South-East Europe

THE PRODUCTION OF RECYCLED AGGREGATES FROM INERT WASTE

Edited byTecnitalia Consultants, MILANO

AuthorsBressi Giorgio, Volpe Gianpaolo, Pavesi Elisabetta

ANPAR - Associazione Nazionale Produttori Aggregati Riciclati

Advisory Board

Blengini Gian Andrea Politecnico di Torino, Italy

Garbarino Elena Sustainable Development and Environmental Department, Environmental Impact Assessment Service, Torino Province, Italy

Pelosio Andrea Territorial Planning Service, Parma Province, Italy

Ratta Manuela, Rizzati Anna Rita, Romagnoli Massimo,Segadelli Stefano

Emilia–Romagna Region, Environment, Soil and Coast Defence Department, Italy

Sarma CoordinationProject Coordinator

Solar Slavko Geological Survey of Slovenia, Slovenia

Italian Coordinators

Cibin Ubaldo Emilia – Romagna Region, Environment, Soil and Coast Defence Department, Italy

Peri Sergio Territorial Planning Service, Parma Province, Italy

Internal Reviewers

Solar Slavko Geological Survey of Slovenia, Slovenia

Chalkiopoulou Fotini Institute of Geology & Mineral Exploration (IGME), Greece

Agioutantis Zacharias Technical University of Crete (TUC), GreeceMarinescu Mihai University of Bucharest, Faculty of Geology and Geophysics,

RomaniaSimic Vladimir University of Belgrade, Faculty of Mining and Geology, Serbia

External Reviewers

Brown Teresa British Geological Survey (BGS), United Kingdom

Hejny Horstr External Expert (Consulting), Germany

O’Brien Jim President of the European Aggregates Association (UEPG) Borad, United Kingdom

Editing InformationEditing:Scappini Simonetta - Emilia–Romagna Region, Environment, Soil and Coast Defence Department, Italy

Cover Design & Photo:Scappini Simonetta - Emilia–Romagna Region, Environment, Soil and Coast Defence Department, ItalyANPAR - Associazione Nazionale Produttori Aggregati RiciclatiPolitecnico di Torino (Polito), Italy

Printing:Press Centre of Emilia Romagna-Region, Bologna, Italy

Year of edition:September 2011© Copyright

This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the South East Europe Programme Managing Authority cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

Natural aggregates (gravels, sands and crushed stones) are essential non-renewable resources that can be used in infrastructures and civil engineering.Moreover in the new member states of the European Union, and also in South East Europe, it is estimated that the construction industry will grow by 4.2% in the coming years. Such an expected growth will likely complicate the overall management of aggregates supply, and therefore quarrying activities, which are presently extremely non-homogeneous and are still associated with local phenomena of illegality and/or heavy environmental impact. In addition to this, a further important issue that can be associated to the aggregates industries is the waste of potential resources represented by the landfill (sometimes illegal) of inert waste mostly coming from construction and demolition activities. Such an inert waste could in fact be processed in technically available, economically sustainable and socially desirable recycling facilities and become recycled aggregates, which could be used as a complementary resource in aggregates supply.

For these reasons SARMa (Sustainable Aggregates Resource Management) waslaunched, a project co-financed by the European Union through the South East Europe (SEE) Transnational Cooperation Programme. The project’s aim is moving a significant step towards sustainable management of aggregates through a better

coordination of activities and actors involved in aggregates planning, supply, use and recycling within or across SEE. Among various activities, SARMa is particularly concerned with recycling of aggregates, and to this aim it provides for specific in-depth analyses on the evolution of inert waste recycling, with emphasis on Construction and Demolition (C&D) waste that will likely be the most important source of unconventional aggregates in the next future. Furthermore, one of the main purposes of SARMa is to better implement the concept of Sustainable Supply Mix (SSM), which can be regarded as a mixture of natural aggregates, recycled aggregates, quarrying by-products and excavation earth and rocks, in order to maximize the benefits associated with the use of aggregates originating from various sources, also non-conventional ones.

As part of the SARMa project, this manual outlines the state-of-art of inert waste recycling, with emphasis on waste coming from construction and demolition activities and with focus on the production of recycled aggregates.

This manual briefly illustrates a broad range of activities related to inert waste recycling: an analysis of waste flows, an overview of inert waste treatment technologies and the main characteristics of recycled aggregates, a quick description of the market, and, finally, a set of recommendations.

INDEX

1. Introduction ………………………………………………………………………………… 7

2. Analysis of inert waste flows in Europe ………………………………………… 11

3. The treatment of C&D waste for the production of recycled aggregates …………………………………………………………………………………… 21

4. Recycled aggregates …………………………………………………………………….. 29

5. The market of aggregates …………………………………………………………….. 37

6. List of the recommendations………………………………………………………… 43

7. Sources of information …………………………………………………………………. 45

Page 7

1. INTRODUCTION

The construction sector has intensely used natural resources and produced waste flows that, in more recent times, are exceeding the absorbing capacity of the environment. On one hand, the necessary demand for aggregates caused severe impacts on the territory due to quarrying operations which in the last decades have been planned and regulated with increasing difficulty.

On the other hand, the significant quantities of waste stemming from the construction sector have generated needs either for disposal areas or for recovery plants, which are difficult to be met, entailing thus the frequent fly-tipping in the suburban areas.

The necessity to reduce the use of non-renewable natural resources and, at the same time, to minimise the negative impacts due to production and management of the construction sector waste has determined an increasingly higher interest towards recycling, in particular for what it concerns the European Commission. Thus the option to recover some fractions of waste and re-insert them into the productive cycles under the forms of products or raw materials seems challenging.

