Environmental Technology

ISSN: 0959-3330 (Print) 1479-487X (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tent20

Overview regarding construction and demolition waste in Spain Desirée Rodríguez-Robles, Julia García-González, Andrés Juan-Valdés, Julia Mª Morán-del Pozo & M. Ignacio Guerra-Romero To cite this article: Desirée Rodríguez-Robles, Julia García-González, Andrés Juan-Valdés, Julia Mª Morán-del Pozo & M. Ignacio Guerra-Romero (2015) Overview regarding construction and demolition waste in Spain, Environmental Technology, 36:23, 3060-3070, DOI: 10.1080/09593330.2014.957247 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09593330.2014.957247

Accepted author version posted online: 21 Aug 2014. Published online: 17 Sep 2014. Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 50

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=tent20 Download by: [University of Birmingham]

Date: 07 November 2015, At: 11:40

Environmental Technology, 2015 Vol. 36, No. 23, 3060–3070, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09593330.2014.957247

Overview regarding construction and demolition waste in Spain Desirée Rodríguez-Robles ∗ , Julia García-González, Andrés Juan-Valdés, Julia Mª Morán-del Pozo and M. Ignacio Guerra-Romero Department of Engineering and Agricultural Sciences, University of Leon, Leon, Spain

Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 11:40 07 November 2015

(Received 17 March 2014; accepted 17 August 2014 ) The construction sector comprises a number of activities that may result in environmental impacts of considerable magnitude, waste generation being one of the major negative effects of this industry due to the large streams generated. Proper knowledge of the environmental problem caused by the sector is of great importance in order to achieve an effective waste management. Thus, this paper analyse the Spanish situation regarding construction and demolition waste (CDW) compared with other European Union countries; which sets out the current figures of the CDW scenario (legislation, generation, composition, treatment and market) as well as the difficulties encountered when handling this residue. Keywords: CDW; management; recycling; composition; legislation

1. Introduction Although human activities have always had an impact on the environment, after the industrial revolution, the technological development achieved has not only meant that humans have a greater capacity for economic growth but also a greater negative impact on the environment. Since the first alarm voices rose up in the 1970s, the reconciliation of economic development with the preservation of the environment has been one of the major global challenges of the society. According to the EU Roadmap to a Resource Efficient Europe, [1] each year the European Union (EU) throws away 2.7 billion tonnes of waste, which if fully implemented the EU waste legislation would represent a saving of e72 billion a year, an increase of e42 billion in the annual turnover of the waste management and over 400,000 new green jobs by 2020.[2] Furthermore, it has been estimated that between 146 and 244 million tonnes of green house gas emissions could be avoided by 2020 through reinforced application of the waste hierarchy.[3] Special concern rests in the European construction industry, since besides being one of the largest consumers of natural resources – more than 50% of European natural resources [4] – it is also a major contributor in the waste scenario – about 33% of the waste generated annually [5] – as large quantities of the raw minerals employed end up in landfills. Construction and demolition waste (CDW) – distinguished as a separate waste stream because of its unique management issues and challenges [6] – constitutes an increasingly significant worldwide problem, not

*Corresponding author. Email: [email protected] © 2014 Taylor & Francis

so much because of its hazardous nature, since it could be considered mostly inert – although various potentially dangerous materials are now recognized to occur in some sources of CDW [6] and some attention has been paid in order to prevent risk to human health, [7,8] – but because of the volume generated, which renders sustainable management as a difficult matter. However, a more efficient use of materials, both the primary aggregates and the secondary materials derived from waste management, could reverse the problematic condition into an opportunity to reduce the environmental impacts of construction and improve the economic efficiency of the sector. The environmental problems caused by the construction sector have triggered considerable public awareness. In an attempt to protect the environment and improve the sustainability of the construction industry, many countries have developed several standards and initiatives to regulate and encourage the management and utilization of CDW. However, the application of these specifications requires an understanding of the magnitude and composition of materials comprising the waste stream, and the difficulties of the recycled aggregates sector, both in the treatment and in the subsequent phases of commercialization and use of the recycled products. The aim of this paper is to set out the latest construction and demolition waste situation in Spain, which is a prerequisite in the development of appropriate solutions for the CDW management. In order to achieve this goal, the study establishes the state-of-theart of the problem, the characteristics of this type of waste according to its origin and the collection, management and

Environmental Technology

Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 11:40 07 November 2015

marketing practices employed; indicating, when possible, the comparison between the Spain and other European Union countries.

