| 英文摘要 |
(1)Many different types of waste battery collection and recycling subsidy rates had been reduced since EPA post the revised subsidy rates in November, 2006. The collection and recycling costs for many different types of waste batteries dropped off after the subsidy rates adjustment. This is resulting in the low purchasing prices of waste batteries offered by recycling industries in the collection market. For primary Li battery, secondary Li battery and Ni-Cd battery, the collection and recycling costs of recycling industries are close to the subsidy rates after the adjustment. The subsidy rates of primary Li battery and secondary Li battery are slightly below the average collection and recycling costs of recycling industries. The subsidy rate of Ni-Cd battery is slightly above the average collection and recycling costs of recycling industries. For Mn-Zn alkaline battery and Ni-MH battery, the subsidy rates are slightly below the collection and recycling costs of recycling industries after the adjustment. For button Li battery, button alkaline battery, Ag-oxide battery, Hg-oxide battery and Zn-air battery, the subsidy rates are above the collection and recycling costs of recycling industries.
(2)The comparing results of suggested waste battery subsidy rates calculated based on the reflecting cost and annual balance principles and EPA subsidy rates , the suggested subsidy rates based on annual balance principles are higher than the ones’ based on the reflecting cost because the recycling fund will be in debt if the suggested subsidy rates calculated based on the reflecting cost. Although the values of suggested subsidy rates have slightly differences, the results of comparing with EPA subsidy rates are the same. The battery types which the suggested subsidy rates of collection and recycling are below the EPA subsidy rates are Mn-Zn alkaline battery, secondary Li battery, button Li battery, button alkaline battery, Ag-oxide battery, Hg-oxide battery, Zn-air battery and Ni-MH battery. The battery types which the suggested subsidy rates of collection and recycling are above the EPA subsidy rates are primary Li battery and Ni-Cd battery.
(3)The domestic waste battery recycling corporation started in October, 2007. according to the current data, the recycling costs of Mn-Zn alkaline battery in domestic are lower than the recycling costs abroad. The recycling costs of secondary Li battery and Ni-MH battery in domestic are higher than the recycling costs abroad.
(4)Based on the data collection and calculation, the collection and recycling costs of fluorescent lamps are around 11.33～17.20 NT dollars/kg in 2006. The average value is around 13.42 NT dollars/kg. And the unit effectiveness for resources is -2.42 NT dollars/kg.
(5)According to the comparing results of suggested waste fluorescent lamp subsidy rates calculated based on the reflecting cost and annual balance principles and EPA subsidy rates, the suggested subsidy rates based on annual balance principles are lower than the ones’ based on the reflecting cost because the recycling fund will be in debt or surplus if the suggested subsidy rates calculated based on the reflecting cost. Although the values of suggested subsidy rates have slightly differences, the results of comparing with EPA subsidy rates are the same. The suggested subsidy rates of collection and recycling are below the EPA subsidy rates.
(6)Because non-linear tube lamps had been regulated to collect since July, 2007, all the recycling factories don’t have the data of collection costs, recycling costs and collection volumes. Thus, the evaluation should be run after cumulating enough data.
(7)We can build up the trusting life-cycle data of products based on the perspectives of domestic production, consumption and wasting, and provide the costs of management processes and data collections. Only restraining in the waste lamps products level and green-design differential rates, it is hard to raise the effects of green-design and green consumption on produces and consumers.
(8)The project team finished collecting the waste battery recycling technology information of Netherlands, American, Switzerland, Spain, France, Germany, Sweden, Japan and Korea.(18 recycling corporations in 10 countries) Also described the recycling technologies above and compared those with domestic technologies in order to evaluate the adequacy of the related regulations. The key perspectives are including recycling equipments (smelting method should provide the separating equipment which can separate Hg quantity content under 5ppm), raw material limitations (the waste battery weight should not over 1% of the total raw material weight by smelting method) and the recycling proportions (the proportion of Ni-Cd battery should reach 75%, others should reach 50%).
(9)After collecting the raw materials specifications of waste batteries and waste lamps, the project team evaluated the proportions of recycling materials and the recycling markets. For instance, the metal recycling rate of primary battery is around 55.7% in Germany. The metal recycling rate of Ni-MH battery is around 52.2% and the recycling rate of Li battery is around 64.6% in Belgium. For the waste fluorescent lamps, the recycling rate in glass is around 85%, in metal is around 10%, in nonmetal is around 2.5% and in Hg material is around 2.5%. For waste bulbs, the recycling rate in glass is around 85%, in metal is around 12.5% and in nonmetal is around 2.5%.
(10)Referring to the analyses of waste battery laws and management systems for Germany, Netherlands, Sweden and domestic, the German waste battery regulation is “Decree Regarding the Collection and Disposal of Used Batteries and Accumulators”. The main collection battery type is primary battery, secondary battery and accumulators. The waste battery collection and recycling is handled by the GRS Batterien which organized by battery producers and importers. The GRS Batterien has to provide the documents of battery types, collection waste battery types and weights to the local authority for waste management.
(11)The project team analyzed the advantages, disadvantages and influences of deposit-refund systems for American, Germany, Canada and domestic experience(PET). The project team also pointed out the possible effects and suggestions regarding to the regulations, producers/distributors and perspectives of consumers.
(12)By collecting the recycling technology information of America, Sweden, Germany and Japan, the project team evaluated the feasibility of domestic recycling technologies for non-linear tube and HID lamps. Currently, the recycling methods are divided into dry recycling and wet recycling 2 categories. The method used by America, Sweden and Germany is dry recycling technology. And Japan uses the both methods.
(13)The project team finished analyzing the waste lamp regulations and managements of Japan, America, China and comparing with domestic conditions. The waste lamp regulations in Japan are “circulating society law” and “resource recycling law”. In Japan, the waste fluorescent lamps were regulated in July, 2001. The local authority is responding for the collection but not the central government. The local department asks the communities to take out waste lamps every Monday. And the cleaners of local department will collect the waste lamps then send to the recycling factories.
(14)The project team accomplished collecting the abroad waste lamps collection methods, collection ways, transporting and storage tools, and breakage preventing information. In America, the waste lamps produced by small businesses and individuals are packed and sent to the local hazardous waste collection center by themselves. The waste lamps produced by large-scale businesses are packed and sent by using recycling and mailing fees prepaid collection boxes, or collected and sent to the legal recycling factories by the contracted supplier while updating the all the lamps.
(15)Regarding to the project objectives, the project team already provided the plan for encouraging the battery producers to join the collection events. After intensive discussions with producers, the P&G corporation agreed to cooperate and finished the posting and TV commercial campaigns for the waste battery collection on October, 2007.
(16)There were 2 waste battery collection councils for communities held in Taipei and Kaohsiung in September and October, 2007. These encouraging collection activities joined the community, the local environmental authority and its executive departments. During the councils, each participated person can get a lottery by collecting 4 batteries. After calculating, there was 160 kg waste batteries collected at 2 councils.
(17)There were 2 waste battery collection councils for local departments’ cleaners and local environmental authorities held in November, 2007. The councils’ contents included describing the results of the collection councils for communities and inviting the excellent local environmental authorities and departments for working experiences sharing.
(18)According to the test results of the sampling batteries (100 specimens), only 1 specimen’s Hg quantity content was over the standard. These unqualified batteries were contained in the product distributed in the toy store and made in China.
|