One of the main objectives of the SARMa project is to promote wastes’ recovery and recycling policies by encouraging Sustainable Supply Mix (SSM) practices in SEE countries. SSM is defined as “the supply of aggregates from multiple sources chosen on the basis of economical, environmental and social criteria”.

The aggregates are an essential resource for the economical and social development of a country. However they must be produced and used according to sustainable development principles. Notwithstanding the fact that the contribution of recycled aggregates can represent only a reduced percentage of the overall demand of the construction sector, it is important to underline that every type of aggregate can and must contribute according to its own characteristics. Therefore, no competition should exist among aggregates of different origin.

In June 2008, with the issuing of the new Waste Framework Directive 2008/98/EC

(WFD), that revised Directive 2006/12/EC, a conclusion was drawn after a long procedure started by the European Commission in May 2003 with the Statement

Page 8

COM(2003) “Towards a thematic strategy of waste prevention and recycling”. The then European Commissioner for the environment, the Greek economist Stavros Dimas, stated that the new Directive should change the mentality of considering waste – from an unwanted load to a precious resource – and contribute to transforming Europe into a “recycling society”.

The waste resulting from prospecting, extraction, treatment and storage of mineral resources and the working of quarries are excluded from the scope of the new WFD, since they are covered by Directive 2006/21/EC on the management of waste from extractive industries.

In a nutshell, the new FWD:

• sets a recycling target of 50% for municipal wastes and 70% for construction and demolition waste, to be reached in 2020;

• requires from the Member States to develop waste prevention programmes concentrating on the key environmental impacts and taking into account the whole life-cycle of products and materials;

• establishes a five-phase hierarchy as a priority order in waste prevention and management legislation and policy of Member States: a) prevention, b) preparation for re-use, c) recycling, d) other recovery, e.g. energy recovery, and e) disposal in the rubbish dump as the last resort;

• makes a distinction between waste and by-product;

o ‘waste’ means any substance or object which the holder discards or intends or is required to discard;

o a substance or object, resulting from a production process, the primary aim of which is not the production of that item, may be regarded as not being waste, but as being a by-product, if certain conditions are met;

• sets a clear distinction between the definitions of recovery and disposal, based on a genuine difference in environmental impact through the substitution of natural resources in the economy and recognising the potential benefits to the environment and human health of using waste as a resource; in this sense recycling is a recovery operation;

• sets the meaning of the End-of-waste status, as follows: certain specified waste shall cease to be waste within the meaning of the WFD when it has undergone a recovery, including recycling, operation and complies with specific criteria to be developed in accordance with the conditions of article 6 of the WFD.

The path to reach recycling target envisaged within the WFD inevitably starts from sustainable management of waste, aiming at reduction, through recovery and recycling operations, of environmental and social impacts associated with their production, keeping in consideration that, only construction and demolition waste represented in 2008 over 30% of the total waste produced in Europe (Source:

Page 9

Eurostat 2008). Consequently, the demand for raw materials, which causes severe impacts on land caused by quarrying operations, could be planned and regulated, towards a sustainable use of natural resources.

Fig. 1.1: Production of C&DW in a demolition yard in Milano - Italy (Source: ANPAR, 2006).

Recommendation n°1

Construction & Demolition Waste (C&DW) recycling offers important opportunities: a) reduce land disposal requirements for landfilling; b) avoid overconsumption of natural non-renewable aggregate

resources, by introducing alternative and supplementary materials onto the aggregate market;

c) create new business opportunities from waste recycling.

Page 10

Page 11

Tab.2.1: C&DW sectors of origin and components.

2. ANALYSIS OF INERT WASTE FLOWS IN EUROPE

Every year in Europe, different types of waste are produced. Each of them, creates different impacts on the environment and on human health according to their particular characteristics.

An analysis of the waste flows per economic sector suggests classifying them in three main types, according to their origin: construction, mining-quarrying and industrial-manufacturing sectors.

They make up 74% of the total amount of waste products in the 27 Member States of European Union.

C&D waste

C&D WASTE

Sector of origin Components

Construction waste

Waste coming from maintenance and/or construction activities of buildings and civil infrastructure works

Demolition waste

Waste coming from the maintenance and/or from the partial or total demolition of buildings and civil infrastructure works

concrete (pre-stressed or normal)cement and various mortarsconglomerates and mixed bituminousbricks, tiles and blocksexcavation soilwoodpaper, cellulose and polystyrenemetalsplasticchalkceramicglassasbestos

Waste from the construction and demolition of roads

Waste coming from road maintenance and construction works

conglomerates and mixed bituminous excavation soilconcretewoodmetalsplastic

Excavation soil and rocks

Waste coming from earthworks for the construction of civil works and/or excavation

excavation soilwood

Page 12

Fig.2.1: Waste produced per economic sector in the EU-27 in the year 2008 (% on the total amount of waste) – Source: Eurostat, 2008.

Although this document will mainly analyze the waste flow produced by the construction sector (hereon commonly named as Construction and Demolition Waste – C&DW), it is necessary to underline also the importance of some of the flows produced by other sectors, not only for their share in the total production of waste, but also for their large potential in the productive cycle of aggregates. The above mentioned wastes are mainly made up of inert waste, which in most cases can be recycled. Waste treatment in mining-quarrying and industrial-manufacturing sectors in fact results in the production of manufactured aggregates which, like the recycled aggregates, can be assimilated to natural aggregates.