2. Legal background Growing public concern led national and international governments to implement legislation to prevent or correct several environmental issues during the 1970s. The first Directive on Waste (75/442/EEC) was adopted in 1975.[9] Since then, EU regulations implemented to address this environmental problem have grown to form a legislative framework that includes both general and specific legislations that address different waste streams and different treatment options. Currently in force, Directive 2008/98/EC,[10] also known as the European Union’s Waste Management Strategy, provides the tools that allow the decoupling between economic growth and waste production. In order to achieve this goal, it defines the necessary measures to prevent or mitigate the adverse environmental impacts caused by the generation and management of waste. To this end, and in terms of construction and demolition waste, the Directive on waste establishes the need to reuse, recycle or recover at least 70% by weight of CDW – excluding materials in category 170504 (soil and stone not containing hazardous substances) – before 2020. Despite the existence of legislation at the supranational level, the primary responsibility for addressing wasterelated problems falls on individual states. Thus, as a

3061

member state of the European Union, Spain is required to comply with the principles and objectives stipulated in EU waste management legislation through the transposition of the European requirements into its own legal system. Law 22/2011,[11] although incorporated out of the 12 December 2010 deadline imposed by EU, includes the EU waste legislation into the national acquis. Furthermore, as its predecessor Law 10/1998,[12] it also contains the legal regulation of contaminated soils, an environmental area not required by EU Directive. In 2001, with the adoption of the first National waste Plan of Construction and Demolition Waste,[13] Spain began to pay special attention to this waste stream. Later, in 2008, a proper legislative framework for regulating the generation and management of CDW was set forth in the Royal Decree 105/2008.[14] Coinciding with the end of effect of the first CDW Plan [13]and the approval of the Royal Decree,[14] the second National Plan of Construction and Demolition Waste came in force.[15] Currently, a State Waste Prevention Programme 2014–2020 is being drafted in order to make progress in the reduction of waste. Royal Decree 105/2008 [14] established the obligation to include a ‘Waste management study’ in the construction project as a tool for implementing the waste management concept from the start of the engineering project. This study aims at waste minimization, rational planning of building work, storage of materials and waste sorting, and moreover it has to comprise an estimation of the waste the building work will generate, which could be determined following the guidelines shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Guidelines for construction and demolition waste quantification.[16–19]

Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 11:40 07 November 2015

3062

D. Rodríguez-Robles et al.

Thus, according to the waste management procedure described in Royal Decree 105/2008,[14] property developers should, ensure through their project designers that the project incorporates a waste management study, including an estimate of the quantities of waste which will be generated and the measures envisaged for its management. Spanish regional and local authorities are crucial actors in environmental protection as well; as the Autonomous Regions are responsible for additional environmental rulemaking – which enables a considerable difference in regulations between them [20] – and town councils have inspection and levying functions by establishing fees to discourage landfilling in favour of recycling and imposing deposits or financial guarantees which will be returned if a certificate of correct waste management issued by a CDW treatment plant is presented at the end of the construction works. Briefly, the Spanish waste management model is shown in Figure 2. Failure to complete any of these phases will halt the process and render it ineffective. Therefore, it is essential that all the agents involved in each phase are aware of the importance of their role, assume the new legal obligations and act according to the principles of sustainability. However, some Spanish professionals are still reluctant to implement waste management practices in construction.[21] According to Morán del Pozo et al.,[22] the agents involved in the waste management process may present in some cases behaviours that hinder a correct completion of the task at hand: • The property developer considers obligatory waste management to be a costly requirement, for the benefits of which do not directly accrue to him. • The project designer deems waste management a time-consuming formality which increases the

Figure 2. Waste management model.

project work-load and which can be accomplished by the inclusion of a generic study. • The project designer disregards the importance of a proper waste quantification and carries out a ‘bottom to top’ calculation process – based on estimates of how much waste can be generated before it becomes obligatory to sort the waste– in order to evade the obligatory waste separation. • The project designer has problems in order to estimate the quantity and the composition of the construction and demolition wastes that will arise. This difficulty constitutes one of the most serious deficiencies of the current legislation, which requires waste volume to be determined, but does not provide the essential indicators for such calculations, which however could be found in the literature as some Spanish researches have focused on addressing this drawback.[23–28] • The building contractor and the project management team frequently see CDW management as an unwieldy bureaucratic procedure which demands excessive effort and slows down work, thus the environmental benefits are overlooked. However, some CDW practices aimed to material minimization – adequate storage and ‘just-in-time’ delivery – are implemented by contractors as their economic benefits are easily perceived. Local authorities do not really enforce compliance with the law in terms of landfill fees or fines, or the environmental law it is enforced to a different extent by the various Autonomous Regions. Nevertheless, it is important to highlight that the aim of this rather new legislation on CDW goes much further than the mere legal obligation to draw up complicated documents or be in compliance with a bureaucratic procedure.

Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 11:40 07 November 2015

Environmental Technology The ultimate goal is to eliminate the traditional approach to waste management, which was based on the use of a product until the end of its service life and subsequent disposal in a landfill, and replace it with a hierarchical approach to waste management (also known as the 3R approach), in which priority is given to reduction, reuse, recycling and recovery of waste. Despite the legislative interest in the management of construction and demolition waste, Spain still lacks of any specific regulations on the use of CDW recycled aggregates. However, both the Spanish Code on Structural Concrete (EHE-08) [29] and the modified General Technical Specifications on Road and Bridge Construction Works (PG-3) [30] allow the use of recycled aggregates under certain constraints. The EHE-08 [29] includes an annex of recommendations on the use of recycled concrete which permits that recycled concrete aggregate replaces the coarse natural aggregate, establishing a 20% substitution limit in structural concrete and allowing up to 100% replacement in non-structural concrete. Meanwhile, the PG-3 [30] has undergone numerous amendments since 2001 to make specific reference to the use of recycled materials in granular layers of roads.

3.

Construction and demolition generation scenario

Although the large volumes of CDW produced are stated as the obvious problem, the identification of the exact figures

Figure 3. CDW generation in Europe.[32]

3063

is complex, as the data of CDW generation and treatment are scarce, mismatched and sometimes extremely outdated. Furthermore, the current information provided by Eurostat (source data at the European level) does not allow an accurate CDW quantification according to the recommended theoretical approach, which takes into account both the nature (building materials) and the activities that originate them (construction and demolition) regardless of who performs these activities. Thus, despite all the legislative efforts, the unawareness of this basic information implies the impossibility of a correct assessment and remedy of the situation. Currently, the majority of the CDW generation data are extracted from a study conducted by several European consultants in 1999 [31] or from national statistics, which in the best case scenario have a time lag of a couple years, and in the case of Spain do not provide exact figures due to the lack of reliable statistics according to the current National Plan for Construction and Demolition Waste.[15] Quantitatively, CDW accounts for one-third of the total waste generated in the EU, constituting a priority waste stream since 1991. In 2010, 857.1 million tonnes of CDW were generated in the EU.[32] Spain echoes this tendency, as the CDW stream is also the largest in the country, accounting 18.8% of the total waste produced in 2010.[32] Since CDW is intrinsically linked to construction, the evolution in the generation of this type of waste increased in most European countries until 2007. In the case of

Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 11:40 07 November 2015

3064

D. Rodríguez-Robles et al.

Spain, the amount of CDW generated over the period 2004–2008 increased annually by 8.7%,[15] placing Spain in fifth place in terms of CDW generation (44 million tonnes), exceeded only by France, Germany, the UK and Italy.[32] With the onset of the economic crisis, there has been a reduction both in construction industry activity and CDW generation. Between 2007 and 2010, Spain witnessed a 75% reduction in residential building works, a 70% drop in demolition and a 40% fall in public tender.[33] This has implied a 52.5% reduction in CDW generation (23 million tonnes produced in 2010), which means that as a CDW producing country, Spain holds seventh place behind Germany, France, Italy, the UK, Finland and the Netherlands, with a generation 17.7% below the European average of 12.4 million tonnes of CDW mineral fraction (Figure 3).[32]

4. Composition of construction and demolition waste CDW includes a wide range of inert materials, making it important the knowledge of its composition since it would largely determine the waste treatment and its enduse. Albeit the existence of a common model (European Catalogue of Waste) for comparison of waste statistics across all member states,[17] the great quantity of types of substances considered and the different definitions and considerations of CDW within each country renders it difficult to compare values between different countries with any accuracy. The composition of CDW is affected by numerous factors, including the raw materials and construction products used, the architectural techniques and the local

Figure 4. Spanish CDW composition study.[10]

construction and demolition practices. In Spain, as in other Mediterranean countries such as Portugal, Italy or Greece, the construction of buildings is usually based on ceramic elements combined with mortar and concrete.[34] Consequently, it is not unusual for 75% of CDW to be of stony origin (Figure 4) or to find a large quantity of ceramic particles (54%) mixed with concrete (12%).[13] Given that the composition of the construction and demolition waste stream varies from one member state to another, some countries have reported their own results of material characterization [35–40] (Table 1). The data used for the Spanish CDW composition study date back to 2001. Since then, and after the standard UNE-EN 933–11 [41] was approved, some Spanish scientific works incorporate a classification of the components of the CDW-recycled aggregates as a part of the experimental research programme; thus, a more recent composition data of the Spanish construction and demolition waste stream are available in the literature [42–52] (Table 2). It is worth mentioning that countries such as Denmark, Germany and the Netherlands, with the highest recycling ratios among the European Union, include soil in their calculations which represent an important bias.[53] For instance, about 50% of the total recycling in Germany (Table 3) is by the way of recycling soil and stones. Additionally, the recycling target of non-hazardous CDW excludes naturally occurring material defined in category 170504 (soil and stone not containing hazardous substances) which might be partially present in those figures; although its precise influence on the aforementioned recycling percentage is difficult to gauge, given that more detailed information is not disclosed. Since Spain

