See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/306067114

The Application Of Recycled Waste Materials In The Construction Of Asphalt

Pavements

Conference Paper · July 2007

CITATION READS
1 803

3 authors, including:
Yue Huang Oliver Heidrich
University of Leeds Newcastle University
28 PUBLICATIONS 961 CITATIONS 67 PUBLICATIONS 2,118 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

RAMSES View project

COST Action TU0902 "Integrated assessment technologies to support the sustainable development of urban areas" View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Oliver Heidrich on 12 August 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 The Application Of Recycled Waste Materials
In The Construction Of Asphalt Pavements
Heidrich O, Bird RN, Huang Y. The Application Of Recycled Waste Materials In The Construction
Of Asphalt Pavements. In: ISWA/NVRD World Congress 2007: Challenging the Future. 2007,
Amsterdam, The Netherlands: ISWA/NVRD.

Correspond in Author: Oliver Heidrich

Address: Newcastle University, School of Civil Engineering and Geosciences,
Cassie Building, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 7RU, United Kingdom
Phone: 0044-191-2226563; Fax: 0044-191-2226502
Email: Oliver.Heidrich@ncl.ac.uk
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Large amounts of virgin aggregates are quarried every year from UK land sources, of which large
majority is being used in the construction industry. The UK road industry requires a substantial
amount of asphalt (some 30 Mt per year), which is made more than 90% with aggregates. It is not
clear how much of this can be made from recycled materials and the level of recycling in asphalt
pavements does vary across the world and the UK, which seems mainly due to the difference of
access to suitable natural aggregates and recycled aggregates. In total some 335 million tonnes per
annum of solid waste are created in the UK. Only a small fraction (less than 2 million tonnes) is
being recycled in asphalt pavements. The aim of this paper is to provide an overview of the
technical and managerial issues that are associated with the recycling of such waste in pavement
applications. This will be achieved by briefly summarising the UK quarrying, waste generation
situation. This will be followed by the technical requirements for asphalt roads as any road, using
virgin or recycled materials have to fulfil such requirements. Waste glass, steel slag, tyres and
plastics are being described considering the waste generated in the UK, the technical requirements
and the findings of previous are being reported. The suitability of the materials investigated here,
namely glass, steel slag, tyres and plastics do depend on various factors such as: mixture types
(different mixtures (e.g. SMA, HRA) impose different property requirements for component
aggregates); particle size of recycled waste types and replacement rate; and the nature and
processing techniques for the waste types (e.g. weathering for steel slag). The paper concludes that
the selection of suitable materials, regardless of its origin, and in particular for aggregates sourced
from waste materials does depend on a range of factors. Such factors may differ substantially
depending on the pavement requirements as well as the waste material, the later and its associated
factors are being described in more detail in this paper.

Page 1 of 11
2. INTRODUCTION
2.1. Overview of Quarrying, Waste Generation and Asphalt Pavements
As described by Heidrich et al. (2007) there are efficiency and productivity reasons for reducing,
reusing, recycling of waste or recovering the energy from waste. One area of potential widespread
use of different waste types can be road construction and maintenance, which can result in the
substitution of virgin aggregates. The Quarry Products Association (QPA 2007) estimates that each
year some 200 Million tonnes (Mt) of primary aggregates are quarried from Great Britain land
sources, of which around 90% are used in the construction industry. In 2005, roads accounted, by
value, for some 3.5% of all UK construction works (DTI 2006). The Institute of Asphalt (IAT 2006)
estimated that some 95% of UK road surfaces are paved with asphalt materials. The construction
and maintenance of these roads require large amounts of aggregates, which typically represent more
than 90% by weight of the asphalt mixtures. The European Asphalt Paving Association (EAPA
2005) estimated that the UK produced some 27.9 Mt of Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) in 2004. The
Highways Agency (2003) estimated, in order to manage its trunk roads and motorways in England,
it consumes some 15 Mt of HMA per annum. It becomes clear that millions of tonnes of aggregates
are extracted and transported each year for the use in roads. At the same time some 220Mt of waste
were generated in 2004 originating from industry, commerce, municipal/household; and
construction and demolition (C&D) in the UK, which accounts of nearly 2/3 of the total annual
waste generated of some 335Mt (DEFRA 2007). A considerable percentage (industrial and
commercial: 44% (weight); municipal: 72%, etc.) did find its way to landfills, although the reuse
and recycling rate is on the rise. For example between 1998/9 and 2002/3 industrial and commercial
rates have risen from 39% to 45%, from 45% to 50% respectively (DETR 2000b; DEFRA 2006).
Resource management that does not consider recycling will not fulfil one of the criteria of the UK
strategy for sustainable construction that requires the protection of the environment and minimising
the consumption of natural resources (DETR 2000a). In addition, there is concern that High
Specification Aggregates (HAS) from UK permitted extractions could be exhausted as early as
2020 (Parker 2004). The situation seems even more urgent for approved landfill sites, as the
Environment Agency (EA 2007) estimates that the country is running out of space in the next 5-10
years. Based on such pressures, the UK government introduced the Landfill Tax1 in 1996 and the
Aggregates Levy2 in 2002, providing financial incentives to increase recycling rates. Other
supporting organisations like the Waste and Resources Action Program (WRAP 2007) or
Envirowise (2007) were established by central government in order to increase recycling rates.
2.2. Recycled Materials in Asphalt Pavements
Recycled or secondary aggregates are defined as aggregates that are not extracted or coming from
virgin resources. Recycled aggregates are reprocessed materials that were previously used as
aggregates, whereas secondary aggregates may come from a different initial application from for
example households or industry; such materials can be waste glass or steel slag (WRAP 2007); the
different sources are summarised for recycled and secondary aggregates in Table 1.