In the year 2008 in the EU-27 about 860 million tons were produced in the construction field. This represents 33% (Fig.2.1) of the total waste production in Europe (Source: Eurostat, 2008).

Tab. 2.2 shows the production of construction and demolition waste in the EU-27.The values were obtained from the Eurostat database after a filter of the –Construction economic field, Non-hazardous waste, and Mineral and solidified type of waste..

Concerning those countries for which the national data are available, Fig. 2.2 showsthe percentage of the Construction and Demolition Waste recovered per country,based on estimations performed by ANPAR, according to data provided by Eurostat on the production of C&DW for the year 2008 and data on the production of recycled

Page 13

Tab.2.2: Production of C&D waste in the EU-27 Data in ton concerning years 2006 and 2008.

aggregates of the same year provided by UEPG (UEPG, 2009-2010).

From the figure we can see that, together with the virtuous countries such as theNetherlands (100%) and the United Kingdom (79%), we also find the Czech Rep (44%)and Germany (37%), with over 35% of recycled waste. Very far behind there areAustria, Spain, Italy and France, with respectively 16%, 14%, 9% and 7%.

Countries 2006 2008 +/-European Union (27 countries) 738.480.000 749.970.000 +1,56%

Belgium 10.622.818 10.119.198 -4,74%

Bulgaria 425.421 821.003 +92,99%

Czech Republic 7.798.612 9.556.795 +22,54%

Denmark 5.104.223 4.964.248 -2,74%

Germany (including former GDR from 1991) 178.542.925 178.195.511 -0,19%

Estonia 584.786 1.014.299 +73,45%

Ireland 16.273.785 0 -

Greece 5.054.855 5.054.855 =

Spain 45.705.006 43.390.048 -5,06%

France 221.916.759 238.148.460 +7,31%

Italy 51.500.453 68.783.678 +33,56%

Cyprus 259.303 336.371 +29,72%

Latvia 16.502 7.492 -54,60%

Lithuania 297.284 345.865 +16,34%

Luxembourg 6.637.162 8.179.864 +23,24%

Hungary 2.879.901 5.100.470 +77,11%

Malta 2.492.522 1.092.694 -56,16%

Netherlands 25.762.104 27.803.309 +7,92%

Austria 29.379.531 30.554.531 +4,00%

Poland 13.762.486 6.702.243 -51,30%

Portugal 2.247.502 2.939.660 +30,80%

Romania 30.227 232.662 +669,72%

Slovenia 652.809 622.017 -4,72%

Slovakia 407.148 552.428 +35,68%

Finland 21.468.379 23.725.000 +10,51%

Sweden 6.566.698 2.250.000 -65,74%

United Kingdom 82.091.620 79.477.882 -3,18%

Croatia - 38.166 -

Norway 819.555 977.789 +19,31%

Page 14

Other potential sources for the production of aggregates comprise the Manufacturing sector and the Mining & Quarrying sector. The waste of the mining-quarrying and manufacturing sectors

WASTE OF THE MINING-QUARRYING AND MANUFACTURING SECTORS

Sector of origin Components

Mining and quarrying field

Waste produced by chemical and physical treatment of non-metalliferous minerals

stonesproduction crapssediments

Waste coming from the iron and steel industry

iron and steel production waste

Manufacturing fieldWaste from the making of ceramic products, bricks, tiles and building materials

ceramicbrickstilesbuilding materials

Fig.2.2: Percentage of C&D Waste recycled in the year 2008. Source: UEPG, 2009-2010 and Eurostat, 2008 - elaborated by ANPAR).

Tab.2.3: Sectors of origin and components of mining-quarrying and manufacturing waste.

Page 15

The mining and quarrying industry was the second more important sector in 2008, on terms of the waste quantities produced in the EU-27 (28% or 727 milliontons) (Fig. 2.3). For the same year, the manufacturing industry contributed with 13% or 343 million tons of waste, being thus the third more important sector on these terms.

These fields, besides being particularly important from a quantity point of view (they constitute over 40% of the waste produced in Europe in 2008), are also important for their quality. In fact the waste they produce are mainly made up of inert waste.

The difference in percentage distribution (Fig. 2.4) of the waste production of the two industrial sectors in European Union States, varies according to the presence of the mining industry and the technological level in the industrial processes.

From the analysis of the quantities produced it is clear that the challenge to be faced by all countries, involves promoting waste management policies based on environmental sustainability, particularly for those sectors with a higher impact, such as those linked to the construction industry.

These policies, besides setting the objective to try and distinguish economic growth from impacts on the environment due to consumption and use of resources, must necessarily head towards strengthening of treatment/recovery, in order to reduce on one hand the use of natural resources and, on the other hand the quantity of waste disposed of in dumps.

Fig.2.3: Waste produced by the main industrial fields in the EU -27 in the year 2008 (% on the total amount of the waste.)

Page 16

Fig.2.4: Waste produced per economic sector in the EU -27 in the year 2008 (% on the amount totalof the waste).

With regards to this, the Waste Framework Directive (2008/98/EC) confirms the intention of the European Parliament to trace out a norm path which sets solid bases for the growth of the waste treatment field aimed at the production of recovery products.

In particular article 4 in establishing the “hierarchy of waste...which order of priority of the norm and policy on prevention and waste management”, rules the priority of the recycling operations compared to the disposal in dumps.

