1 - 1mm (95% passing), 0.5-1mm (10% passing), 0.5mm (5% passing) Grade 3 -
2mm (95% passing), 1-2mm (10% passing), 1mm (5% passing)
Particle Shape Aspect ratio of greater than 5:1
Entirely brown glass with clear and blue <5% in total
Colour Specs
Entirely of green glass with brown, clear and blue <5% in total

Economics
As seen above the sand used in such filtration
systems is of high specification and in the market
place is priced between £50 and £125/tonne. If the
consistency in glass in terms of specification and
supply can be guaranteed there is a great potential
in this field for cullet use. Cullet prices are
extremely competitive with filtration sand but only
providing re-processing costs to achieve such high
specifications do not significantly increase cullet
price.

18
ABRASIVES
There are a variety of abrasives for which glass
could be used as a substitute. These include blast
abrasives, bonded abrasives and frictionaters. Blast
abrasives are commonly used in the cleaning of
buildings and masonry and can be either recyclable
or expendable. The major factors for consideration
in using glass as a substitute is that in the areas of
cost (purchase and disposal), cleaning rate and
consumption rate glass can equal or better the
original material. Research has taken place to
evaluate these aspects particularly in comparison to
the expendable abrasive, copper slag. Glass does
equally well and in some cases is better. The
chemical content of copper slag makes it unusable
in environmentally sensitive areas and in this factor
glass is clearly more competitive as it may be used
in such areas. Bonded abrasives use crushed glass
for the production of paper bonded abrasive sheets
particularly by Naylors Abrasives. Frictionaters use
glass for the production of matches and
ammunition.
Volume Potential
The main market players in the blast abrasives
sector include Wolverhampton Abrasives, Minelco
(previously known as Ferguson Wild Ltd.), Scangrit
and Krysteline. The estimated UK market potential
for waste glass is between 10,000t/a and 50,000t/a
although the problems described later (ref: Barriers
to entry) have so far caused resistance to the
formation of a significant market in this area.
However, at present, there is a current market
consumption of approximately 3,500t/a and this
market area is growing.
Economics
If the varying problems are overcome the price of
cullet could be extremely competitive with
abrasives as current glass abrasives for grit blasting
sell at £50-£100 per tonne. The cost of conventional
recyclable abrasives is in excess of £200/tonne
whilst although lower in price, expendable
abrasives still fetch a good price of between £50
and £100/tonne. A common expendable abrasive
used is copper slag which although available at
virtually no cost is not available in the UK and as
such costs approximately £70/tonne to import.
Glass abrasives can therefore compete in cost with
the major conventional abrasives used in this
market.
Specifications
The specifications for these materials are similar to
those for container cullet () and as the container
industry accept a wide variety and vast amount of
both flat and container cullet such specifications
must be economically viable from the re-processing
perspective. With specifications such as those
detailed below there is significant market potential
for consuming glass cullet.

Table 6 – Abrasive specifications

Standard Specifications
Coarse - >2.8mm (<10%), 1.4-2.8mm (balance), <1.4mm (<10%)
Medium - >1.4mm (<10%), 0.5-1.4mm (balance), <0.5mm (<10%)
Particle size
Fine - >1.0mm (<10%), 0.2-1.0mm (balance), <0.2mm (<5%)
Ultra-fine- <0.2mm (100%)
Ferrous Metals 50ppm

Non-Ferrous Metals 20ppm

Organic material 500ppm

Inorganic material 50ppm

19
BRICKS & CERAMICS
The inclusion of sodium oxide in most plate and
container glass types allows finely ground crushed
glass to act as a fluxing agent and bind with clay in
the production of bricks and ceramics. This results
in a reduction of the firing temperature and so has
the energy saving benefits described earlier which
are particularly attractive in this industry. Research
has shown that the inclusion of glass in bricks
results in increased frost resistance, greater
compressive strength and a lower water absorption.
Volume potential
The estimated UK domestic market in ceramics has
the potential to use up to 20,000t/a of waste glass.
This is in addition to the volumes that could
potentially be used in the brick making industry
(using a figure of 5% glass inclusion in the
economic analysis) make the combined brick and
ceramics markets a significant potential consumer
of waste glass.
Specifications
The specifications for glass in order for its use in
this sector (Table 7) are relatively easy to achieve
and in particular the ability of this industry to
consume any colour and both flat and container
glass gives this sector significant potential in the
UK’s waste glass market.

