我國自民國91年1月1日起開始公告回收廢直式日光燈管,回收工作至今近7年多,執行狀況良好,而國內廢照明光源經回收處理後其資源化產物如玻璃、汞及鋁等物質皆已進行實際之再利用,唯螢光粉之最終處置仍以掩埋為主,實有違資源永續再利用之原則,以國內每年使用之日光燈管約1億支,每支日光燈中含螢光粉之重量約4g,每年產生之廢螢光粉已達400公噸,若能將其直接進行再利用,不僅可減低原物料之需求,同時亦能獲得實質上之益處,如降低環境衝擊、降低成本、提昇附加價值等。 本研究以光譜分析方法,進行新舊螢光粉混摻再利用之最適比例探討,另針對不同段日光燈管螢光粉,將其分為A、B、C等3段,並以XRD、SEM、ICP-MS及光譜分析等方法進行基本特性之研究,新舊螢光粉混摻再利用之最適比例實驗結果顯示,不論以新鹵磷酸鹽螢光粉或新三波長螢光粉針對回收螢光粉進行混摻,其結果皆隨新螢光粉比例提高,可見光譜之積分強度值亦隨之增加,新螢光粉比例為75%,回收螢光粉比例為25%時,其可見光譜之平均積分強度值已達新螢光粉的95.5%及97%,故新螢光粉比例為75%,回收螢光粉比例為25%為本研究認定再利用之最適混摻比例。 另依不同段日光燈管螢光粉之基本特性分析實驗結果顯示,鹵磷酸鹽燈管A段螢光粉於結構、成份及發光效率上皆明顯較B、C段螢光粉為差,若以C段螢光粉之積分強度值為標準,A、B段螢光粉之積分強度值可達C段螢光粉的16%及93%;而三波長燈管之A段螢光粉不論於成份及發光效率上,皆與B、C段螢光粉相似,若以B段螢光粉之積分強度值為標準,A、C段螢光粉之積分強度值可達B段螢光粉的99%。
The government has declared recycling for waste fluorescent lamps since Jan 1st in 2002. Distinguished results are very well, and though the waste fluorescent light tubes have been recycled and reused, the resource material- glass, mercury, and aluminum are reused. However, phosphor powder final disposal is still landfill. In Taiwan, there were 100 millions fluorescent lamps be used every year. On the other hand, there were 400 tons phosphor powder which disposal form waste lamps. The phosphor powder recycling could be save the material, protecting environment, and promoting of the value addition. This study uses spectral analysis to analyze that mixed fluorescent powder which virgin phosphor powder and recycled phosphor powder. Moreover, the author also uses XRD, SEM, ICP-MS to analyze the base compound of the powder. According to the result in this research, the luminous intensity of mixed powder was increased as the ratio of raw tri-band and halophosphare phosphor powder increased, respectively. When the ratio of raw phosphor powder and recycled phosphor powder was 3:1, the integral intensity of mixed powder was percentages of 95.5 and 97 as raw phosphor powder when wavelength band was 400-700nm. In this result, this study indicated that the optimum mixed powder was3:1 as raw powder and recycle. This study also separated the lamps as three stages by length to discuss the characteristics. In the result, it found that the stage A was worst among stage B and C. Moreover, the structure of stage A doesn’t have a good components and efficiency of lighting. It found that the integral strength of stage A and B were only 16% and 93% compared with stage C. In the stage A of tri-band lamp, no matter or components lighting efficiency were similar to stage B and C. The integral strength of stage A and C got 99% strength compared with stage B.