How Does the European Recovery Target for Construction & Demolition Waste Affect Resource Management?

Maria Arm, Ola Wik, Christian J. Engelsen, Martin Erlandsson, Ole Hjelmar, Margareta Wahlström

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

12 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The revised EU Waste Framework Directive (WFD) includes a 70 % target for recovery of construction and demolition (C&D) waste. In order to study the potential change in the resource management of the main C&D waste fractions, as a consequence of fulfilling the WFD target, a Nordic project (ENCORT-CDW) has been performed. Waste fractions studied included asphalt, concrete, bricks, track ballast, gypsum-based construction materials and wood. Recovery scenarios were identified and estimations were made regarding expected savings of primary materials, impact on transport, and pollution and emissions. For wood waste, the main differences between re-use, material recycling and energy recovery were evaluated in a carbon footprint screening based on life cycle assessment methodology. The study concluded that the EU recovery target does not ensure a resource efficient and environmentally sustainable waste recovery in its present form since: It is very sensitive to how the legal definitions of waste and recovery are interpreted in the Member States. This means that certain construction material cycles might not count in the implementation reports while other, less efficient and environmentally safe, recovery processes of the same material will count.It is weight-based and consequently favours large and heavy waste streams. The result is that smaller flows with equal or larger resource efficiency and environmental benefit will be insignificant for reaching the target.It does not distinguish between the various recovery processes, meaning that resource efficient and environmentally safe recovery cannot be given priority.Improved knowledge on C&D waste generation and handling, as well as on content and emissions of dangerous substances, is required to achieve a sustainable recovery.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1491-1504
Number of pages14
JournalWaste and Biomass Valorization
Volume8
Issue number5
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jul 2017
MoE publication typeA1 Journal article-refereed

Fingerprint

Demolition
resource management
Recovery
resource
carbon footprint
demolition waste
demolition
Wood wastes
asphalt
Carbon footprint
gypsum
Gypsum
savings
Brick
Asphalt
recycling
life cycle
Recycling
Life cycle
Wood

Keywords

  • Construction & demolition waste
  • Life cycle assessment
  • Recovery
  • Resource efficiency

Cite this

Arm, Maria ; Wik, Ola ; Engelsen, Christian J. ; Erlandsson, Martin ; Hjelmar, Ole ; Wahlström, Margareta. / How Does the European Recovery Target for Construction & Demolition Waste Affect Resource Management?. In: Waste and Biomass Valorization. 2017 ; Vol. 8, No. 5. pp. 1491-1504.
@article{a5b88389965b468abeced7d3fc292f12,
title = "How Does the European Recovery Target for Construction & Demolition Waste Affect Resource Management?",
abstract = "The revised EU Waste Framework Directive (WFD) includes a 70 {\%} target for recovery of construction and demolition (C&D) waste. In order to study the potential change in the resource management of the main C&D waste fractions, as a consequence of fulfilling the WFD target, a Nordic project (ENCORT-CDW) has been performed. Waste fractions studied included asphalt, concrete, bricks, track ballast, gypsum-based construction materials and wood. Recovery scenarios were identified and estimations were made regarding expected savings of primary materials, impact on transport, and pollution and emissions. For wood waste, the main differences between re-use, material recycling and energy recovery were evaluated in a carbon footprint screening based on life cycle assessment methodology. The study concluded that the EU recovery target does not ensure a resource efficient and environmentally sustainable waste recovery in its present form since: It is very sensitive to how the legal definitions of waste and recovery are interpreted in the Member States. This means that certain construction material cycles might not count in the implementation reports while other, less efficient and environmentally safe, recovery processes of the same material will count.It is weight-based and consequently favours large and heavy waste streams. The result is that smaller flows with equal or larger resource efficiency and environmental benefit will be insignificant for reaching the target.It does not distinguish between the various recovery processes, meaning that resource efficient and environmentally safe recovery cannot be given priority.Improved knowledge on C&D waste generation and handling, as well as on content and emissions of dangerous substances, is required to achieve a sustainable recovery.",
keywords = "Construction & demolition waste, Life cycle assessment, Recovery, Resource efficiency",
author = "Maria Arm and Ola Wik and Engelsen, {Christian J.} and Martin Erlandsson and Ole Hjelmar and Margareta Wahlstr{\"o}m",
year = "2017",
month = "7",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/s12649-016-9661-7",
language = "English",
volume = "8",
pages = "1491--1504",
journal = "Waste and Biomass Valorization",
issn = "1877-2641",
publisher = "Springer",
number = "5",

}

How Does the European Recovery Target for Construction & Demolition Waste Affect Resource Management? / Arm, Maria; Wik, Ola; Engelsen, Christian J.; Erlandsson, Martin; Hjelmar, Ole; Wahlström, Margareta.