Table 7 – Brick specifications

Standard Specifications
>106µm (<0.1% by mass)
Particle Size 75-106µm (<1% by mass)
<75µm (balance)
Colour Any
Type Flat and container glass suitable
Contaminants (all) <1%
Thixotrophy of slip (annex A) and
Agreed between processor and end user
dissolved salts (annex B)

Economics these are currently priced at £100/tonne. Glass

Bricks addition has also been shown to decrease hydrogen
The current cost of brick manufacturing is fluoride emissions by 33% which is likely to be
£35/tonne. Of this, raw materials account for beneficial in meeting the forthcoming IPPC
£5/tonne and energy £11/tonne. If the industry were requirements.
to use a 5% addition of glass the raw material and
energy savings would be equivalent to a cost saving Ceramics
of £0.25 and £0.55 respectively, giving a total cost Glass can be produced at a cost of approximately
saving of £0.80/tonne of bricks. This would require 40% cheaper per tonne than the traditional
the costs of the 5% glass addition to be less than materials which cost around £70/tonne. The
£0.80/tonne of bricks resulting in a benchmark cost ceramics industry is also undergoing trials into the
for glass of £16/tonne. This is relatively low economic savings in temperature and therefore
compared to average cullet prices and so may not prospective energy savings.
be cost competitive bearing in mind the
specifications require a fairly good quality cullet
(unlike aggregates).
However, the energy consumption by brick
manufacturers is of particular importance due to the
Climate Change Levy, in addition to the decrease in
Hydrogen Fluoride emissions which would require
additional expenditure on abatement technologies.
Savings in this area are also approximately
£0.80/tonne of bricks. Therefore, inclusion of 5%
glass has potential cost savings of £1.60/tonne and
so the benchmark cost for glass rises to £32/tonne.
This price would allow glass cullet to be cost
competitive with virgin materials.
Even without taking into account energy savings,
there is still potential for the use of glass cullet as
the inclusion of this material allows the production
of frost resistant bricks with increased durability
(for which glass actually enhances the effect) and

20
NICHE MARKETS & OTHER POTENTIALS
There a number of niche markets for recycled glass
that use it for a variety of applications. Although
the total volume potential for these markets is small
in comparison to the others described it is often in
these applications that the selling price is high.
There are a number of other potential markets for
Table 8 – Niche market company products
Company Name Product
Crystal architectural Products Resin composite flooring
Eight Inch Furniture/worktops
Freeform Arts Trust Pavers/blocks
GreenGlass UK Wine glasses
Decorative Aggregates primarily
Recycled Glass Company
decorative glass chipping
Decorative Aggregates used in the
Windmill Aggregates
glass gravel and floral industries
William Tracey Decorative Aggregates
The Clean Washington Centre
Paint Filler
(Research)
US Research Zeolites
Pittsburgh Corning (US + Europe)
Misapor AG (Switzerland)
Hasopor (Norway, Germany and Foam Glass
seeking UK partnership)
Cell-U-Foam (USA)
Innolasi Oy (Finland) Glass Tiles
Volume potential
In addition to the companies and respective
volumes they use the paint filler market within the
UK at present is only small whilst the use of waste
glass in zeolites is currently in the development
stage in the UK and currently no UK producers of
Foam Glass at present with the main market players
in North America and Europe. This market has
great potential in the use of glass cullet using up to
98% post consumer glass. It is also well suited to
the more difficult glass types able to consume
contaminated glass such as lighting, ELV glass and
CRT glass which combined have a waste arising
volume of approximately 165,000t/a. A 1%
penetration into the UK market would be the
equivalent of an approximate production of
2million tonnes per year of foam glass products
with the potential to consume 50,000t/a of waste.
Glass Tiles currently make products in the
Scandinavian market which is predicted to make
30,000m2 in 2005. This could consume 1200t/a of
waste glass and has the ability to use CRT glass
solely for this product in the glazing. If all tiles are
glazed there is a potential use for 48t/a of CRT
glass. However, at present, in Finland, the dominant
glass type used is container glass.
21
waste glass which include paint filler, zeolites,
foam glass and glass tiles. Paint filler can use finely
ground glass for a specialist exterior paint with a
sand textured finish, whilst foam glass is used in
the construction industry and glass tiles are popular
particularly in the Scandinavian market (Table 8).
Glass use t/a
100
10
40
450
1000
1500
1000
Particle size must range between
0.2 and 0.4µm. Current UK market
is very small
Finer glass is more reactive and
therefore a particle size of <100µm
is require
Particle size ~ 100µm required
Particle Size of 0.1-10mm required
Economics
The nature of such small specialist markets means
that the final products often demand high prices.
They are therefore very attractive for industries
wishing to find a high value end market for their
waste glass. The list below gives a brief look at
some of the prices that these products fetch:
Crystal paving: Finished product £150/m2 with top
range products fetching up to £1000/ m2.
Eight Inch: High value work tops sell at £350/m-
£400/m.
Paint filler: General filler may be cost competitive
with CaCO3 at £50-100/tonne whilst another
common filler, TiO2, can fetch prices up to
£350/tonne.
Zeolites: Have applications in high value end
markets at approximately £70/tonne.
Foam Glass: Sells at £30-65/m3 in its loose form
whilst pre-shaped insulation products can reach
prices of £200/m3.
 SUMMARY OF VOLUME POTENTIALS AND MARKET ROUTES
The following section summarises the development
in markets from 1999 to present and in the future
for the use of glass cullet. In addition to this with
the current waste glass arisings exceeding 3 million
tonnes per year this section summarises the present
total market capacity by sector for waste glass and
the potential capacity for waste glass (taking into
account increases in actual market capacity and
potential market entrants). In 1999 the primary
markets for recycled glass were in the glass sector
itself with the dominant intake in the container
sector. However, the aggregates sector was
emerging in the reuse of glass cullet. The 2002
figures (Figure 5) show that although the container
sector still remains the dominant player in the
recycled glass market the aggregates sector is
increasing steadily in its use of glass cullet. In
addition to this there are emerging markets in the
Figure 5 - recycled glass market – current players and market dominance
5%
8%
10%
0%
0%
0%
77%
Figure 6 - recycled glass market – the potential picture
3% 3%
26%
0%
2%
50%
0%
5%
2% 9%
22
filtration and abrasives sectors that show increasing
potential as research continues and new markets
emerge. However, there is not only an increasing
potential of current market players to take in greater
loads of recycled glass but advances in research are
giving rise to realise potentials for new market
entrants that could consume significant proportions
of waste glass. If current market players realise
their potential for consuming glass cullet and the
potential entrants realise their potential for
consuming waste glass the market structure could
change significantly (Figure 6). The aggregates
sector would theoretically be the dominant market
player. However, the realistic view is that the
change in market structure although continuing to
develop form the 2002 figures is unlikely to reach
the proposed state in Figure 6. The main barriers to
this are the specifications for each and the
economic feasibility of using glass in low value end
markets such as the aggregates sector.
Container
Flat
Fibre
Aggregate
Filtration
Abrasives
Niche Markets
Container
Flat
Fibre
Aggregate
Filtration
Abrasives
Bricks & Ceramics
Niche Markets
Foam Glass
Glass Tiles
 BARRIERS TO ENTRY
Every sector is subject to a variation of
specifications to which the glass cullet must adhere
to be used. However, there are additional barriers to
entry in some sectors and some factors are more
critical than others. The following section
highlights the main factors that pose problems in
the entry of glass cullet into that market.
abrasive sector to make use of the alternative but
recently this has become more available. The recent
emergence of a UK Market for recycled glass
however still faces problems such as an apparent
weak enforcement of the sand blasting legislation
that limits the benefits of glass in environmentally
sensitive areas. In addition to this the overall
abrasive market is declining although the market
share for glass abrasives is increasing.