Article 6 dictates the conditions according to which criteria must be laid out so that the waste if subjected to recovery operations, including recycling, ceases being categorised as waste. These conditions are:

• the substance or object is commonly used for specific purposes;

• there is a market or demand for such a substance or object;

• the substance or object meets the technical requirements for specific purposes and complies with the norm and existing standards that are applicable to the products; and

• the use of the substance and object will not lead to overall negative impacts on the environment or on human health.

The criteria include, if necessary, limit values for polluting substances and take into account all the possible negative effects on the environment of the substance or object.

The criteria that result from these conditions start from the concept that a

Page 17

substance or an object stop being waste in the moment that there are the conditions for its effective reuse.

As a consequence, such a substance or object can and must meet the same technical assessment criteria used for raw materials produced for the same purposes.

Also the establishment of environmental requirements has the aim of identifying criteria that guarantee a level of protection for human health and the environment.

Thus, we can conclude that a substance classified as waste stops being such when it is subjected to recovery operations and abides by certain criteria developed according to the basic concepts dictated by the four conditions seen in the Waste Framework Directive.

Considering the different nature of waste of interest and the environmental impacts associated with them, the development of such criteria must be specific for every type of waste and must be defined for every secondary product and its application.

The approach to be adopted is an integrated one and takes into account all elements seen in the recovery process chain.

At the moment these criteria are being developed.

Finally, article 11 of the Directive establishes a recycling target of non-hazardous C&D waste at an EU level equal to 70%, to be reached within 2020.

Recommendation n°2

The 2008/98/EC Directive establishes a recycling target of non-hazardous C&DW at an EU level, equal to 70% to be reached within 2020. It is necessary that the Member States establish intermediate goals to monitor and guarantee the reaching of the final target and the recycling objectives of the WFD.

Recommendation n°3

The issue of C&D waste management is not tied so much to its quality but to the quantities involved. The total production of C&Dwaste in Europe is equal to 850 million tons of which, in many countries, a high percentage is still landfilled; this percentage should be reduced in the following years.

Page 18

2008/98/EC Waste Framework Directive

Article 4Waste hierarchy

1. The following waste hierarchy shall apply as a priority order of law and policy on prevention and waste management:a) prevention;b) preparation for reuse;c) recycling;d) recovery of another type, e.g. of energy recovery; ande) disposal.

2. In applying the waste hierarchy as under paragraph 1, the member states adopt measures aimed at encouraging the options that give the best overall environmental result. To this end it can be necessary that specific waste flows differ from the hierarchy where this is warranted by the laying out in terms of life cycle in relation to the overall production impacts and the management of such waste.

The member states guarantee that the formulation of the waste norm and policy takes place in a fully transparent way, in accordance with the national norms in force concerning consulting and the participation of citizens and interested parties.

In compliance with articles 1 and 13, the member states take into account the general principles regarding environmental protection, precaution and management, technical and economical feasibility, protection of the resources as well as the overall social, economical, health and environmental impacts.

Article 6Discontinuance of the label of waste

1. Some specific waste stop being such pursuant to article 3, point 1, when they are subjected to a recovery operation, including recycling, and they meet specific criteria to be established in compliance with the following conditions:a) the substance or object is commonly used for specific purposes;b) there is a market or demand for this substance or object;c) the substance or object meets the technical requisites for specific purposes and complies

with the existing norm and standard applicable to the products; andd) the use of the substance or object will not lead to overall negative impacts on the

environment or on human health.The criteria include, if necessary, limit values for polluting substances and take into account all the possible negative effects of the substance or object on the environment.2. The measures designed to modify non-essential elements of this directive, completing it, concerning the adoption of the criteria under paragraph 1 and specify the type of waste to which these criteria are applied, have been adopted according to the regulatory procedure withcontrol as under article 39, paragraph.

Page 19

Article 11Reuse and recycling

1. omission

2. In order to meetthe objectives of this directive and move towards a recycling European society with a high level of resource efficiency, the member states shall adopt measures necessary for reaching the following aims:

a) by 2020, the preparation for reuse and recycling of waste, such as, at least, paper, metal, plastic and glass coming from households, to the extent that such waste flows are to be similar to domestic ones, shall be increased by a total of at least 50 % in terms of weight;

b) by 2020 the preparation for reuse, recycling and other and other types of recovery ofmaterial, including backfilling operations which use waste in replacement of other materials, non-hazardous construction and demolition waste, excluding material in a natural condition defined under entry 17 05 04 of the waste list, shall be increased by at least 70% in terms of weight.

3. Criteria aimed at defining when waste stops being such should be considered, among the others, at least for aggregates, paper and glass waste, metals, tires and textile waste.

4. Waste that stops being such in compliance with paragraphs 1 and 2 also stop being such for the purposes of the recovery and recycling aims established in the directives 94/62/EC, 2000/53/EC, 2002/96/EC and 2006/66/EC and in the other relevant EU norm when the recycling or recovery requisites of this legislation are met.

5. If no criteria have been established at an EU level in compliance with the procedure as under paragraphs 1 and 2, the member states can decide, case by case, if a certain waste has stopped being such taking into account the applicable case law. They shall notify such decisions to the Commission in compliance with the 98/34/EC directive of the European Parliament and the Council of the 22nd June 1998 which provides for an information procedure in the norm and technical regulation sector and the rules relevant to the services of the information company, where so required.

Page 20

Page 21

3. THE TREATMENT OF C&D WASTE FOR THE PRODUCTION OF RECYCLED AGGREGATES

Nowadays there are various C&D Waste treatment technologies available for the production of high quality recycled aggregates, usable in the construction industry as recovery products or raw materials, with technical performance characteristics comparable to those of natural aggregates. These technologies are currently being applied both in stationary (Fig. 3.1) and mobile (Fig. 3.2) plants, in order to meet various requirements.