Table 1: Type and source of recycled and secondary aggregates (DMRB 2004; FHWA 1997; WRAP 2007)
Recycled Aggregates Secondary Aggregates
Recycled Aggregates Blast Furnace Slag (BFS) Pulverised Fuel Ash (PFA)
Recycled Asphalt Recycled China Clay Sand Coal Fly Ash Recycled Glass Recycled
Concrete Recycled Roofing (CFA) Colliery Spoil Foundry Plastic Recycled Tyre
Shingle Spent Rail Ballast Sand Slate Aggregates Spent
Furnace Bottom Ash (FBA) Incineration Oil Shale Steel Slag
Bottom Ash (IBA) Kiln Dusts

1
A rate of £2/tonne applies to inert waste; for non inert waste the rate is increasing to some £35f/tonne.
2
A rate of £1.6/tonne is charged to all commercial extraction for construction aggregates including sand, gravel
and stone.
The use of recycled, instead of virgin, materials has the ‘dual sustainability benefits’ of easing
landfill pressure and reducing demand for the extraction of virgin materials. The Design Manual for
Roads and Bridges (DMRB 2004) listed the permitted applications of recycled materials in road
layers. Structural features of the road decide that the lower courses (base, sub-base etc.) are able to
absorb materials in larger quantity than upper layers (Huang et al. 2007). However, UK Highway
Authorities are mainly dealing with the maintenance and repair of roads rather than new road
constructions. Such works affect mainly the upper pavement layers. In addition, the cost of
transport and process waste materials into desired properties is more likely to be justified by using
the recycled materials in applications such as asphalt surfacing. Some recycled materials have
superior performance compared with virgin materials. For example, steel slag when used as
aggregates in asphalt surfacing may improve strength and skid resistance; these virtues would be
wasted if they end up replacing cheap stones in granular base. All this makes a closer investigation
of the different waste materials, their availability and technical requirements for being used in
asphalt roads necessary, but first the general requirements for asphalt materials are described below.
2.3. General Requirements for Asphalt Pavements
A European standard (BS EN 13043 2002) for the specification of aggregates used in asphalt was
introduced. The technical requirements for aggregates, alongside the relevant test methods are
described by the various Standards and the most relevant ones are summarised in Table 2. Thus
aggregates made from recycled materials and applied in asphalt mixtures are subject to the same
requirements regarding their technical properties, classification and testing as virgin aggregates.

Table 2: Requirements and methods for Aggregates in Asphalt Pavements

Property Category Methods Property Requirements
Aggregates in general BS EN 13043 Grading of coarse and fine aggregate
Geometric BS EN 933 Grading, Fines Content, Flakiness Index
Resistance to Fragmentation, Polished Stone Value (PSV),
Physical and Mechanical BS EN 1097 Aggregate Abrasion Value (AAV)
Chemical BS EN 1744 Leaching
Thermal and Weathering BS EN 1367 Water Absorption, Magnesium Sulphate Value