Environmental Technology

3065

Table 1. CDW composition studies carried out by several member states of the European Union.[35–40] Concrete (%) Ireland 1995 [35] Austria 2006 [36] Czech Republic 2006 [37] Estonia 2006 [37] Finland 2006 [37] Hungary 2006 [36] Denmark 2009 [38] Germany 2010 [39] Netherlands 2010 [40]

Ceramic (%)

Mixed CDW (%)

Soil (%)

1.5 – 35 8 33 – 4

0.8 43 –

52.7 6 – 53

13 12 14.5

17 28 56.7 7

39 26 33 13 26 28.5

62

Others (%) 6 25 32 39 67 57 30 0.3 31

Table 2. Spanish CDW composition studies found in the literature.[42–52] Concrete (%)

Ceramic (%)

Unbound material (%)

Asphalt (%)

92.90 77.90 49.00 77.30 42.30 76.00 34.80 15.20 50.90 15.20 34.80 20.80 43.00 72.50 71.30 55.04 71.06 51.26 9.33 71.00 86.21

4.76 16.63 44.34 1.58 35.68 3.10 26.60 21.00 21.00 21.00 26.60 3.10 18.50 1.00 3.7 4.1 2.34 21.00 17.67 0.00 0.08

– – – 20.83 18.91 20.80 33.40 52.70 22.00 52.70 33.40 20.80 37.00 21.50 25.00 40.00 22.73 24.03 69.00 29.00 10.48

2.02 4.03 2.58 0.27 2.17 0.00 4.40 9.20 2.90 9.20 4.00 0.00 – 4.00 – – 3.30 2.99 1.33 0.00 3.13

Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 11:40 07 November 2015

2011b [42] 2011b [42] 2011b [42] 2012b [43] 2012b [43] 2012 [44] 2012 [44] 2012 [45] 2012 [46] 2012 [46] 2012 [46] 2012 [46] 2012 [47] 2012 [48] 2013 [48] 2013 [49] 2013b [50] 2013b [50] 2013 [51] 2013 [51] 2014 [52]

a Impurities such as metal, paper, plastics, glass, gypsum b Average value of a set of similar CDW samples.

Table 3.

...

Soil and stones

CDW fraction comparable to Spanish CDW

Recycling ratio (%)

Composition (%)

Recycling ratio (%)

Composition (%)

Recycling ratio (%)

89.1 89.8 89.5 91.7

63.9 56.2 55.9 56.7

56.1 48.4 47.7 50

36.1 43.8 44.1 43.3

33 41.5 41.8 41.7

does not include excavated material, not only the CDW composition is different which hinder the comparison but also this fact affects the values of the recycling ratios achieved.

5.

0.26 1.06 3.72 0.03 0.94 0.10 0.70 1.90 3.80 1.90 0.70 0.10 0.40 1.00 < 0.20 ≤ 0.10 0.58 0.72 2.67 0.00 0.10

German CDW composition and recycling ratios studies.[39,53–55] German CDW

2004 2006 2008 2010

Othersa (%)

Waste management and recycling ratio

The recycling ratio in Spain, calculated as indicated in Directive 2008/98/EC,[10] has always been well below the 90% ratio of countries such as Denmark, Germany and the Netherlands, where recycling is less expensive

than dumping,[56] and is still below the European average of 47%.[57] However, considerable progress has been achieved, going from ratios of less than 5% in 1999,[31] to values of 30% in 2011,[58] although with notable differences between the recycling values accomplished in each Autonomous Region (Figure 5). Based on this data, the 70% recycling goal is still out of reach, and in order to improve the ratios it will be necessary to implement new measures by means of introducing new regulations and moreover attain a homogeneous level of development within the whole country.

Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 11:40 07 November 2015

3066

D. Rodríguez-Robles et al.

Figure 5. CDW treatment plants and recycling ratios in Spain.

As regards management of the mineral fraction of CDW, Spain has moved from an unsustainable scenario of illegal dumping to modest attempts at recovery, with 64.2% being reused in various applications without reuse of energy and 35.8% being disposed of in authorised landfill sites.[32] In 2012, Spain had 282 recycling plants, which were unevenly distributed throughout the country (Figure 5). As a sufficient number and an adequate spatial distribution of the CDW treatment plants is a key factor in the consecution of an efficient waste management, the local government should strive in order to provide the tools necessary to implement the compulsory waste management process. For example, in the Autonomous Region of Castile and León, Decree 54/2008 [16] envisaged the creation of primary waste sorting plants in provincial capitals, secondary plants in other towns, with a 35 km radius of operation and containment zones or landfill sites for non-hazardous waste in isolated areas. The level of technology employed at these plants is relatively simple (Figure 6). It basically consists of sequential phases of sorting, crushing and sieving that enables a recovery of 80% of the CDW collected,[59] 75% as the secondary aggregate while the remainder 25% should be recovered by specialist managers (metal, wood, plastic, paper and cardboard).[60]