In: Waste and Biomass Valorization, Vol. 8, No. 5, 01.07.2017, p. 1491-1504.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - How Does the European Recovery Target for Construction & Demolition Waste Affect Resource Management?

AU - Arm, Maria

AU - Wik, Ola

AU - Engelsen, Christian J.

AU - Erlandsson, Martin

AU - Hjelmar, Ole

AU - Wahlström, Margareta

PY - 2017/7/1

Y1 - 2017/7/1

N2 - The revised EU Waste Framework Directive (WFD) includes a 70 % target for recovery of construction and demolition (C&D) waste. In order to study the potential change in the resource management of the main C&D waste fractions, as a consequence of fulfilling the WFD target, a Nordic project (ENCORT-CDW) has been performed. Waste fractions studied included asphalt, concrete, bricks, track ballast, gypsum-based construction materials and wood. Recovery scenarios were identified and estimations were made regarding expected savings of primary materials, impact on transport, and pollution and emissions. For wood waste, the main differences between re-use, material recycling and energy recovery were evaluated in a carbon footprint screening based on life cycle assessment methodology. The study concluded that the EU recovery target does not ensure a resource efficient and environmentally sustainable waste recovery in its present form since: It is very sensitive to how the legal definitions of waste and recovery are interpreted in the Member States. This means that certain construction material cycles might not count in the implementation reports while other, less efficient and environmentally safe, recovery processes of the same material will count.It is weight-based and consequently favours large and heavy waste streams. The result is that smaller flows with equal or larger resource efficiency and environmental benefit will be insignificant for reaching the target.It does not distinguish between the various recovery processes, meaning that resource efficient and environmentally safe recovery cannot be given priority.Improved knowledge on C&D waste generation and handling, as well as on content and emissions of dangerous substances, is required to achieve a sustainable recovery.

AB - The revised EU Waste Framework Directive (WFD) includes a 70 % target for recovery of construction and demolition (C&D) waste. In order to study the potential change in the resource management of the main C&D waste fractions, as a consequence of fulfilling the WFD target, a Nordic project (ENCORT-CDW) has been performed. Waste fractions studied included asphalt, concrete, bricks, track ballast, gypsum-based construction materials and wood. Recovery scenarios were identified and estimations were made regarding expected savings of primary materials, impact on transport, and pollution and emissions. For wood waste, the main differences between re-use, material recycling and energy recovery were evaluated in a carbon footprint screening based on life cycle assessment methodology. The study concluded that the EU recovery target does not ensure a resource efficient and environmentally sustainable waste recovery in its present form since: It is very sensitive to how the legal definitions of waste and recovery are interpreted in the Member States. This means that certain construction material cycles might not count in the implementation reports while other, less efficient and environmentally safe, recovery processes of the same material will count.It is weight-based and consequently favours large and heavy waste streams. The result is that smaller flows with equal or larger resource efficiency and environmental benefit will be insignificant for reaching the target.It does not distinguish between the various recovery processes, meaning that resource efficient and environmentally safe recovery cannot be given priority.Improved knowledge on C&D waste generation and handling, as well as on content and emissions of dangerous substances, is required to achieve a sustainable recovery.

KW - Construction & demolition waste

KW - Life cycle assessment

KW - Recovery

KW - Resource efficiency

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85001754637&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s12649-016-9661-7

DO - 10.1007/s12649-016-9661-7

M3 - Article

VL - 8

SP - 1491

EP - 1504

JO - Waste and Biomass Valorization

JF - Waste and Biomass Valorization

SN - 1877-2641

IS - 5

ER -