To withstand wear from tyres and weather exposures, the pavement surface layers are made with
the strongest and most expensive materials in road structure. Characteristics they exhibit like
friction, strength, noise and ability to drain off surface water are essential to vehicles’ safety and
riding quality. Some of the characteristics can already be assessed using a standard test method (BS
EN 13036 2002). Besides the nature of aggregate components and binders, the asphalt performance
does depend on the mixture type and the surface layer has to consider a multitude of factors
including traffic, climate, condition of existing surface and economics. No single mixture type
could provide all the desired properties. For example, stone mastic asphalt (SMA), porous asphalt
or open graded friction course (OGFC) have a reputation for low tyre noise, high resistance to
rutting and skidding, and therefore are preferred to hot rolled asphalt (HRA) for road surface that is
subject to heavy traffic in terms of volume and loading (NAPA and FHWA 2000). For both mixture
types, a number of properties are required of the component aggregates (particularly the coarse)
such as PSV, resistance to fragmentation, affinity with bitumen, etc. Thus the selection of suitable
materials, regardless of its origin, but in particular for aggregates sourced from waste materials does
depend on a range of factors. Such factors may differ substantially depending on the pavement
requirement as well as the waste material, the later and its associated factors are being described.
3. GENERATION OF WASTE GLASS AND ITS APPLICATIONS
3.1. Waste Glass Generation
Some 3.4Mt of glass entered the UK’s waste stream in 2003, of which some 1.1Mt (33%) was
recycled and only 0.14Mt (13%) was used as recycled/secondary aggregates (WRAP 2004). The
majority of 2.3Mt (67%) of waste glass was disposed to landfill (WRAP 2004). The Council
Directive 94/62/EC on Packaging and Packaging Waste, however, has set a UK recycling target of
60% by 2008 for waste glass of which the glass industry is anxious to achieve (British Glass 2004).
The lack of collection infrastructure is blamed for sending the majority of waste glass to landfill in
the UK (British Glass 2007). The recycling infrastructure may not only serve as a passive receptor
of recyclable waste, but as a visual motivation that can influence people’s recycling behaviour
(Gonzalez-Torre et al. 2003). Currently, UK Packaging Recovery Notes (PRNs) are acquired by
obligated businesses from accredited re-processors as an incentive to recycle materials such as
aluminium, glass, plastics, etc. The value of glass PRNs fluctuates over time, and was worth in June
2007 between £25-27/tonne (Letsrecycle.com 2007). The value of PRNs is suggested to be raised
higher in order to cover the higher costs that might be associated with recycling (WRAP 2004).
Glass can be recycled indefinitely without loss of product quality (British Glass 2007) and returning
recycled cullet to a glassmaking plant saves energy and mineral resources in great quantity (Edward
and Schelling 1999; Krivtsov et al. 2004). However, some argue using waste glass to substitute
aggregates is perceived to be less sustainable in terms of energy and CO2 footprint, to substantiate
such claims life cycle assessment studies may be consulted (cf. Dacombe et al. 2004; WRAP
2006). However, it is widely accepted that the colour imbalance between glass production and
waste arisings3 encourages, in occasions even necessitates, seeking alternative markets for waste
glass (WRAP 2003), and may include the usages as an aggregates (Hopkins and Foster 2003). Thus
waste glass can be used as an aggregate in asphalt road construction as described below.
3.2. Recycled Glass in Asphalt Pavements
Asphalt pavements containing between 10-15% (weight) crushed glass are widely accepted as being
of sufficient quality for a pavement (FHWA 1997). In order to reduce safety risks like skin cut, tyre
puncture etc. pavements surface course mixtures should not accept crushed glass with a particle size
of above 4.75mm. Anti-strip agent, typically 2% hydrated lime, is added to retain the stripping
resistance. Glass in asphalt mixtures that have contained higher content and larger size is reported to
have led to a number of problems such as insufficient friction and bonding strength, and is
considered more suitable for use in lower courses only (FHWA 1997; Maupin 1997; Maupin 1998;
Airey et al. 2004). In practice, the same manufacturing equipment and paving method designed for
conventional asphalt can be used for asphalt containing recycled glass. A UK pilot case study
conducted by Tarmac Situsec in 2001 provided evidence that hot mix asphalt (HMA) containing
10% recycled glass for a resurfacing project can be ‘cost neutral’ (WRAP 2003d).
4. GENERATION OF STEEL SLAG AND ITS APPLICATIONS
4.1. Steel Slag Generation
One advantage of recycling steel slag is that it can be collected from a low number of steel plants,
which makes the collection efficient and a gate-to-gate process ensures a controlled and consistent
quality of the recycled materials. The Transport Research Laboratory (TRL) reported that in 2003
some 1Mt of Basic Oxygen Steel (BOS) slag was produced annually in the UK, with about some
4Mt still in stockpiles (TRL 2003). The figures were updated in 2007 by Roe and Dunford (2007),
that 0.75Mt was produced and 1Mt still in stockpiles. However, the amount of steel slag can be
estimated based on the output from steel production process (assuming that the process is stable and
the rate of slag generation consistent). According to US NSA (National Slag Association), steel slag
accounts for 7.5-15% (weight) of the steel produced (NSA 2001). The marketable slag is estimated
by US Geological Survey (USGS 2001) at a rate of 10-15% steel production. The UK’s steel
production saw a decline from some 18Mt in 1997 to not even reaching 12Mt in 2002, before rising
to around 14Mt in 2004 (UK Steel 2006). This leads to the assumption that some between 1.05 to
2.1 Mt of steel slag would be available. Owing to decades of research and practice, the UK has
achieved a 100% recycling of steel slag, 98% of which are used as aggregates, mainly in concrete
and asphalt (ODPM 2002). Although steel slag in the UK is 100% recycled, the application in
asphalt surfacing might be more beneficial due to its mechanical properties as described below.