Container Sector Bricks & Ceramics

The main problem faced in this sector is the colour
imbalance although measures have been taken to
reduce this and this is now less of a problem than it
was a few years ago.
Flat glass sector
The critical factor for the flat glass sector is the
contamination levels of the glass which from post-
consumer sources are still unpredictable and a
significant barrier to the intake of such cullet by the
flat glass producers.
Fibre glass sector
The quality requirements of continuous re-
enforcement fibre manufacturers is still too
stringent to allow the use of external cullet
however, insulation fibre manufacturers use a
considerable amount of external cullet. The ceramic
content is the particular problem for contaminating
fibre glass production and so the preferred cullet
source is flat glass due to its reduced contamination
levels.
The main barrier for the UK is the insufficient
grinding capacity to allow the production of the
required particle sizes for the use in the ceramics
sector in particular, but also for brick production. In
the potter industry there must be increasing work to
address the metal contamination levels of external
cullet as these could be detrimental to the glazing
process.
Niche Markets
The main problems faced in these markets are the
markets themselves which are small and therefore
subject to the fluctuation, in supply and demand to
a larger extent. The ability to source the required
materials at the required time are therefore critical.

Other Glass sectors

Tableware, decorative products and scientific
glassware have limited opportunities for the use of
external cullet at present primarily due to the
stringent requirements in production.

Aggregates
The major drawback in the use of glass cullet in the
aggregates sector is the alkali content in the cement.
This can react with the silica in the glass which can
produce a gel that may cause the concrete to swell
and crack over time. This problem can be overcome
by using a fine glass aggregate of less than 1mm, a
low alkali cement, the use of suppressing additives
and a fine glass powder of less than 45µm.

Filtration
The main factors for consideration are that the
silica content in the glass is not too low and the
organics contamination must be extremely low.