6. Recycled aggregate market The undeniable environmental problem is forcing a change in the way people see waste. Traditionally, waste was associated with unwanted things that suppose a cost, a problem or a source of contamination. Today, although

still with a bad reputation within the general society, scientists and politicians push for the idea that waste can be a resource to be exploited. That is, the use of construction and demolition waste as recycled secondary aggregates in new construction works. Given the CDW typical composition, there are basically two types of recycled aggregates in Spain: that obtained from crushed concrete – which despite having received most attention only accounts for 15% of the CDW generated and 30% of the CDW marketed [58] – and that comprising mixed components with varying percentages of ceramic material. It has been estimated that in 2011, Spain produced less than a million tonnes of recycled aggregate, whereas Germany and the UK were the biggest producers (65 and 50 million tonnes, respectively) in the EU, where 5% of the aggregate produced was recycled.[61] As in any free market economy, the decision to purchase and use recycled aggregate will be based not only on the fact that it fulfils the technical requirements of the product but also on whether it costs less than natural aggregate. Hence, in countries such as Spain which have abundant natural resources and not the most adequate recycling infrastructures, it is necessary that governments take measures in order to grant an incentive to develop this market. As regards market prices, studies have shown ranges between e3 and e12 per tonne in Europe,[62] whereas prices in Spain are between e1.8 and e5 per tonne. As for the final destination of the commercialized recycled aggregates, it is estimated that 90% are employed as unbound aggregates,[58] which represents its use in low-level applications, such as filling, repair and sub-bases. Aiming for an increase in the use of these materials in concrete manufacture, scientific research on

Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 11:40 07 November 2015

Environmental Technology

3067

Figure 6. Production process at CDW treatment plants.

CDW has been driven by both government and the sector industries themselves, enabling the acquisition of increased knowledge through research projects (RECHNOR, CLEAM, GEAR Project), conference papers and scientific articles published in high-impact journals. Furthermore, some of the research on recycled aggregate from CDW has involved pilot projects to assess the viability and long-term behaviour of this material. Some examples of this construction experiences could be found in the subbases and ripraps constructed at the Olympic Village in Barcelona, the TATO-14 project – which was the first attempt in Spain to build a detached two-storey house using 10% recycled aggregate [63] – the cable-stayed bridge over the Turia River (Valencia) – the first bridge in the world made entirely from recycled concrete from the previous structure employing a substitution of 20% [64] – and a footbridge in the Forum (Barcelona) – using a substitution percentage of 20% moistened recycled aggregate [58] – among others. 7. Conclusion Spain has undergone a decade of intense construction activity, in which about 60% of the CDW ended in illegal landfills without any pre-treatment.[12] Since 2008,

the growing awareness to the environmental effect of construction spurred the government to the enactment of laws addressing the problem. However, to date, these regulations are insufficient to control and further enhance the reuse and recycling of CDW. Therefore, the need to include more severe control measures for the CDW management and specific regulations for the applicability of the resulting recycled aggregates must be consider, given that their implementation in other European countries have being proved effective. Spain is one of the EU countries with the highest production of construction and demolition waste. However, the amount generated has decreased dramatically since the economic crisis began in 2008 (about 53%), positioning Spain as the seventh largest producer of waste in the European Union with 23 million tonnes in 2010. It is worth mentioning that precautions should be taken when assuming these figures due to temporal mismatches and the different existing interpretations about the construction and demolition waste stream. Given the importance that the knowledge of these CDW generation ratios has in issues such as the identification of obstacles in recycling and the adoption of appropriate waste management systems, more reliable statistics are needed. To this end, more attention to the amounts of CDW produced on site, as well as entry

Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 11:40 07 November 2015

3068

D. Rodríguez-Robles et al.

CDW records of treatment plants or landfills should be paid. As for the composition of these wastes, Spain has a reliable estimate in its National Plan of Construction and Demolition Waste 2001–2006.[10] The problem lies in extrapolating these data to the European level, as most of the main CDW composition studies at this level include a category of soil, which hinders the comparison with the Spanish case in terms of percentage composition and recycling ratio (since the recycling of the soil category represents a high percentage of the final CDW recycling figure). The treatment technology required to the CDW handling is quite simple and not a real obstacle for the recycled aggregates sector. The difficulties in the management of CDW relate mainly to administrative factors, the lack of a successful cooperation between the competent authorities and the low willingness to establish CDW management measures in the works. To which must be added the difficulties in the CDW market, summarized in a lack of confidence in the product, from both the designers and constructors who do not use the product, and from the government that does not generate enough possibilities of application for the recycled aggregates. In conclusion, solutions are gradually being found in Spain for managing CDW, by the state and regional governments, the scientific community and the sector itself, which is becoming increasingly aware of this need. Their active commitment would be crucial in order to attain sustainability in the construction sector, and each small contribution, when added to others, would enable us to move towards global sustainability. However, there is still a long way to go (selective demolition, specific standards and assay methods for recycled aggregates, motivation and development of the market, green procurement, etc.) before these materials are no longer considered waste for which there is virtually no use but are instead viewed as simply one more viable option for construction. Funding This work was supported by the Spanish Ministry of Education, Culture and Sports under Grant number FPU AP2010-0613 awarded to Desirée Rodríguez Robles; the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness under Grant number FPI BES2011-047159 awarded to Julia García González, associated with project BIA2010-21194-C03-02.