Regardless of the technology applied, however, an efficient plant must be able to split the incoming material basically into three sections: stone material that can be used again, light fraction (paper, plastic, wood, impurities, etc.) and metal fraction.

Fig.3.1: General view of a stationary plant at Montecatini in Italy (Source: ANPAR, 2008).

Page 22

Fig.3.2: General view of a mobile plant (Source: ANPAR, 2006).

The main phases which characterize a construction and demolition waste treatment process can be subdivided into:

• Crushing, aiming at obtaining a size reduction to allow particle suitable for the final use (Fig. 3.3 – 3.4);

Fig.3.3: Breakage mechanism in a crushing operation with jaw crusher (Source: Garbarino & Cardu, 2008).

Fig.3.4: Breakage mechanism in a crushing operation with pulse crusher (Source: Garbarino & Cardu, 2008)

Page 23

• Screening, aimed at separating the fragmented material according to their grain size in order to obtain homogeneous particle-size fractions (Fig. 3.5);

Fig.3.5: Example of a double-deck vibrating screen (Source: Garbarino, 2005.)

• Separation, aimed at removing unwanted materials. Two basic principles are commonly applied:

o separation according to magnetic properties, i.e. magnetic separation (Fig. 3.6-3.7);

o separation according to differences in specific gravity, i.e. gravimetric separation (Fig. 3.8).

Fig.3.6: Overband magnetic separator (Source: Mancini et al., 2005).

Page 24

Fig.3.7: Magnetic separator at a stationery recycling plant at Pisa in Italy. The magnetic product is recovered as metallic scrap (Source: ANPAR, 2003).

Fig.3.8: Gravimetricseparation at the plant of Pisa in Italy. The unwanted light fraction (plastics, papers, wood, etc.) is rejected. (Source:ANPAR, 2003.

Page 25

It is necessary to underline that concerning in particular the C&D inert wastes, besides the technology adopted for their treatment, the process applied for demolition takes on also a central role. In fact, the more the specific waste is separated into homogeneous fractions during the production phase (e.g. demolition), the more the subsequent recycling process is simplified and efficient.

The waste produced during a traditional demolition includes a variety of materials among which there are also unwanted fractions (e.g. paper, plastic and wood, gypsum, etc.), may affect negatively the quality of the recycled aggregate obtained by the treatment of the same.

Pre-sorting of wastes at source enables a saving on the disposal or treatment costswhich increase significantly with the heterogeneity and the presence of pollutants and ensures higher level of quality for the recycled material to replace the natural materials. Furthermore, separating at the source the different waste types enablestreatment of not only the typical construction materials, such as brick and concrete, but also of wood, plastic, glass and metals, in their respective recovery sectors.

To achieve this, the demolition activity must be planned and organized until dismantling of the entire building. A strategy of this kind, called selective demolition, is still not widely practiced today because it involves high costs, due to the massive use of manpower and long implementation times. Furthermore, the lack of an organized network, i.e. a network of widespread facilities and/or services able to exploit separate materials, and an effective market of goods and/or produced materials, has so far discouraged demolition companies.

In reality it happens that during selection of the demolition techniques the economical aspect and the operation implementation speed are considered as priority elements and the necessity to replace the different types of waste and components in the productive process is not taken into account.

The specifications concerning demolition works rarely provide for the adoption of selective procedures, which enable recovery and best exploitation of demolition waste, thus in the sites there is the tendency to demolish in the traditional way.

C&DW so produced can be landfilled or recovered. In the latter case however, it isnecessary to use plants equipped with special equipment able to guarantee elimination of non-inert material, biodegradable material, iron and light fractions. Only in this way is it possible to speak about real recycling, in other words a treatment aiming at transforming the waste into a product with high quality and performance characteristics.

Generally this result can be obtained with stationary plants that use complex and sophisticated technologies.

As a conclusion, we can say that there is a very strong connection between the technology used, the demolition processes adopted and the quality of the recycled

Page 26

aggregates.

As a matter of fact the demolition techniques used influence decisively the heterogeneity of demolition waste, the choice of the treatment technology and, consequently, the quality of recycled materials.

The recovery products obtained from homogeneous waste flows are of a higher quality compared to those resulting from heterogeneous mixes. If the aim is that of favouring demolition waste recycling, then demolition processes that are able to achieve separation of waste in homogeneous fractions should be adopted.

Recommendation n°5

Nowadays, many state-of-the-art technologies exist which can be employed for the treatment of C&DW in order to produce good quality recycled aggregates that can compete with quarry products on terms of technical properties. These technologies are availableeither in the form of mobile processing plant units that may be established on site, or as specific stationery recycling plants.

Recommendation n°4

The methodology applied for demolition affects significantly the performance of the subsequent recycling process and the technical features of the recycled products. Pre-sorting of C&DW at source into homogeneous segments reduces recycling or disposal (where applied) costs and ensures better quality for the recycled products.

Page28

Page29

4. RECYCLED AGGREGATES

Fig.4.1: Recycled aggregates production: final stockpiling (Source:ANPAR, 2003)

Page30

The application fields of the aggregates can be roughly divided into two main categories:

• unbound applications, (road construction, railway ballasts, etc.) using coarse materials;

• bound applications, where the mixture contains a binding agent, such as concrete, bitumen or a substance which has binding properties in contact with water, such as cement (concrete, mortar, etc.).