Abrasives
There are three main barriers at present to the entry
of glass as a substitute for abrasives in addition to
the quality specifications which as noted above can
be met. In past years, there have been insufficient
supplies of competitively priced glass to enable the

23
 GLASS AND THE AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY
WHY GLASS?
Table 9 – Composition of an average automobile
Material Average Weight (kg)
Ferrous Metal
Light Non-Ferrous Metal
Heavy Non-Ferrous Metal
Electrical/Electronics
Fluids
Plastics
Carpet
Process Polymers
Tyres
Rubber
Glass
Batter
Other
TOTAL 1142
The table above () details the composition of an
average passenger car for 2000.
Materials such as the metal fraction of motor
vehicles are relatively easy to recover and therefore
have been for many years. With the adoption of the
EU Directive on End-of-Life Vehicles in 2000
figures have estimated that the automotive industry
already recycles or recovers as much as 80% of
these materials and therefore if all materials and
processes fall into the recycling category the target
for 2006 has been met. However, if any of the
current materials only contribute towards recovery
targets and looking forward to the 2015 targets of
recycling 85% and recovery 90% the motor
industry now has to look at the smaller materials in
terms of percentage compositions in order to reach
these targets. It is for this reason that the motor
industry is now focusing its attentions on the
plastics and glass fractions of ELV’s. The 3% by
mass that glass contributes to the total car
composition could, therefore, be a significant
contributor to reaching these targets.
AUTOMOTIVE GLASS
Structure and Function
There are many features that must be taken into
consideration in the production of glass for
vehicles. These include durability, aesthetics and
above all safety. There are typically three different
types of glass made for automotive applications
which vary slightly in there make up. These are
front windscreen glass, the rear windscreen glass
and that used for the side windows. The safety
aspects are of crucial importance and for this reason
car manufacturers use either toughened or
laminated glass or a combination of both in all
vehicles. Laminated safety glass has a plastic
interlayer of polyvinylbutyral (PVB) between two
% Weight
780 68.3
72 6.3
17 1.5
8 0.7
24 2.1
104 9.1
4 0.4
12 1.1
40 3.5
18 1.6
33 2.9
13 1.1
17 1.5
100
sheets of glass. This acts as an adhesive in the event
that the glass breaks whereby the glass does not
shatter but remains in contact with the PVB.
Another inclusion in the rear windscreens of
automotives is metal in the form of heating
elements. All these features aim to provide the
vehicle owner with comfort and safety whilst other
features including tinted windows are becoming
increasingly popular. In addition to the glass itself
the method of bonding the glass to the car is also of
importance when discussing the ultimate fate of this
glass as referred to later in the dismantling section.
There are two main methods that can be used, the
use of a rubber gasket seal or by direct bonding.
The latter of the two is becoming increasingly
popular with vehicle manufacturers particularly for
the front windscreen and is currently the preferred
method in all passenger vehicles.
Standards and Specifications
Safety is of paramount importance in all
specifications and components of a motor vehicle
and glass is no exception. As such, the motor
industry faces specific standards relating to safety
in relation to the glass fitted which includes not
only its function on impact (both from inside and
outside the vehicle) but also its resistance to
physical changes to factors such as temperature, its
optical clarity and its resistance to chemicals.
However, in addition to the safety requirements
demanded by law, the motor industry faces
increasing consumer pressure to increase the
performance of the vehicle and make it appealing in
terms of aesthetics. The requirements on the motor
industry to make vehicles lighter means that the flat
glass produced for motor vehicles is thinner
(approximately 3mm) than flat glass used in
24
construction applications (most commonly 6mm).
Flat glass is rejected at production if any optical
defects greater than 0.5mm are found and therefore
it is mandatory that contaminants are less than
0.3mm in size to present production loss.
AUTOMOTIVE GLASS AS WASTE
There are three main stages at which automotive
glass can enter the waste steam. The first is at the
production stage. In shaping and forming excess
glass is cut to achieve the final product. This waste
glass and any breakages during the production
phase are able to be recycled as cullet as the source
is known (downstream processing) and
contamination low. The second is in the window
replacement sector. Such businesses replace the
broken window with a new one and again this is a
fairly low contamination source providing it is not
mixed with other waste sources prior to
transportation to a glass re-processor. Also, many
windscreen replacements are often due to a chip in
the main viewing section of the car windscreen and
as such the glass can be removed almost whole
which helps to minimise contamination. This
process is driven by the incorporation of recycling
cost into the replacement cost which is ultimately
born by the consumer or their insurance company
Figure 7 – ELV disposal routes
Premature
Salvage Operators
Dismantlers
Shredders
Glass & Aggregate
Alternativ
s
e Markets
25
and as such delivers a relatively low contaminated
cullet at virtually no cost to the cullet processor.
The final fate of glass in motor vehicles is at the
End-of-Life stage which could be through the
natural expiration of the vehicle or premature
through road incidents. The following sections
address the fate of glass at the ELV stage.
ELV glass
Prior to the ELV Directive and the increasing
government pressures on producer responsibility
the disposal of a motor vehicle at the end-of-its
natural life was the responsibility of the owner at
that time. In the event that the ELV was such due to
a road incident or similar then it was most likely
that the ELV would become the responsibility of
the insurance company who would then seek the
relevant disposal routes for that car. However,
following the increasing producer responsibility
regulations and the ELV Directive it is now the
responsibility of vehicle manufacturers to dispose
correctly of all vehicles on the market from 2002
and by 2007 they will be responsible for the
disposal of ALL vehicles regardless of age.
