Sustainable Impact Annual Report

Service Project on the Ground

Zero-Waste Tribute to Mazu

How the Club's impact happens on the ground, this page answers with photos, narrative, and data together.

Zero-Waste Tribute to Mazu Xingang Lunzi Refreshment Station 2026.04.20 Waste sorting and recycling 2,800 participants

We place case studies in the report so that readers can first see the scene, then look back and understand how the Club defines impact. The Disclosure Framework explains the classification method, the assessment methodology explains the angle of observation, and the actual case brings this language back to on-the-ground results, so that the philosophy and the outcomes can be matched up.

This page is the first compiled version of the case. This case study is based on the on-site statistics and post-event review from the service provided at Xingang on April 20, 2026. If more photos or supplementary data become available later, the narrative and charts will be adjusted accordingly.
01

Zero-Waste Tribute to Mazu

Xingang Lunzi Refreshment Station · On the ground, 2026.04.20

"Zero-Waste Tribute to Mazu" is one of the service projects driven by the Club. On April 20, 2026, the Club carried out a formal waste-sorting and recycling demonstration and results count at the largest refreshment station in front of Fengtian Temple in Xingang. Using paper bowls as the main basis for estimation, and converting by the weight of every 30 items of each recyclable category, we compiled quantitative results covering more than 2,800 instances of people collecting food and participating in waste sorting.

This refreshment station sits along the unavoidable route to Fengtian Temple and is one of the largest food-collection points. With dense foot traffic, the recycling volume is therefore highly informative as a reference. What the Club did here, beyond separating the waste, was to record the sorting results in a trackable way, so that on-the-ground service can be seen, compared, and continued.

From the statistical results, the number of people bringing their own utensils to collect food was still small, indicating that there is room for work in promoting the habit. However, because there were concrete recycling actions and clear records of results, the team on the ground also received praise from the local volunteer group, and the organizer proactively added our Line account, inviting the Club back to assist again next year.

The value of this case lies in turning a short, high-traffic service into an impact sample that can be explained, counted, and shared externally. For the Club, this is precisely the on-the-ground evidence that the report aims to preserve.

Summary of Core Figures

Three figures: first look at the results, then read on for the structure.

Total weight of recycled waste
194.22 kg
Recyclable and reusable, including food waste
123.75 kg (63.7%)
Participated in sorted food collection
Approx. 2,800 participants

Weight Comparison of Six Recyclable Categories

Each bar width is converted with 70.47 kg as 100%. Recyclable categories are shown in soft gold and muted green; general waste is distinguished in warm gray.

Steel and aluminum cans
12.03 kg
PET bottles
11.22 kg
Glass bottles
11.41 kg
Paper bowls
41.05 kg
Food waste
48.04 kg
General waste
70.47 kg

Share of Recyclable vs. General Waste

Recyclable and reusable, including food waste: 123.75 kg, accounting for 63.7%. General waste: 70.47 kg, accounting for 36.3%.

Recyclable, including food waste 123.75 kg, 63.7% General waste 70.47 kg, 36.3%

On-site statistics from the Xingang case, April 20, 2026

Next Page Disclosure Framework
How We Classify Impact

The classification skeleton formed at the March 2026 consensus camp, comprising 5 main outcome chains, 10 material issues, 8 categories of stakeholders, and 16 tracking indicators.