Metabolism of Cities
  • About

    About Us

    • Our Story
    • Mission & Values
    • Team
    • Task Forces
    • Services

    Connect With Us

    • ContributeJoin Us
    • Subscribe
    • Contact Us
  • Community

    Research

    • Projects
    • Theses
    • ContributeAdd Research
    • People

    Updates

    • Events
    • News
  • Resources

    Getting Started

    • About Urban Metabolism
    • Starter Kit

    Multimedia

    • Photos
    • Videos

    Publications

    • Library
    • Journals
    • ContributeAdd Publication

    Data

    • Datasets
    • Data Visualisations

    Tools

    • Online Material Flow Analysis Tool (OMAT)
    • MOOC
  • Cities

    MultipliCity - Data Portals

    • Introduction
    • Video
    • Add DataContribute
    • Data Collection Events
    • Development Roadmap
    • Datasets

    Existing Data Portals

    • Prototype: Cape Town, South Africa
    • Prototype: The Hague, Netherlands
    • Prototype: Beijing, China
    • Overview page

    Upcoming Data Portals

    • Apeldoorn, Netherlands Coming soon
    • Bødo, Norway Coming soon
    • Brussels, Belgium Coming soon
    • Høje Taastrup, Denmark Coming soon
    • Mikkeli, Finland Coming soon
    • Porto, Portugal Coming soon
    • Sevilla, Spain Coming soon
    • Toronto, Canada Coming soon
    • Your city?
    • Orange Theme
    • Blue Theme
    • Metabolism of Cities
    • Metabolism of Islands

Publications

  1. Resources
  2. Publications
  3. Publication #86

Bibtex

@article{reference_tag,
  author = " Wei-Qiang Chen",
  title = "Recycling Rates of Aluminum in the United States",
  journal = "Journal of Industrial Ecology",
  year = 2013,
  abstract = "Recycling rates of aluminum are defined in different (sometimes inconsistent) ways and poorly quantified. To address this situation, the definitions and calculation methods of four groups of indicators are specified for the United States: (1) indicators used to measure recycling efficiencies of old aluminum scrap at the end‐of‐life (EOL) stage, including EOL collection rate (CR), EOL processing rate, EOL recycling rate, and EOL domestic recycling rate; (2) indicators used to compare generation or use of new with old scrap, including new to old scrap ratio, new scrap ratio (NSR), and old scrap ratio; (3) indicators used to compare production or use of primary aluminum with secondary aluminum, including four recycling input rates (RIRs); and (4) indicators used to track the sinks of aluminum metal in the U.S. anthroposphere. I find that the central estimate of EOL CR varies between 38% and 65% in the United States from 1980 to 2009 and shares a relatively similar historical trend with the primary aluminum price. The RIR is shown to be significantly reduced if excluding secondary aluminum produced from new scrap resulting from the relatively high NSR. In 2003, a time when approximately 73% of all of the aluminum produced globally since 1950 was considered to still be “in service,” approximately 68% to 69% of all metallic aluminum that had entered the U.S. anthroposphere since 1900 was still in use: 67% in domestic in‐use stock and 1% to 2% exported as scrap. Only 6% to 7% was definitely lost to the environment, although the destination of 25% of the aluminum was unknown. It was either exported as EOL products, was currently hibernating, or was lost during collection. ",
  doi = "10.1111/jiec.12070",
}

RIS

TY  - JOUR
T1 - Recycling Rates of Aluminum in the United States
AU -  Wei-Qiang Chen
Y1 - 2013
DO - 10.1111/jiec.12070
N2 - Recycling rates of aluminum are defined in different (sometimes inconsistent) ways and poorly quantified. To address this situation, the definitions and calculation methods of four groups of indicators are specified for the United States: (1) indicators used to measure recycling efficiencies of old aluminum scrap at the end‐of‐life (EOL) stage, including EOL collection rate (CR), EOL processing rate, EOL recycling rate, and EOL domestic recycling rate; (2) indicators used to compare generation or use of new with old scrap, including new to old scrap ratio, new scrap ratio (NSR), and old scrap ratio; (3) indicators used to compare production or use of primary aluminum with secondary aluminum, including four recycling input rates (RIRs); and (4) indicators used to track the sinks of aluminum metal in the U.S. anthroposphere. I find that the central estimate of EOL CR varies between 38% and 65% in the United States from 1980 to 2009 and shares a relatively similar historical trend with the primary aluminum price. The RIR is shown to be significantly reduced if excluding secondary aluminum produced from new scrap resulting from the relatively high NSR. In 2003, a time when approximately 73% of all of the aluminum produced globally since 1950 was considered to still be “in service,” approximately 68% to 69% of all metallic aluminum that had entered the U.S. anthroposphere since 1900 was still in use: 67% in domestic in‐use stock and 1% to 2% exported as scrap. Only 6% to 7% was definitely lost to the environment, although the destination of 25% of the aluminum was unknown. It was either exported as EOL products, was currently hibernating, or was lost during collection. 
ER - 

Journal Article

2013

Author(s)

  • Wei-Qiang Chen

Reference

  • Bibtex
  • RIS
  • RefWorks

Search

  • Google Scholar
  • Google

More options

Add a publication

Report error

Recycling Rates of Aluminum in the United States

Journal of Industrial Ecology

Journal of Industrial Ecology

Recycling rates of aluminum are defined in different (sometimes inconsistent) ways and poorly quantified. To address this situation, the definitions and calculation methods of four groups of indicators are specified for the United States: (1) indicators used to measure recycling efficiencies of old aluminum scrap at the end‐of‐life (EOL) stage, including EOL collection rate (CR), EOL processing rate, EOL recycling rate, and EOL domestic recycling rate; (2) indicators used to compare generation or use of new with old scrap, including new to old scrap ratio, new scrap ratio (NSR), and old scrap ratio; (3) indicators used to compare production or use of primary aluminum with secondary aluminum, including four recycling input rates (RIRs); and (4) indicators used to track the sinks of aluminum metal in the U.S. anthroposphere. I find that the central estimate of EOL CR varies between 38% and 65% in the United States from 1980 to 2009 and shares a relatively similar historical trend with the primary aluminum price. The RIR is shown to be significantly reduced if excluding secondary aluminum produced from new scrap resulting from the relatively high NSR. In 2003, a time when approximately 73% of all of the aluminum produced globally since 1950 was considered to still be “in service,” approximately 68% to 69% of all metallic aluminum that had entered the U.S. anthroposphere since 1900 was still in use: 67% in domestic in‐use stock and 1% to 2% exported as scrap. Only 6% to 7% was definitely lost to the environment, although the destination of 25% of the aluminum was unknown. It was either exported as EOL products, was currently hibernating, or was lost during collection.

Tags

  • Case Study
  • National
  • Substance Flow Analysis (SFA)
  • Time series

More information

10.1111/jiec.12070

  • Literature
  • Publications
  • Journals
  • Events
  • Publishers

Latest news

Urban metabolism seminar in Brussels - update
Sept. 20, 2019

Read more

Do you have data on resource flows?

Share data

We can use your help

Join us

Upcoming event

W12 Congress: First International Meeting of Cities Facing a “Day Zero” Water Scenario
Cape Town, South Africa
Jan 27, 2020 - Jan 31, 2020

View event

Metabolism of Cities

Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license.

Our source code is available on
Gitlab

Contact us

Follow Us

Metabolism of Islands

Visit our twin site:
Metabolism of Islands