There are two main routes for ELV’s (after vehicle
collection) primarily dependent on whether they are
premature or natural (Figure 7).
Natural
Landfill
Salvage operators work on behalf of insurance
companies in cases where an ELV has been
subjected to an incident of some sort that involves
an insurance claim. After this as with natural ELV’s
the vehicle passes to the dismantlers most often for
recovery of used parts.
Dismantling in the UK
In contrast to the 1999 figures, estimates form the
Department of trade and Industry (DTI) in 2002
quote the numbers of dismantling companies in the
UK to be between 2000 and 3500. Under the
Environmental Protection Act 1990 UK operating
dismantlers are required to be authorised or
registered exempt so the apparent reduction in
figures may be due to the increasingly stringent
environmental standards on these companies.
However, as the majority are small family run firms
within only a few (approximately 1000) larger
firms it is unfortunately more likely to be the case
that there are those companies still operating
outside the required standards and therefore not
registered in the above way. At present there are
1553 dismantlers and scrap yards affiliated to trade
associations.
If the automotive glass is to be recycled at the
dismantling stage it must first be removed from the
vehicle. The ease of removal is dependent upon the
method of sealing used in manufacture. The use of
a rubberised gasket seal is comparatively easy when
considering removal of the whole window however
the direct bonding method (more commonly used in
modern day vehicles) is particularly time
consuming. In order to minimise the time taken it is
possible to cut the glass using a ‘cheese-wire’ to cut
a disc at the largest size possible but this still leaves
a significant proportion of the glass in contact with
the car. There are increased problems in removing
the glass from the side windows due to the locking
mechanism.
After removal the glass must then be sorted into the
different types (laminated, silver printed rear
windows etc.). The waste glass is then sometimes
resold if appropriate but more likely will be
available to cullet processors and in the event that it
cannot be sold will ultimately be land filled.
Shredding in the UK
2002 data shows that there were 37 shredding
facilities in the UK (a slight decrease from the 1999
figures) of which EMR and Sims Metal dominated
the market. Shredding facilities are large, capital-
intensive sites whose primary function remains to
recover the valuable metal components.
It is possible that natural ELV’s may pass straight to
the shredder particularly in cases where the vehicle
has been demolished and abandoned such as to
make proving ownership impossible. Also, those
cars who have suffered severe glass breakage or
where dismantlers cannot economically remove the
glass fraction will also pass to the shredder with the
glass fraction. At the shredding stage the vehicle is
crushed and shredded into pieces. These are then
sorted using a variety of methods into product
streams. The main product fraction is shredded steel
which accounts for approximately 70% of the
output whilst the remaining 30% is primary
shredder fluff (25%) and heavy media. The
shredder fluff is comprised mainly of foam in
addition to light weight non-metallic materials
whilst the heavy material is often a variable mix of
materials such as rubber and concrete. Modern
plants use floatation methods for separation of the
materials (Dense Media Separation) and following
separation the heavy fraction can be processed
further at heavy media plants at which stage some
materials such as copper, aluminium, magnesium,
glass and plastics can be removed whilst the
remainder shredder fluff is currently land filled.
There is ongoing research into the possibility of
further separating the materials in shredder fluff.
If the glass is separated sufficiently form the other
materials with contamination below the limits set
out in the glass sector specifications and the
alternative markets then it may follow one of these
routes to fetch a reasonable market price. However,
in most cases the concrete contamination is too
significant and the only real market available for
the waste is in the aggregates sector. In the event
that this is still unsuitable the only option left is
landfill.
TECHNICAL AND ECONOMIC BARRIERS TO RECOVERING
ELV GLASS
Using the most current data available the estimates
for total ELV arisings in the UK is 2.1
million/annum (2,109,967 Defra). Of this
approximately 0.4 million/annum premature, 1.5
million/annum natural disposed of responsibly, 0.2
million/annum abandoned and the remaining 1% is
illegal parts form stolen vehicles.
The estimated weight of ELV arisings each year is
1,733,842 tonnes in total taking into account both
premature and natural ELVs.
On average the glazing in motor vehicle contributes
3% towards the total composition of the vehicle and
therefore in its fullest extent would give an
approximate weight of 52,000t/a of glazing for
potential recycling.
However, due to the technical problems of
removing the glazing particularly if directly bonded
CARE studies have shown in a project using 179
ELVs, that only 1.75 tonnes of glass were removed
which is the equivalent of 9kg per vehicle. The
common practice to remove laminated glass is by
use of a cutter and can leave up to 20% of the glass
attached to the body aperture. This would therefore
reduce the estimated potential figure of glass
available for recycling at the dismantling stage (the
higher value product) to approximately less than
19,000t/a in total.
The average time taken to remove bonded glazing
from a motor vehicle at the dismantling stage is 5
minutes/vehicle. The main cost incurred at this
stage is the labour cost of dismantling and the cost
equivalent of this ranges between approximately
£2.50 and £3.50 per vehicle.
Toughened glass, which cannot be cut out, is
removed by breaking the glass in situ using a
pointed implement and the subsequent small
fragments are collected. However, even with this
technique much of the glass is lost and there is an
increased chance of contamination with other small
fragments.
likely to be the car manufacturers that must absorb
the cost of this process as it becomes necessary to
recycle glass in order to reach ELV Directive
targets at least at present if not for some
considerable time into the future. The solution to
the problem may therefore lie in the manufacturing
stage such that bonding methods are changed and
developed to make glass removal more efficient at
the ELV stage of a cars’ life cycle.

