Quantities issue: architectural glass is long-lasting
Increasing the percentage of cullet quickly and significantly proves difficult due to the far too low overall quantities of glass from end-of-life buildings and components because float glass is an extraordinarily slow-moving commodity. Buildings dating back to the 1970s, 80s and 90s will only end up at recycling centres in the coming years. The buildings of relevance currently are older buildings with a significantly lower percentage of glass in the building skin than is customary today. It will take time before we see more glass for recycling being reclaimed from triple insulating glass or large-format facades – high-quality insulating glass is long-lasting and survives several decades without losing functionality. This is also backed up by the numbers: according to the latest figures published by “Bundesverband Flachglas e.V.” (German Flat Glass Association), some 521,000 tons of cullet are available annually in Germany.[2] Of this, 350,000 tons come from old buildings while the remaining 171,000 tons with markedly higher purity are sent by glass processing companies to recycling firms. On the other hand, every year 1.67 million tons of new float glass are placed on the market for use in building applications. Due to the circumstances outlined above, only 101,000 tons (19%) flow back into float tanks in a closed loop from recyclers. The largest share, some 235,000 tons (45%), leaves the closed-loop systems to end up in container glass while a further 165,000 tons (32%) are channelled into producing insulation materials and other mineral construction materials. Adding all this up you realise that 20,000 tons (4%) of cullet still end up in landfill at the end of the day if they cannot be used for another purpose.
Even if solutions are found to salvage the cullet existing in old buildings to the ideal quality level: over a third of the total volume of glass put on the market every year will – for the time being – not be recoverable from buildings because the proportion of glass in their facades is too low – it is not expected for large formats and triple-insulating units to be returned any time soon. By adding cullet from their own manufacturing sites, float glass producers could realise a recycling ratio of 40 to 50 mathematically speaking – provided the cullet was not required in other industries, too. A higher figure will only become achievable once the first triple glazing units, larger window-pane formats and glass facades, which appeared around the turn of the millennium, are received by recycling centres.
Manufacturers’ own networks and systems would also be worth considering to secure end-of-life insulating glass and cullet. This is a view also shared by Tim Janßen, Executive Managing Director and co-founder of the non-profit “Cradle to Cradle” NGO: “Manufacturers should, in their own interest, work towards orienting not only their product but also their business model towards a cradle-to-cradle approach and design them for circularity. This may mean offering glass as a service for a building for a specific period of use, and after the end of this period, getting the product and the raw materials contained in it back rather than selling their property rights.” Modular facades and glass or windows for buildings could in future be rented. Like this, “Glass as a Service” could make for a planned, energetic updating of buildings at regular intervals thereby ensuring a more constant return of insulating glass for re-use, re-manufacturing and recycling – albeit still at very long-term intervals.