As far as possible uses are concerned, the recycled aggregates find their typical destination in:

• civil engineering earthworks;

• road and railway works.

Civil engineering earthworks Road and railway works

Realization of civil engineering earthworks Construction of road, railway, airport, square, civil and industrial foundations

Realization of environmental restoration (old quarries), fillings and reclaimed

Construction of foundation layers of transport infrastructures

Low resistance concrete (Rck • 15 MPa)Construction of accessory layers (having anti-capillary, anti-freeze, draining functions etc.)

Tab.4.1: Main use destinations of the recycled aggregates.

The road works are definitely a field in which the use of recycled aggregates can be largely applied, in replacement of the primary ones.

In Fig. 4.2 the layers are shown that form the structure of a flexible road pavement.The construction of a road superstructure of this kind provides for the overlapping of various mixture layers, some not bound, others bound, in which the binding agent is almost always bitumen.

The recycled aggregates can be used for the construction of foundation layers and for road foundations or road embankments, in the form of granulometrically stabilized unbound mixtures.

Page31

Fig.4.2: Diagram of flexible road pavement (Source: A. Marradi, 1999).

Recycled aggregates, just like natural aggregates, do not all possess the same characteristics therefore, according to their specific performances, they are more or less suitable for a certain use. It is therefore of great importance to know theirproperties and their behaviour with regard to various factors (such as mechanical stress, exposure to cycles of freeze-thaw or to water etc.); instead knowing their origin is of no importance.

Recommendation n°6

Recycled aggregates are widely used in bulk unbound applications for infrastructure works (road and railway foundations) or for environmental restoration. They may also be used for the preparation of low strength concrete mixtures.

Recommendation n°7

The choice of aggregates for a specific application should depend only on the material’s characteristics and not on its origin.

Page32

Fig. 4.3: Use of recycled aggregates for environmental restoration (Source: ANPAR, 2005).

Page33

The introduction of the CE marking for building materials and the publication of harmonized standards for aggregates have officially ruled out traditional distinction of the aggregates according to their nature, requiring materials to be evaluated only for their performance characteristics.

The CE marking therefore enables to compare recycled aggregates to natural ones and to replace them with each other without distinction (for the uses set by the designer).

Recycled aggregates with the CE marking are, to all intents and purposes, construction materials.

Fig.4.4: CE marking according to the Harmonized European Norms.

NORM TITLE

EN 13055-1“Light aggregates – Part I: Light aggregates for concrete, mortar andgrout”

EN13139 “Aggregates for mortar”

EN 13383 “Aggregates for protection works (armourstone)”

EN 12620 “Aggregates for concrete”

EN 13242“Aggregates for unbound and bound materials with hydraulic binders to be used in civil engineering works and in road construction”

EN 13450 “Aggregates for railway ballasts”

Tab.4.2: Harmonized norms for the EC marking of natural, recycled and manufactured aggregates.

Page34

As already mentioned, the waste recovery operation is based on end of wastecriteria, which establishes the conditions under which a waste stops being such to becomes a new substance or object.

The quality assessment of the final product becomes a fundamental passage in order to establish compliance with the end of waste criteria.

The creation of the new product can be reasonably identified in the moment when the material complies with certain quality standards (defined by the designer or by specific norms), depending on the foreseen use.

Compliance with such standards must be guaranteed by control of the whole recovery process, from the management of incoming waste, through the productive process and applied technologies, to the product requirements.

We can think of a quality assessment path which analyzes the final product from both a technical and environmental point of view.

As shown in Fig. 4.5, the product will have to comply with the assessment path term, concerning both CE marking according to the Harmonized European Norms and behaviour of recycled materials subjected to Leaching Tests.

Recommendation n°8

The European technical norms of use do not distinguish aggregates according to their origin but according to their characteristics. Therefore the recycled aggregates must be compared to all intents and purposes to natural aggregates.

Recommendation n°9

Only those recycled aggregate products that meet the prevailing European norms and specifications and are CE marked can compete with conventional aggregates. Eco-compatibility of recycled aggregates should also be checked through leaching and other appropriate testing in accordance with existing protocols

Page35

Fig.4.5: Diagram of the final product’s quality criteria.

Page36

Page37

5. THE MARKET OF AGGREGATES

As stated by the UEPG (European Aggregates Producers Association) report published for the twentieth anniversary of the association (UEPG, 2007 A), “No construction without aggregates”, the construction industry represents 10÷12% of the European GDP and that the aggregate industry is its most important source of raw materials.

In 2008 about 3.5 billion tons of aggregates were produced, with a yearly average per European citizen of over 6 tons per capita (Source: UEPG, 2009-2010). The production involved about 17.000 companies with an employed staff of 400.000 in almost 23.000 quarrying sites. Fig. 6.1 shows the percentage subdivision of the European production in 2008 per type of aggregate: about 90% comes from natural resources, while only 6% from recycled aggregates (Source: UEPG, 2009-2010).

Fig. 5.1: Production of aggregates in Europe in 2008. (source UEPG 2009-2010)

Page38

Market assessment indexes

MEMBERSTATES

PC&D ** PC&D(effective)

PAR * PAR/PC&D PAN *** PAR/(PAN+ PAR )

PC&D/(PAN + PAR)

Czech Rep 9 8 4 44% 71 5% 10%

Germany 178 151 56 37% 478 10% 28%

Spain 43 37 5 14% 378 1% 10%

France 238 202 15 7% 402 4% 49%

Italy 68 58 5 9% 360 1% 16%

Netherland 28 24 24 100% 46 34% 34%

Austria 30 26 4 16% 94 4% 26%

UnitedKingdom 79 67 53 79% 169 24% 30%

1) PAR/(PAN + PAR ) = ratio between production of recycled aggregates and total aggregate production

It assumes as it were the “state of affairs”, i.e. what the contribution of recycled aggregates is compared to the total requirements of aggregates.