The value of the waste glass from ELV is dependent

primarily upon its quality but general market cullet
prices can range form as low as £5/tonne up to
£45/tonne for clear cullet of sufficient quality.
Appendix 1 details the realistic and potential
revenue of glass cullet from ELV’s over the current
market range of cullet prices and greater prices. The
total minimum and maximum costs of dismantling
are calculated using the values of £2.50 and £3.50
per vehicle respectively and the total ELV waste
glass arisings per year. These figures are used to
calculate the net income to the car manufacturers
(only taking into account simple sales and cost
prices and excluding secondary cost such as
transportation and reprocessing). These are
projected upwards for increased cullet values to
determine the market price required to give a net
income rather than net loss.

In order for the removal of ELV glazing to be

economically feasible the minimum price per tonne
that the resultant cullet would have to sell at would
be £102/tonne at potential revenue and minimum
dismantling costs (highlighted green in Appendix
1), whilst costs could be such that cullet would
need to sell at £389/tonne (highlighted in yellow in
Appendix 1) at maximum dismantling costs and
realistic revenue at £45/tonne. At present the
quality of such cullet is insufficient to warrant even
the highest prices that some cullet may fetch
(highlighted in blue Appendix 1).

It seems apparent that present day methods of glass

removal from vehicles are insufficient to make it
economically feasible and so it might be necessary
to look towards alternative technologies in order to
reduce the cost of glass removal per vehicle.
Appendix 2 details the costs required to make glass
removal economically feasible both for the actual
tonnages able to be removed at present and the
potential tonnages should advances in the removal
stage be made. For potential tonnages of ELV glass
the cost of dismantling would need to decrease to
£1.23/vehicle (i.e. best case scenario ½ the current
cost). For realistic tonnages of ELV glass the cost
of dismantling would need to decrease to
£0.45/vehicle (i.e. best case scenario in fifth of the
current cost). It can be seen that the reduction in
price per vehicle is so considerable that this might
be some way off in the future before technology
gives rise to a solution to the problem. It is then
 KEY REFERENCES

Department of Trade & Industry (2002) End of Life Vehicles (ELV)Waste Arisings and Recycling Rates.

Enviros (May 2004) Recycled Glass Market Study & Standards Review – 2004 Update. The Waste & Resources
Action Programme (Published May 2004).

Glass Recycling Report. (Issue 1) (2002) Glasspac.

Glass Stakeholder Update. (2003). The Waste & Resources Action Programme.

Hurley, J (2003) A Market Survey for Foam Glass. The Waste & Resources Action Programme (Published April
2003).

Kollamthodi, S, Bird, A. B., Elghali, L, Johnstone, K, Wayman, M & McColl, V, A N (TRL Limited) (2003)
Data Required To Monitor Compliance With The End Of Life Vehicles Directive. Prepared for DEFRA project
report PR SE/483/02.

Kollamthodi, S, Johnstone, K & Elghali, L, (TRL Limited) (2003) Data Required To Monitor Compliance With
The End Of Life Vehicles Directive. Part 2 Report – Demonstrating compliance. Prepared for DEFRA project
report PR SE/518/02.

Recovered container glass – specification for quality and guidance for good practice in collection (PAS 101)
(2003). The Waste & Resources Action Programme.