References [1] Commission to the European Parliament. Commission to the European Council, European Economic and Social Committee, Committee of the Regions. Roadmap to a Resource Efficient Europe (COM(2011) 571 final). European Commission; 2011. [2] Monier V, Hestin M, O’Connor C, Anderson G, Neubauer A, Sina S, Homann G, Reisinger H. Implementing EU legislation for green growth. Paris, France: BIO Intelligence Service; 2011.

[3] Prognos, Institute of Environmental Research University of Dortmund (INFU). Institute for Energy and Environmental Research (ifeu). Resource savings and CO2 reduction potential in waste management in Europe and the possible contribution to the CO2 reduction target in 2020. Berlin, Germany: Prognos; 2008. [4] Schultmann F, Hiete M, Kuehlen A, Ludwig J, Schulte Beerbuehl S, Stengel J, Vannieuwenhuyse M. Collection of background information for the development of EMAS pilot reference sectoral documents: the construction sector. French-German Institute for Environmental Research (DFIU), Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT); 2010. [5] European Environment Agency (EEA). The European environment state and outlook 2010. Material resources and waste. Copenhagen, Denmark: European Environment Agency; 2010. [6] Clark C, Jambeck J, Townsend T. A review of construction and demolition debris regulations in the United States. Crit Rev Environ Sci. Technol. 2006;36:141–186. [7] Garrido E, Calvo F, Ramos AF, Zamorano M. Methodology of environmental diagnosis for construction and demolition waste landfills: a tool for planning and making decisions. Environ Technol. 2005;26:1231–1242. [8] Kijjanapanich P, Annachhatre AP, Esposito G, Lens PNL. Chemical sulphate removal for treatment of construction and demolition debris leachate. Environ Technol. 2014;35:1989–1996. [9] Directive 75/442/EEC, of 15 July 1975, on waste. Official Journal of the European Union L194 25/07/1975. [10] Directive 2008/98/CE, of 19 November 2008, on waste and repealing certain Directives. Official Journal of the European Union L 312 22/11/2008. [11] Law 22/2011, of 28 July, on waste and contaminated soils. Boletin Oficial del Estado (BOE) No 181, 29/07/2011. [12] Law 10/1998, of 21 April, on waste. Boletin Oficial del Estado (BOE) No 96, 22/04/1998. [13] Resolution of 14 June, that approves the National Plan of Construction and Demolition Waste 2001–2006. Boletin Oficial del Estado (BOE) No 166, 12/7/2001. [14] Royal Decree 105/2008, of 1 February, that regulates the production and management of construction and demolition waste. Boletin Oficial del Estado (BOE) No 38, 13/02/2008. [15] Resolution of 20 January, that approves the Integrated National Waste Plan 2008–2015. Boletin Oficial del Estado No 49, 26/02/2009. [16] Decree 54/2008, of 17 July, that approves the Castile and Leon Regional Plan on Construction and Demolition Wastes. Boletin Oficial de Castilla y Leon (BOCYL) No 141, 23/07/2008. [17] Commission Decision 2000/532/EC, of 3 May, establishing a list of wastes pursuant to Article 1(a) of Council Directive 75/442/EE. Official Journal of the European Union L 226 06/09/2000. [18] Order MAM/304/2002, of 8 February, that publishes the recovery and disposal waste operations and the European list of wastes. Boletin Oficial del Estado (BOE) No 43, 19/02/2002. [19] Mañà F, González J, Sagrera A. Plan de Gestión de Residuos en las Obras de Construcción y Demolición, Programa Life. Dirección General de Medio Ambiente, Institut de Tecnología de la Construcció de Catalunya (ITeC), Barcelona, España; 2009. [20] Spanish Association for Standardisation and Certification (AENOR). Informe de situación: Gestión de los residuos de construcción y demolición [Situation report: Construction and demolition waste management]. Madrid, Spain:

Environmental Technology

[21]

[22]

[23]

Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 11:40 07 November 2015

[24]

[25] [26]

[27]

[28]

[29] [30] [31]

[32] [33]

[34] [35] [36]

[37]