3
The largest volume of UK glass manufacturing is clear; the largest waste glass stream is green. The price of
glass containers delivered to re-processors is in the descending order of clear > amber/brown > green > mixed.
 4.2. Recycled Steel Slag in Asphalt Pavements
Steel slag and its angular shape, hardness and roughly textured surface makes it a suitable substitute
for coarse aggregate in asphalt where mix stability (resistance to rutting) and skid-resistance are
important. European standards (BS EN 13043 2002) permits the use of steel slag in asphalt;
provided 7 days volumetric expansion is no more than 3.5%; a range of studies investigating steel
slag and its usability in pavement have been conducted over the years. For example, collaborative
research was carried out by US Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP) and University of
Petroleum and Minerals in Saudi Arabia. It was found that mix durability (resistance to moisture,
fatigue) was improved when coarse slag aggregates were supplemented with limestone filler and
fine aggregates (Khan and Wahhab 1998; Bagampadde et al. 1998). In 1994, trial section of asphalt
containing 30% steel slag was laid in Oregon (Hicks and Epps). A 5-year field inspection of ride
and skid performance was conducted, which did not show as high rutting and skid resistance as
expected. The report attributed the lack of measurable increase to the low content and small size
(6.3-12.7mm) of slag particles. However an economic disadvantage of using slag aggregates due to
increased mix density (implying higher transport cost) and mixing temperature (implying higher
energy use) was highlighted.

In the UK the TRL (2003) reported that BOS slag produced from main UK sources can be used in
pavement surface where a minimum PSV of 60 is required. Although the report suggested that
when assessing the anti-skid properties of asphalt made with slag aggregates, traditional PSV test
should consider in-service performances under comparable situations. Another UK study by Airey
et al. (2004) investigated the mechanical (stiffness modulus, resistance to permanent deformation,
resistance to fatigue cracking) and durability (aging susceptibility, moisture susceptibility)
performance of asphalt containing slag aggregates. 71% coarse steel slag particles were mixed with
21% fine BFS aggregates in Stone Mastic Asphalt (SMA) surfacing. It was found that the stiffness
modulus was enhanced compared with control mixture made of gritstone, while mix density and
aging susceptibility also increased. A Chinese study (Wu et al. 2007) reviewed a project that used
steel slag (≥9.5mm) after 3 years of aging (7 days expansion below 1%) and replacing 62% of
basalt aggregates that is used in the SMA mixtures. The study found an improved surface
performance (texture, friction, etc.), resistance to rutting and low temperature cracking. Studies
conducted by the Research Association of Iron and Steel Slags (FEhS, Germany) confirmed that
BOS slag asphalt exhibit superiority in bearing and anti-polishing performance over asphalt that
was made with established premium aggregates such as basalt, flint gravel, etc. Volumetric stability
and leaching behaviour caused most concerns, but precautionary treatment was practised at the steel
plant, which resulted in the reduction of free CaO/MgO in the slag. (Motz and Geiseler 2001).
5. GENERATION OF WASTE TYRES AND ITS APPLICATIONS
5.1. Waste Tyres Generation
The Transport Research Laboratory (TRL) estimated that the UK generates nearly 0.44Mt of waste
tyres per annum. It is estimated that some 21% (weight) is shredded and used as aggregates, 22%
sent for energy recovery, and around 34% is disposed to landfill, stockpiled or illegally dumped
(Viridis and TRL 2003; WRAP 2003a). Approximately 0.04Mt (or 9%) are being used as an
alternative fuel in cement kilns, as tyres have similar calorific value to coal (UTWG 2002).
According to TRL, the high processing cost is responsible for the existence of unregulated and
illegal tyres disposal (Viridis and TRL 2003). European Tyre Recycling Association (ETRA) and
their secretary general (Shulman 2000) estimated an average transport cost of waste tyres with
£1/tonne/km. The Washington DOT (2003) stated that the financially sensible use of scrap tyres in
asphalt or any other road structures needs to be subsidised in order to compete with conventional
aggregates in meeting the technical requirements for that use.
 5.2. Recycling Processes and Scrap Tyres in Asphalt Pavements
There are two main processes that are applied in order to use waste tyres in asphalt; one is to
dissolve crumb rubber in the bitumen as binder modifier by heating it up till the rubber is
completely melted and then bound with the bitumen; the other process replaces a portion of fine
aggregates with ground rubber that is not fully reacted (melted) with the bitumen. These processes
are referred to as the ‘wet’ and ‘dry’ process, respectively. Modified binder from the ‘wet process’
is often referred to as ‘asphalt rubber’; whereas asphalt made by the ‘dry process’ is referred to as
‘rubberised asphalt’ (FHWA 1997). From a financial point of view, most research recommended
conducting life cycle cost analysis by considering time periods of 30-40 years. Some of the above
studies have conducted a LCCA using the World Bank’s Highway Development and Management
model (HDM-4) and the FHWA’s LCCA method (FHWA 1998), respectively. To be consistent
with the discussion of other waste materials, this paper described below only the use of waste tyre
as aggregates (the ‘dry’ process).