Smith, Dr. A. S. (CERAM Building Technology 2004) To demonstrate commercial viability of incorporating
ground glass in bricks with reduced emissions and energy savings. The Waste & Resources Action
Programme (Published March 2004).

Specification for processed glass markets for selected secondary end markets (PAS 102) (2004). The Waste &
Resources Action Programme.

Staudinger, J & Keoleian, G. A (2001) Management of End-of Life Vehicles (ELVs) in the US. (Report No.
CSS01-01) Centre for Sustainable Systems, University of Michigan in cooperation with Flynn, M. S., Office
for the Study of Automotive Transportation. Prepared for Japan External Trade Organisation (JETRO).

ADDITOINAL INFORMATION AND REPORT SOURCES

www.britglass.co.uk (05/08/2004)
www.caregroup.org.uk (05/08/2004)
www.acea.be (05/08/2004)
www.plastics-in-elv.org (05/08/2004)
www.wasteonline.org.uk (05/08/2004)
www.defra.org.uk (05/08/2004)
www.dti.gov.uk (06/08/2004)
www.detr.gov.uk (06/08/2004)
www.gepvp.org (06/08/2004)
www.wrap.org.uk (General info - 06/08/2004)
www.wrap.org.uk/reports.asp (Additional Reports - 06/08/2004)
 APPENDIX I

Current situation at current dismantling costs of £2.50-£3.50 per vehicle

Cost of dismantling (£) Net income
Realistic Potential
Market Price (£) of Min Max realistic min realistic max potential min potential max
revenue* revenue**
cullet/tonne (£2.50/vehicle) (3.50/vehicle) cost cost cost cost
5 £95,000.00 £260,000.00 £5,274,917.50 £7,384,884.50 -£5,179,917.50 -£7,289,884.50 -£5,014,917.50 -£7,124,884.50
10 £190,000.00 £520,000.00 £5,274,917.50 £7,384,884.50 -£5,084,917.50 -£7,194,884.50 -£4,754,917.50 -£6,864,884.50
15 £285,000.00 £780,000.00 £5,274,917.50 £7,384,884.50 -£4,989,917.50 -£7,099,884.50 -£4,494,917.50 -£6,604,884.50
 20 £380,000.00 £1,040,000.00 £5,274,917.50 £7,384,884.50 -£4,894,917.50 -£7,004,884.50 -£4,234,917.50 -£6,344,884.50
25 £475,000.00 £1,300,000.00 £5,274,917.50 £7,384,884.50 -£4,799,917.50 -£6,909,884.50 -£3,974,917.50 -£6,084,884.50
30 £570,000.00 £1,560,000.00 £5,274,917.50 £7,384,884.50 -£4,704,917.50 -£6,814,884.50 -£3,714,917.50 -£5,824,884.50
35 £665,000.00 £1,820,000.00 £5,274,917.50 £7,384,884.50 -£4,609,917.50 -£6,719,884.50 -£3,454,917.50 -£5,564,884.50
40 £760,000.00 £2,080,000.00 £5,274,917.50 £7,384,884.50 -£4,514,917.50 -£6,624,884.50 -£3,194,917.50 -£5,304,884.50
45 £855,000.00 £2,340,000.00 £5,274,917.50 £7,384,884.50 -£4,419,917.50 -£6,529,884.50 -£2,934,917.50 -£5,044,884.50
50 £950,000.00 £2,600,000.00 £5,274,917.50 £7,384,884.50 -£4,324,917.50 -£6,434,884.50 -£2,674,917.50 -£4,784,884.50
55 £1,045,000.00 £2,860,000.00 £5,274,917.50 £7,384,884.50 -£4,229,917.50 -£6,339,884.50 -£2,414,917.50 -£4,524,884.50
60 £1,140,000.00 £3,120,000.00 £5,274,917.50 £7,384,884.50 -£4,134,917.50 -£6,244,884.50 -£2,154,917.50 -£4,264,884.50
65 £1,235,000.00 £3,380,000.00 £5,274,917.50 £7,384,884.50 -£4,039,917.50 -£6,149,884.50 -£1,894,917.50 -£4,004,884.50
70 £1,330,000.00 £3,640,000.00 £5,274,917.50 £7,384,884.50 -£3,944,917.50 -£6,054,884.50 -£1,634,917.50 -£3,744,884.50
75 £1,425,000.00 £3,900,000.00 £5,274,917.50 £7,384,884.50 -£3,849,917.50 -£5,959,884.50 -£1,374,917.50 -£3,484,884.50
80 £1,520,000.00 £4,160,000.00 £5,274,917.50 £7,384,884.50 -£3,754,917.50 -£5,864,884.50 -£1,114,917.50 -£3,224,884.50
85 £1,615,000.00 £4,420,000.00 £5,274,917.50 £7,384,884.50 -£3,659,917.50 -£5,769,884.50 -£854,917.50 -£2,964,884.50
90 £1,710,000.00 £4,680,000.00 £5,274,917.50 £7,384,884.50 -£3,564,917.50 -£5,674,884.50 -£594,917.50 -£2,704,884.50
95 £1,805,000.00 £4,940,000.00 £5,274,917.50 £7,384,884.50 -£3,469,917.50 -£5,579,884.50 -£334,917.50 -£2,444,884.50
100 £1,900,000.00 £5,200,000.00 £5,274,917.50 £7,384,884.50 -£3,374,917.50 -£5,484,884.50 -£74,917.50 -£2,184,884.50
101 £1,919,000.00 £5,252,000.00 £5,274,917.50 £7,384,884.50 -£3,355,917.50 -£5,465,884.50 -£22,917.50 -£2,132,884.50
102 £1,938,000.00 £5,304,000.00 £5,274,917.50 £7,384,884.50 -£3,336,917.50 -£5,446,884.50 £29,082.50 -£2,080,884.50
142 £2,698,000.00 £7,384,000.00 £5,274,917.50 £7,384,884.50 -£2,576,917.50 -£4,686,884.50 £2,109,082.50 -£884.50
143 £2,717,000.00 £7,436,000.00 £5,274,917.50 £7,384,884.50 -£2,557,917.50 -£4,667,884.50 £2,161,082.50 £51,115.50
277 £5,263,000.00 £14,404,000.00 £5,274,917.50 £7,384,884.50 -£11,917.50 -£2,121,884.50 £9,129,082.50 £7,019,115.50
278 £5,282,000.00 £14,456,000.00 £5,274,917.50 £7,384,884.50 £7,082.50 -£2,102,884.50 £9,181,082.50 £7,071,115.50
388 £7,372,000.00 £20,176,000.00 £5,274,917.50 £7,384,884.50 £2,097,082.50 -£12,884.50 £14,901,082.50 £12,791,115.50
389 £7,391,000.00 £20,228,000.00 £5,274,917.50 £7,384,884.50 £2,116,082.50 £6,115.50 £14,953,082.50 £12,843,115.50
* Realistic amounts of ELV glass estimated at 19,000 tonnes per year
** Potential amounts of ELV glass estimated at 52,000 tonnes per year
 APPENDIX II