2) PAR/PC&D = ratio between the production of recycled aggregates and construction and demolition waste

It provides indications on the conversion rate of incoming construction and demolition waste. Obviously the PAR value takes into account the production composition and the efficiencies of the current collection and recycling systems.

3) PC&D/(PAN+ PAR )= ratio between construction and demolition waste and the total aggregate production

It indicates the potential impact of recycled aggregates on the total requirements of aggregates, i.e. the maximum contribution that construction and demolition waste could provide to meet the demand of aggregates, in the hypothetical case the entire flow is recycled.

Tab.5.1: Comparison between the production of construction and demolition waste and the production of natural and recycled aggregates (year 2008 expressed in millions of tons/year).

Note: * Source: UEPG, 2009-2010; ** Source: Eurostat, 2008; *** production referred only to sand, gravel and rock assuming null the import/export balance in the absence of certain data.

Page39

In order to understand the possible developments of the aggregate market, it is interesting to assess not only the relation between production of natural and recycled aggregates, but also correlate the production datum of construction and demolition waste, from which recycled aggregates are generated, with that of the production of recycled aggregates, as well as the potential impact of recycled aggregates on total demand of aggregates. Data seen in Tab. 5.1 concern production of natural and recycled aggregates in the year 2008 (UEPG 2009-2010) and production of construction and demolition waste in the same year (Eurostat, 2008) for those Member States in which sufficiently reliable data are available. The PC&D values were obtained from the Eurostat database and filtered per economic field (NACE_2 section F - Construction), per danger (non hazardous waste) and per type of waste (Mineraland solidified wastes). Taking into account the nature of the data, to obtain a more reliable value for the purposes of this discussion, we considered a new index (PC&Deffective) that purifies the flow of non-stony components of C&D waste, estimated at 15% (it takes into account the product composition of C&D waste and the recycling technologies that are available).

From the PAR/PC&D index it is seen that the European situation is so varied; if some best cases like Holland and the United Kingdom are excluded, the recovery objective set by the 2008/98/EC Framework Directive (equal to 70% by 2020, Art. 11, point 2, letter b) of the Directive) is still in most cases, very difficult to meet.

As far as the impact of recycled aggregates on the total demand of aggregates is concerned, the indexes PAR/(PAN+ PAR ) e PC&D/(PAN+ PAR ) highlight that:

1) the potential impact of recycled aggregates on the total demand of aggregates ranges between 10% and 35% (excluding France, where PC&D data appear to be not completely reliable)

2) at the moment the aggregate demand is met almost exclusively by quarriedmaterials.

3) particular experiences and careful C&D waste flow management policies can lead to interesting results (Holland, United Kingdom and Germany) in terms of saving natural resources.

Recommendation n°10

The integrated use of natural and recycled aggregates, besides an appreciable saving of natural resources, could enable a better exploitation of the available resources according to the different uses.

Page40

Table 5.2 shows the average consumption of aggregates for some majorapplications. From these data we can conclude that the need of aggregates, even if strictly tied to the construction industry in each single nation, is generally high.

The integrated use of natural and recycled aggregates, besides an appreciable saving of natural resources, could enable a better exploitation of the available resources according to the different uses.

Type of useAverage aggregate consumption (tons) / per unit construction

Sport stadiums 300.000

Highways – 1 km 30.000

Schools 3.000

New homes 400

Railways for high speed trains – 1 m 9

Tab.5.2: Average consumption of aggregates in the main use destinations (Source: UEPG, 2007).

In the free market there are a series of factors which should/could favour the use of recycled aggregates against natural ones. They are:

1) lower price than the replaced natural materials;

2) high demand of materials with low performance (road pavement, backfilling, lures, embankments etc.);

3) reduction of transport costs (which can be lower because the recycling operation is usually closer than the quarry and which can be annulled in the case of on site production).

The lowest price is undoubtedly the most important lever in the choice of recycled product, because, with the same characteristics, it represents one of the decisive factors in the granting of tenders.

The price of recycled aggregates depends on the local markets but is frequentlylower than 20% of the price of natural aggregates. This difference in price is not due to a lower quality of recycled aggregates, but to “cultural resistances” of the market, which in fact downgrades aggregates coming originally from waste.

For a partial recovery of production costs tied to the work that is necessary to guarantee constancy of recycled aggregates characteristics (Production Control in the Factory), the producer can also count on the fees applied to the disposal of the waste to the plant, which, even if limitedly, enables carrying out of the operation in almost every local place.

Page41

Another important factor is the high demand of aggregates for lower grade applications. It is estimated that approximately 40% of the overall demand for aggregates in Europe concerns such types of applications). This particularly concerns the various applications in the construction and maintenance of infrastructures.

Finally, given that the recycling plants are normally situated very close to urbansettlements the transport cost do not affect substantially the final price of the recycled material, as instead often happens for natural materials. In the event the recovery operation is carried out directly on site, transport costs are even cancelled.

Recommendation n°11

Waste recovery carried out on site has a very positive eco-balancedepending largely upon zeroing of transport costs, concerning both waste and aggregates. It is however necessary to guarantee the quality and EC marking of the product with an increase of demolition cost and on-site waste management.