5.2.1. Dry Process

The dry process uses ground rubber (0.85-6.4mm) to substitute fine aggregates in the asphalt,
typically between 1-3%. Asphalt properties of particular interest in the dry process include resilient
modulus and noise reduction. Where there was a 10-20% increase of binder content as required, the
resilient modulus of the rubberised asphalt was reduced implying an increase of layer thickness,
compared with conventional mixtures (FHWA 1997). Some laboratory studies have shown a
reduced permanent deformation (Reyes et al. 2005; Selim et al. 2005). Acoustic analysis and field
measurement confirmed that rubberised asphalt paving is effective in reducing traffic noise from
light-duty vehicles (Sacramento County 1999). Leaching test indicated that rubber in sand-based
root zones (typically seen in sports and recreation fields) reduced by more than half the nitrate
concentration of leachate into ground water, by replacing traditional gravel of comparable size in
the drainage layer (Lisi et al. 2004). The design method for conventional mixtures can be used to
design rubberised asphalt containing 1-3% of ground rubber particles. A target air void of 2-4% is
the primary design factor (FHWA 1997). The time and temperature at which the bitumen reacts
with rubber particles need to be controlled with care, to retain the physical shape and rigidity
required for the dry process (Tortum et al. 2005).

5.2.2. Application of Scrap Tyres in Road Foundations

Tyre shreds may have applications in road foundations and compared with compacted soil, tyre
rubber is light weight, with low thermal conductivity, high hydraulic conductivity and, high shear
strength at large strains. However, leaching potential seems to be one of the main concerns.
Constituent analysis of tyre samples indicated that although it contained leachable hydrocarbons
(e.g. PAH), metals (e.g. zinc) and respiratory dust, the released concentration was not of a concern
to human health or surrounding environment under normal operating conditions, that is to say open
air, neutral pH value (Edeskar 2004). Tyre rubber used in lower pavement layers can help reduce
the depth of frost penetration in winter time. The processing of scrap tyres does produce waste
fibres, which can also be added into SMA mixtures to prevent the ‘drain down’ of bitumen from
aggregates. Traditionally stabilising additives like cellulose or mineral fibre are used. (Putman and
Amirkhanian 2004).
6. GENERATION OF WASTE PLASTICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS
6.1. Waste Plastic Generation
As discussed by Heidrich et al. (2007) although agreed figures for plastic waste generated are not
available, it was estimated that England and Wales created some 2.8Mt in 1998 (DETR 2000a).
Most of those reused or recycled (a total of around 5%) are from industry and commerce sectors;
recycling from municipal sources (e.g. bottles) is less practised, mainly for economic reasons (TRL
2004). An increase of plastic recycling rate relies on the successful recycling of mixed plastics and
plastics that might be mixed with other waste (Heidrich et al. 2007; British Plastic Federation
2007), and the support from robust environmental assessment method (Patel et al. 2000). Similar to
tyre waste, a notable percent of waste plastics is recovered by retrieving its calorific value (38Mega
Joule (MJ) per kg). This does compare favourably to that of coal (31MJ/kg) and appears to reduce
the energy as well as CO2 footprint (Patel et al. 2000; British Plastics Federation 2007) of such a
waste management option.

It is suggested that about 0.4Mt of waste plastics generated each year are suitable for aggregate use
(WRAP 2003b and 2003c). Presently, however, only 0.008Mt is being recycled for that purpose and
the majority is used made into street furniture, insulation, ducts and pipes, etc. (WRAP 2003c).
Similar to glass, the low of value of between £10-12/tonne (Letsrecycle.com 2007) for the PRN is
partly to blame for the low recycling levels (DTI 2004). Recycled plastic packaging accounts for
over 90% of all the recycled plastics each year in the UK (British Plastics Federation 2007) and
financial incentives are believed to be more effective than specifications in affecting the recycling
activity (WRAP 2003b). Should the technical requirements be fulfilled, using plastic waste in
asphalt pavements may provide an important and valuable outlet for such waste types.
6.2. Recycled Plastic in Asphalt Pavements
The blending of recycled LDPE to asphalt mixtures required no modification to existing plant
facilities or technology (FHWA 1997). Similar to tyre rubber, recycled plastics can either replace a
portion of aggregates, or serve as a binder modifier. For example, Zoorob and Suparma (2000) have
shown that Dense Bitumen Macadam (DBM) using mainly low density polyethylene (LDPE) can
replace 30% (weight) of 2.36-5mm aggregates and reduces the mix density by 16%, as well as
increase the Marshall Stability by 250%. The indirect tensile strength was also improved in this
mixture. Qadir and Imam 2005) used recycled LDPE of a size between 0.30-0.92mm replacing 15%
aggregates in asphalt surfacing. The Marshall quotient nearly doubled and the stability increased by
15%, implying improved rutting and water resistance, but a 20% increase of binder content was
required. Flexural behaviour of asphalt containing recycled plastics (PVC bottle) and it was found
that the bending strength increases by adding 2-6% of plastic particles, further investigations
suggest to depict the ‘bending strength against plastics content’ curve (Ergun et al. 2005).
7. DISCUSSION
The level of recycling in asphalt pavements does vary across the world and in the UK, which seems
mainly due to the difference of access to suitable natural aggregates and recycled aggregates.
However, recycled glass, steel slag, tyre rubber and plastics are currently being used in asphalt
pavement applications. The annual waste arising (due to the lack of consistent figures different
reference years are being used here) are being summarised in Table 3. The overall recycling rate
and the recycling rate for those materials being used as aggregates are presented. For example some
3.4Mt of glass are entering the waste stream, of which some 1.1Mt (33%) is recycled. Only 13%
(0.14Mt) of the 1.1Mt is being used as aggregates, meaning that only 4.1% of waste glass is
recycled as aggregates. From the materials selected the potential replacement rate within asphalt
pavement as aggregates are summarised in Table 3 . For example, scarp tyres can be used as
aggregates replacing 15-30% of virgin aggregates.