Asociación Española de Normalización y Certificación (AENOR); 2005. [Spanish]. de Guzmán Báez A, Villoria Sáez P, del Río Merino M, García Navarro J. Methodology for quantification of waste generated in Spanish railway construction works. Waste Manage. 2012;32:920–924. Morán del Pozo J, Juan Valdés A, Aguado P, Guerra M, Medina C. Estado actual de la gestión de residuos de construcción y demolición: limitaciones [Current status of construction and demolition waste management: limitations]. Inf. Construc. 2011;63:89–95. [Spanish]. Solís-Guzmán J, Marrero M, Montes-Delgado MV, Ramírezde-Arellano A. A Spanish model for quantification and management of construction waste. Waste Manage. 2009;29:2542–2548. Martínez-Lage I, Martínez-Abella F, Vázquez-Herrero CV, Pérez-Ordóñez JL. Estimation of the annual production and composition of C&D Debris in Galicia (Spain). Waste Manage. 2010;30:636–645. Llatas C. A model for quantifying construction waste in projects according to the European waste list. Waste Manage. 2011;31:1261–1276. De Guzmán-Báez A, Villoria Sáez P, Del Río-Merino M, García-Navarro J. Methodology for quantification of waste generated in Spanish railway construction works. Waste Manage. 2012;32:920–924. Villoria-Sáez P, Del Río-Merino M, Porras-Amores C. Estimation of construction and demolition waste volume generation in new residential buildings in Spain. Waste Manage Res. 2012;30:137–146. Mercader-Moyano P, Ramírez-De Arellano-Agudo A. Selective classification and quantification model of C&D waste from material resources consumed in residential building construction. Waste Manage. 2013;31:458–474. Royal Decree 1247/2008, of 18 July, that approves the Spanish Code on Structural Concrete EHE-08. Boletin Oficial del Estado (BOE) No 203, 22/08/2008. Order of 2 July, that approves General Technical Specifications on Road and Bridge Construction Works PG3. Boletin Oficial del Estado (BOE) No 162, 07/07/1976. Symonds, ARGUS, COWI, PRC Bouwcentrum. Report to DGXI, European Commission. Construction and demolition waste management practices and their economic impacts. Symonds Group Ltd.; 1999. Eurostat. European Statistics [Internet]. European Commission [cited 2014 Mar 10]. Available from: http://ec.europa. eu/Eurostat Spanish Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Environment. Agricultura, alimentación y medio ambiente en España 2011 [Agriculture, food and environment in Spain 2011]. Ministerio de Agricultura, Alimentación y Medio Ambiente; 2011. [Spanish] Brito J, Pereira AS, Correia JR. Mechanical behaviour of non-structural concrete made with recycled ceramic aggregates. Cem Concr Compos. 2005;27:429–433. Irish Environmental Protection Agency. National waste database – report for 1995. EPA: Irish Environmental Protection Agency; 1995. Fischer C, Werge M. EU as a recycling society: present recycling levels of municipal waste and construction & demolition waste in the EU. Copenhagen, Denmark: European Topic Centre on Sustainable Consumption and Production; 2009. Böhmer S, Moser G, Neubauer C, Peltoniemi M, Schachermayer E, Tesar M, Walter B, Winter B. Aggregates case study – final report 2008. Vienna, Austria: Umweltbundesamt; 2008.