Recommendation n°12

To improve the market of recycled aggregates, their price must be kept at least 20% lower compared to the price of natural aggregates in order to overcome “cultural resistances” of the market, which at the moment downgrade aggregates produced from waste.

Recommendation n°13

Cultural resistance to the use of recycled aggregates, due to their waste origin, is one of the main obstacles for the development of the C&D waste recycling industry. In order to eliminate indefinitely all user prejudices, it is necessary to define as soon as possible, pursuant to the 2008/98/EC Directive, the criteria to determine the moment in which waste stops being such and becomes material (end of waste).

Page42

INERT WASTE

RECYCLING

RECYCLEDAGGREGATES

CONSTRUCTIONPRODUCT

2008/98/EC Directive

art. 4 – Waste hierarchyart. 11 – Reuse and recycling

Homogeneous waste< technology; < costs; > quality

Heterogeneous waste> technology; > costs; < quality

Regulation (EU) N. 305/2011EC Marking Requirement

2008/98/EC Directiveart. 6 – Discontinuance of being waste

End of waste

Page43

6. LIST OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS

1. Construction & Demolition Waste (C&DW) recycling offers important opportunities:

a) reduce land disposal requirements for landfilling;

b) avoid overconsuption of natural non-renewable aggregate resources, by introducing alternative and supplementary materials onto the aggregate market;

c) create new business opportunity from waste recycling.

2. The 2008/98/EC Directive establishes a recycling target of non-hazardous C&DW at an EU level, equal to 70% to be reached within 2020. It is necessary that the Member States, and particularly the SEE Countries, establish intermediate goals to monitor and guarantee the reaching of the final target and the recycling objectives of the WFD.

3. The issue of C&D waste management is not tied so much to its quality but to the quantities involved. The total production of C&D waste in Europe is equal to 850 million tons of which, in many countries, a high percentage is still landfilled; this percentage should be reduced in the following years.

4. The methodology applied for demolition affects significantly the performance of the subsequent recycling process and the technical features of the recycled products. Pre-sorting of C&DW at source into homogeneous segments reducesrecycling or disposal (where applied) costs and ensures better quality for the recycled products.

5. Nowadays, many state-of-the-art technologies exist which can be employed for the treatment of C&DW in order to produce good quality recycled aggregatesthat can compete with quarry products on terms of technical properties. These technologies are available either in the form of mobile processing plant units that may be established on site, or as specific stationery recycling plants.

Page44

6. Recycled aggregates are widely used in bulk unbound applications forinfrastructure works (road and railway foundations) or for environmental restoration. They may also be used for the preparation of low strength concrete mixtures

7. The choice of aggregates for a specific application should depend only on the material’s characteristics and not on its origin.

8. The European technical norms of use do not distinguish aggregates according to their origin but according to their characteristics. Therefore the recycled aggregates must be compared to all intents and purposes to natural aggregates.

9. Only those recycled aggregate products that meet the prevailing European norms and specifications and are CE marked can compete with conventional aggregates. Eco-compatibility of recycled aggregates should also be checked through leaching and other appropriate testing in accordance with existing protocols.

10. The integrated use of natural and recycled aggregates, besides an appreciable saving of natural resources, could enable a better exploitation of the available resources according to the different uses.

11. Waste recovery carried out on site has a very positive eco-balance depending largely upon zeroing of transport costs, concerning both waste and aggregates. It is however necessary to guarantee the quality and EC marking of the product with an increase of demolition cost and on-site waste management.

12. To improve the market of recycled aggregates, their price must be kept at least 20% lower compared to the price of natural aggregates in order to overcome“cultural resistances” of the market, which at the moment downgrade aggregates produced from waste.

13. Cultural resistance to the use of recycled aggregates, due to their waste origin, is one of the main obstacles for the development of the C&D waste recyclingindustry. In order to eliminate indefinitely all user prejudices, it is necessary to define as soon as possible, pursuant to the 2008/98/EC Directive, the criteria to determine the moment in which waste stops being such and becomes material (end of waste).

Page45

7. SOURCES OF INFORMATION

¨ Eurostat, 2008 Databasehttp://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?dataset=env_wasgen&lang=en)

¨ UEPG, 2009-2010 - “Sustainable Development in the European Aggregates Industry - Annual Review”, 2009-2010”

¨ Garbarino & Cardu, 2008 - Garbarino E., Cardu M., Tecnologie di riciclaggio: impianti di trattamento ed applicazioni sperimentali d'impiego, INERTCH 2007, supplemento a RECYCLING, 2008, pagine 146-174, Vol.62/08

¨ Garbarino E., 2005 – “Stato dell’arte e risultati di una ricerca sperimentale inerente la valorizzazione e l’impiego nella produzione di calcestruzzo di aggregati riciclati derivanti da rifiuti da costruzione e demolizione”. PhD tesi.Politecnico di Torino

¨ Mancini et al., 2005 - “Trattamento dei rifiuti da costruzione e demolizione”,dispense del corso di formazione di III livello “Recupero delle materie prime secondarie da rifiuti provenienti da demolizioni edilizie” del Politecnico di Torino,editore Politeko

¨ A. Marradi, 1999 – “Breve storia delle tecniche costruttive delle infrastrutture stradali”, tratto da “Riciclare per l’ambiente”, editore AREA

¨ UEPG, 2007-A – “Sustainable Development in the European Aggregates Industry - Brochure for the 20th anniversary of UEPG”, 2007

¨ UEPG, 2007 - “Committing to Sustainable Development – Annual Report”, 2007 ¨ ANPAR – Internal images archives