Table 3: Selected waste types and their use in asphalt pavements

Annual Recycling Used as Used in asphalt pavements
waste rate aggregates
Mt/yr % % Aggregates Replace rate (%)
Glass 3.4 33 4.1 √ 10-30
Steel slag 0.75 100 98 √ 30-62
Scrap tyre 0.44 21 N/A √ 1-3
Plastics 2.8 5 0.29 √ 15-30
Well crushed glass (e.g. ≤4.75mm) can replace a few percent (e.g. 10-15%) of fine aggregates, but
should not be excluded from use in asphalt surface layers, as glass particles that are ground too
finely may present any safety risks, and the PSV, AAV and affinity requirements apply only to
coarse aggregates in the mixtures. Steel slag should be used in place of coarse aggregates in surface
asphalt, to make best use of its mechanical strength and skid resistance. Large particle size and high
replacement rate are recommended by laboratory and trial results. Tyre rubber is used in asphalt
mixtures to reduce cracking, improve durability and mitigate noise. So far, most laboratory and
field work has been focused on the ‘wet’ trial. Results from the ‘dry’ trial so far are of limited
number, and are as well far from conclusive. The wet process is more tolerant, whilst the dry
process requires extra care in materials selection, mix design and asphalt manufacture. Recycled
LDPE can substitute a portion of 15-30% of aggregates depending on its particle size and if
properly designed, the rutting, cracking and aging performance of asphalt mixture may improve.
Similar to tyre rubber in the ‘dry process’, a number of asphalt properties when using recycled
plastics are yet to be reported. In addition the cost and environmental implications, due to the
limited practice, are so far not being reported. Nevertheless, it is evident that no technical
difficulties seem to exist for the selected materials to be considered for use in asphalt pavement
scheme. The UK government encourages recycling by legislation, purchasing power and grants that
are offered to companies to help initiate recycling locally (QPA 2004; Bird et al. 2004). The use of
recycled materials in asphalt pavements must have a value-added prospect; and is likely to be
practical where there is a surplus that is otherwise destined for landfills.
8. CONCLUSION
The paper investigated and reported surrounding issues in the fields of waste management and the
recycling of selected waste types being used in road construction and asphalt pavements in
particular. Using the literature the paper reported on waste types such as glass, steel slag, tyres and
plastics and their suitability in pavements. It is evident that recycled materials in pavement asphalt
represent a valuable outlet for such materials. The suitability of the materials investigated here, i.e.
glass, steel slag, tyres and plastics do depend on various factors such as: mixture types (different
mixtures (e.g. SMA, HRA) impose different property requirements for component aggregates);
particle size of recycled waste types and replacement rate; and the nature and processing techniques
for the waste types (e.g. weathering for steel slag). Large amounts of aggregates are consumed by
the asphalt industry, which outweighs the total waste arising (around 7.6Mt/yr) of the four waste
types discussed in this paper. Diverting wastes to pavement use is therefore worth the ongoing
efforts that have given approval to an expanding list of recycled waste types in road construction
(TRL 2004). Benefits are twofold; ease landfill pressures and reduce the demand for quarrying
virgin minerals. However, in order to ensure sustainable construction the assessment of the whole
life cycle in terms of environmental burdens and costs should be considered. Using life cycle
assessment (LCA) models and tools are needed in order to assess the environmental impacts
throughout pavement life.
9. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
An earlier and extended version of this paper is accepted for publication in the Resources,
Conservation and Recycling Journal. The financial and intellectual support from Aggregate
Industries UK Ltd is greatly appreciated
10. REFERENCES
ADHIKARI, B. et al, 2000. Reclamation and Recycling of Waste Rubber. Progress in Polymer
Science 25; p. 909-948.
APME (ASSOCIATION OF PLASTICS MANUFACTURES IN EUROPE), 2002. An analysis of
plastics consumption and recovery in Western Europe 2000. Brussles, Belgium: APME.
AIREY, G.D., COLLOP, A.C. and N.H. THOM, 2004. Mechanical performance of asphalt
mixtures incorporating slag and glass secondary aggregates. In: 8th Conference on Asphalt