3069

[38] Danish Ministry of the Environment. Affaldsstatistik 2009 og Fremskrivning af affaldsmængder 2011–2050 [Waste Statistics 2009 and Projections of waste 2011–2050]. Miljøministeriet Miljøstyrelsen; 2011. [Danish]. [39] Basten M, Pahl G, Schäfer B. Mineralische Bauabfälle Monitoring 2010 [Monitoring of construction and demolition waste in 2010]. Berlin, Germany: Bundesverband Baustoffe, Kreislaufwirtschaft Bau; 2013. [German]. [40] Government of the Netherlands. Bijlagen bij de brief met kenmerk IenM/BSK-2012–87678 van de Staatssecretaris van IenM over afvalbeheer [Annexes to the Secretary of Infrastructure and the Environment on waste management]. Rijksoverheid; 2012. [Dutch]. [41] UNE-EN 933-11:2009/AC:2010 Ensayos para determinar las propiedades geométricas de los áridos. Parte 11: Ensayo de clasificación de los componentes de los áridos gruesos reciclados. Madrid. AENOR. [42] Agrela F, Sánchez-De Juan M, Ayuso J, Geraldes VL, Jiménez JR. Limiting properties in the characterisation of mixed recycled aggregates for use in the manufacture of concrete. Constr Build Mater. 2011;25:3950–3955. [43] Barbudo A, Galvín A, Agrela F, Ayuso J, Jiménez JR. Correlation analysis between sulphate content and leaching of sulphates in recycled aggregates from construction and demolition wastes. Waste Manage. 2012;32:1229–1235. [44] Jiménez JR, Ayuso J, Agrela F, López M, Galvín A. Utilisation of unbound recycled aggregates from selected CDW in unpaved rural roads. Resour Conserv Recycl. 2012;58: 88–97. [45] Jiménez JR, Ayuso J, Galvín A, López M, Agrela F. Use of mixed recycled aggregates with a low embodied energy from non-selected CDW in unpaved rural roads. Constr Build Mater. 2012;34:34–43. [46] Galvín A, Ayuso J, Jiménez JR, Agrela F. Comparison of batch leaching tests and influence of pH on the release of metals from construction and demolition wastes. Waste Manage. 2012;32:88–95. [47] Mas B, Cladera A, Del Olmo T, Pitarch F. Influence of the amount of mixed recycled aggregates on the properties of concrete for non-structural use. Constr Build Mater. 2012;27:612–622. [48] Pérez I, Pasandín AR, Medina L. Hot mix asphalt using C&D waste as coarse aggregates. Mater Des. 2012;36:840– 846. [49] Galvín A, Ayuso J, Agrela F, Barbudo A, Jiménez JR. Analysis of leaching procedures for environmental risk assessment of recycled aggregate use in unpaved roads. Constr Build Mater. 2013;40:1207–1214. [50] Gómez-Meijide B, Pérez I. Effects of the use of construction and demolition waste aggregates in cold asphalt mixtures. Constr Build Mater. 2014;51:267–277. [51] López-Gayarre F, López-Colina C, Serrano MA, LópezMartínez A. Manufacture of concrete kerbs and floor blocks with recycled aggregate from C&DW. Constr Build Mater. 2013;40:1193–1199. [52] Galvín A, Agrela F, Ayuso J, Beltrán MG, Barbudo A. Leaching assessment of concrete made of recycled coarse aggregate: physical and environmental characterisation of aggregates and hardened concrete. Waste Manage. 2014; 39:1693–1704. [53] Heuser B, Kohler G, Ortleb H, Pahl G, Schäfer B. Monitoring-Bericht Bauabfälle (Erhebung 2004) [Monitoring report of construction waste (Survey 2004)]. Berlin, Germany: Arbeitsgemeinschaft Kreislaufwirtschaftsträger Bau; 2007. [German]. [54] Basten M, Pahl G, Schäfer B. Mineralische Bauabfälle Monitoring 2006 [Monitoring of construction and demolition

3070

[55]

[56]

[57] [58]

Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 11:40 07 November 2015

[59]

[60]

D. Rodríguez-Robles et al.

waste in 2006]. Berlin, Germany: Bundesverband Baustoffe, Kreislaufwirtschaft Bau; 2011. German. Basten M, Pahl G, Schäfer B. Mineralische Bauabfälle Monitoring 2008 [Monitoring of construction and demolition waste in 2008]. Berlin, Germany: Bundesverband Baustoffe, Kreislaufwirtschaft Bau; 2011. German. Lauritzen EK. Recycling concrete: an overview of development and challenges. Paper presented at: International RILEM Conference on Use of recycled Materials in Buildings; 2004 Nov 9–11; Barcelona, Spain. Sonigo P, Hestin M, Mimid S. Management of construction and demolition waste in the EU. Paper presented at: Stakeholders Workshop; 2010 Jun 21; Brussels, Belgium. GERD. Guía española de áridos reciclados procedentes de RCD [Spanish guide of recycled aggregates from CDW]. Madrid: Fueyo Editores; 2012. Ortiz O, Pasqualino JC, Castells F. Environmental performance of construction waste: comparing three scenarios from a case study in Catalonia, Spain. Waste Manage. 2010;30:646–654. GERD. Control de los residuos de construcción y demolición (RCD) en los ayuntamientos [Control of con-

[61] [62] [63]

[64]

struction and demolition waste (CDW) in the municipalities]. GERD: Asociación Española de Gestores de Residuos de la Construcción y Demolición; 2010. [Spanish]. European Aggregates Association (UEPG). A sustainable industry for a sustainable Europe: annual review 2012– 2013. UEPG; 2013. World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD). Recycling concrete: the cement sustainability initiative. WBCSD; 2009. Cátedra Mariano López Navarro. [Internet]. Spain: Universidad de Zaragoza. Proyecto TATO-14. [TATO-14 project]; 2005. [cited 2014 Mar 10]. Available from: http:// catedramln.unizar.es/files/cursos/2007-2008/sostenibilidad/ S5-2-Fernando_Navarro.pdf. Spanish. Alaejos P, Domingo A, Lázaro C, Monleón S, Sánchez M. Puente reciclado sobre el río Turia en Manises (Valencia) [Recycled bridge over the Turia river in Manises (Valencia)]. Paper presented at: Congreso de Puentes y Estructuras de Edificación [Conference on Bridges and Building Structures]. 3rd Triennial Meeting; 2005 Nov 14–17; Zaragoza, Spain. Spanish.