Dismantling costs reduction needed to bring cullet back into range of market prices
Realistic revenue based on realistic glass tonnages available
Market Price (£) of cullet Cost of dismantling/vehicle Total Cost of dismantling Net income
Realistic Revenue
/tonne Threshold (red) Threshold (black) Red Black Red Black
5 £95,000 0.05 0.04 £105,498 £84,399 -£10,498 £10,601
10 £190,000 0.10 0.09 £210,997 £189,897 -£20,997 £103
15 £285,000 0.14 0.13 £295,395 £274,296 -£10,395 £10,704
20 £380,000 0.19 0.18 £400,894 £379,794 -£20,894 £206
25 £475,000 0.23 0.22 £485,292 £464,193 -£10,292 £10,807
30 £570,000 0.28 0.27 £590,791 £569,691 -£20,791 £309
35 £665,000 0.32 0.31 £675,189 £654,090 -£10,189 £10,910
40 £760,000 0.37 0.36 £780,688 £759,588 -£20,688 £412
45 £855,000 0.41 0.40 £865,086 £843,987 -£10,086 £11,013
50 £950,000 0.46 0.45 £970,585 £949,485 -£20,585 £515

Potential revenue based on potential glass tonnages available

Market Price (£) of cullet Cost of dismantling/vehicle Total Cost of dismantling Net income
Potential Revenue
/tonne Threshold (red) Threshold (black) Red Black Red Black
5 £260,000 0.13 0.12 £274,296 £253,196 -£14,296 £6,804
10 £520,000 0.25 0.24 £527,492 £506,392 -£7,492 £13,608
15 £780,000 0.37 0.36 £780,688 £759,588 -£688 £20,412
20 £1,040,000 0.50 0.49 £1,054,984 £1,033,884 -£14,984 £6,116
25 £1,300,000 0.62 0.61 £1,308,180 £1,287,080 -£8,180 £12,920
30 £1,560,000 0.74 0.73 £1,561,376 £1,540,276 -£1,376 £19,724
35 £1,820,000 0.87 0.86 £1,835,671 £1,814,572 -£15,671 £5,428
40 £2,080,000 0.99 0.98 £2,088,867 £2,067,768 -£8,867 £12,232
45 £2,340,000 1.11 1.10 £2,342,063 £2,320,964 -£2,063 £19,036
50 £2,600,000 1.24 1.23 £2,616,359 £2,595,259 -£16,359 £4,741