Pavements for Southern Africa: Roads, the Arteries of Africa. Sun City, South Africa. pp. 243-255
BAGAMPADDE, U., WAHHAB, H.I.A.A. and S.A. AIBAN, 1998. Optimization of Steel Slag
Aggregates for Bituminous Mixes in Saudi Arab. Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering 11, 1,
30-35.
BIRD, R., CLARKE, B., DONNELLY, T., HEIDRICH, O. and Y. HUANG, 2004. Life Cycle and
Sustainability Indices for Road Paving Materials. Unpublished report, School of Civil
Engineering and Geosciences, Newcastle upon Tyne, GB: Newcastle University.
BRITISH GLASS, 2004. Glass Recycling Report-towards Sustainable Development. Sheffield, GB:
British Glass.
BRITISH GLASS, 2007. Recycling. Available at <http://www.britglass.org.uk/Industry/
Recycling.html> [Accessed by the author 10th June 2007].
BRITISH STANDARD EUROPEAN NORM (BS EN) 13043, 2002. Aggregates for Bituminous
Mixtures and Surface Treatments for Roads, Airfields and Other Trafficked Areas. British
Standards Institution.
BS EN 13036, 2002. Road and Airfield Surface Characteristics-Test Methods. British Standards
Institution.
BRITISH PLASTICS FEDERATION, 2007. Plastic Recycling. Available at: <http://www.bpf.co.
uk/bpfindustry/process_plastics_recycling.cfm> [accessed 10th June 2007].
Council Directive 94/62/EC on Packaging and Packaging Waste
Council Directive 99/31/EC of 26 April 1999 on the Landfill of Waste. OJ L 182, 16th July 1999,
pp. 1-19.
CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY RESEARCH AND INFORMATION ASSOCIATION (CIRIA),
2001. Sustainable Construction: Company Indicators. CIRIA
DACOMBE P., KRIVTSOV V, BANKS C. J. AND S. HEAVEN S., 2004. Use of energy footprint
analysis to determine the best options for management of glass from household waste.
Proceedings of Sustainable Management and Recycling: Challenges and Opportunities
Conference. University of Kingston, 14-15th September, 265-272.
DEPARTMENT FOR ENVIRONMENT FOOD AND RURAL AFFAIRS (DEFRA), 2007. Key
Facts about: Waste and Recycling. Available at: http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/statistics/
waste/kf/wrkf02.htm [accessed 10th June 2007].
DETR (DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT TRANSPORT AND THE REGIONS), 2000a.
Waste Strategy 2000, England and Wales Part I. Norwich, GB. HMSO.
DETR, 2000b. Waste Strategy 2000, England and Wales Part II. Norwich, GB: HMSO.
DETR, 2001. The Environment in Your Pocket 2001. Norwich, GB: HMSO.
DEPARTMENT OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY (DTI), 2004. Development of Asphalt and
Concrete Products Incorporating Alternative Aggregates. DTI.
EDWARDS, D. W. and J. SCHELLING, 1999. Municipal Waste Life Cycle Assessment (Part 2) -
Transportation Analysis and Glass Case Study. IChemE 77: 259-274.
EURO-PROJECTS, 2004. Development of mass produced thermoplastic panel containing recycled
plastic waste. Oxon, GB: WRAP.
ERGUN, M., IYINAM, S. and A.F. IYINAM, 2005. Flexural Behavior of Waste Plastic Added
Asphalt Concrete Mixture. IN: Int. Symposium on Pavement Recycling. Sao Paulo, Brazil.
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION (FHWA), 1997. User Guidelines for Waste and By-
product Materials in Pavement Construction. Washington, US: FHWA.
FHWA, 1998. Life-Cycle Cost Analysis in Pavement Design-In Search of Better Investment
Decisions. Washington, US: Pavement Division Interim Technical Bulletin, FHWA.
GONZALEZ-TORRE, P. L., ADENSO-DIAZ, B. and A. RUIZ-TORRES, 2003. Some
Comparative Factors regarding Recycling Collection Systems in Regions of the USA and Europe.
Journal of Environmental Management 69: 129-138
HEIDRICH, O., SALLIS, P., QUINN, P. and J. GASKARTH, 2007. The designs, installations and
applications of drainage material manufactured from recycled mixed polymers. IN: Proceedings
of the World Congress 2007: Challenging the Future. Amsterdam, Netherlands; ISWA/NVRD.
HICKS, G. and J. EPPS, 2000. Life Cycle Cost Analysis of Asphalt Rubber Paving Materials.
Oregon State University, University of Nevada.
HOPKINS, A. AND C. FOSTER, 2003. Achieving Life Cycle Benefits through Practical
Sustainable Waste Management-Opportunities, Benefits and Barriers Associated with the Use of
Glass Waste as Aggregates in Coated Roadstone. RMC Environment Fund.
HUANG, Y., BIRD, R., and O. HEIDRICH, 2007. A review of the use of recycled solid waste
materials in asphalt pavements. Resources, Conservation and Recycling. Accepted for publication.
INSTITUTE OF ASPHALT (IAT), 2006. Asphalt Professionals in the 21st Century. Dorking, GB:
I Institute of Asphalt.
LETSRECYCLE.COM, 2007. PRN Prices. Available at: http://www.letsrecycle.com/prices/
prnPrices.jsp [accessed 10th June 2007).
LISI, R.D., Park, J.K. and J.C. STIER, 2004. Mitigating Nutrient Leaching with a Sub-surface
Drainage Layer of Granulated Tires. Waste Management 24: 831-839.
Local Government Act 1999 (Chapter 27). London, GB: HMSO, 27th July 1999.
KHAN, M. I. and H. I. A.-A. WAHHAB, 1998. Improving Slurry Seal Performance in Eastern
Saudi Arabia Using Steel Slag. Construction and Building Materials 12: 195-201.
KRIVTSOV, V., WAGER, P.A., DACOMBE, P., GILGEN, P.W., HEAVEN, S., HILTY, L.M. and
C.J. BANKS, 2004. Analysis of energy footprints associated with recycling of glass and plastic -
case studies for industrial ecology. Ecological Modelling, 174 (1-2), 175-189.
MAUPIN, G.W., 1997. Glasphalt Test Sections in Virginia-Final Report. Charlottesville, US:
Virginia Transportation Research Council.
MAUPIN, G.W., 1998. Effect of Glass Concentration on Stripping of Glasphalt, Charlottesville,
US: Virginia Transportation Research Council.
MOTZ, H. and J. GEISELER, 2001. Products of Steel Slags an Opportunity to Save Natural
Resources. Waste Management 21, 285-293.
NAPA and FHWA, 2000. HMA Pavement Mix Type Selection Guide. National Asphalt Pavement
Association and Federal Highway Administration.
NATIONAL SLAG ASSOCIATION, 2001. Steel Slag-a Premier Construction Aggregate. National
Slag Association.
OFFICE of DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER (ODPM), 2002. Summary Sheet Covering Individual
Materials. London, GB: Office of the Deputy Prime Minister.
PATEL, M., THIENEN, N.V. and E. WORRELL, 2000. Recycling of plastics in Germany.
Resources, Conservation and Recycling 29, 1-2, 65-90.
QUARRY PRODUCTS ASSOCIATION (QPA), 2004. Quarrying Today-Joined up Thinking-
Linking Quarries to Life. Quarrying Today. Autumn 2004.
QPA, 2007. Natural Resources-Resource Conservation. Available at: <http://www.qpa.org/sus_
natres_cons01.htm> [accessed 10th June 2007].
QADIR, A. and M. IMAM, 2005. Use of Recycled Plastic Waste Aggregate as a Partial
Substitution Material in Pavement Structure. IN: International Symposium on Pavement
Recycling. Sao Paulo, Brazil.
 RECOUP, 2000. Analysis and review of collection, sorting, reprocessing and end-market issues and
economics. Peterborough, GB: Recoup.
REYES, F., REYES, O. and FIGUEROA, A.S., 2005. Study of the Rutting in Asphalt Mixtures by
Addition of Plastic Waste. IN: Int. Symposium on Pavement Recycling. Sao Paulo: Brazil.
ROE, P. AND A. DUNFORD, 2007. 7 Years of Skid Resistance Monitoring on Slag Asphalt
Surfacings. 6th International Conference on Sustainable Aggregates, Asphalt Technology and
Pavement Engineering. Liverpool, GB JMU.
SACRAMENTO COUNTY, 1999. Report on the Status of Rubberized Asphalt Traffic Noise
Reduction in Sacramento County. Sacramento County and Bollard & Brennan Inc.
SELIM, A.A., MUNIANDY, R. and M. ABDELRAHMAN, 2005. Potential Use of Ground Tyre
Rubber in Stone Matrix Asphalt (SMA)-A Laboratory Evaluation. IN: International Symposium
on Pavement Recycling. Sao Paulo, Brazil.
SHULMAN, V. L., 2000. Tyre Recycling after 2000-Status and Options, European Tyre Recycling
Association.
STRATEGY UNIT, 2002. Waste not, want not: A strategy for tackling the waste problem in
England. London, GB: HMSO
TORTUM, A., Celik, C. and A.C. AYDIN, 2005. Determination of the Optimum Conditions for
Tyre Rubber in Asphalt Concrete. Building and Environment 40: 1492-1504.
TRANSPORT RESEARCH LABORATORY (TRL), 2005. A Model Set of Asphalt Sustainability
Indicators. TRL Report 638.
TRL, 2003. Basic Oxygen Steel Slag as Surface Course Aggregate: an Investigation of Skid
Resistance. TRL Report 566
TRL, 2004. Development of New Materials for Secondary and Recycled Aggregates in Highway
Infrastructure. Transport Research Laboratory.
UK STEEL, 2006. UK Steel Key Statistics 2006. London, GB: EEF Manufactures’ Organisation,
UK Steel.
UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY (USGS), 2001. US Geological Survey Minerals
Yearbook 2001: Slag-Iron and Steel. US Geological Survey.
Used Tyre Working Group (UTWG), 2002. Used Tyre Working Group-2001 Statistics Detail, Used
Tyre Working Group.
VIRIDIS and TRL, 2003. Civil Engineering Applications of Tyres. Available at:
http://www.trl.co.uk/content/main.asp?pid=247 [accessed 10th June 2007].
WASHINGTON DOT, 2003. Evaluation of the Use of Scrap Tires in Transportation Related
Applications in the State of Washington. Washington Department Of Transportation (DOT).
WASTE AND RESOURCE ACTION PROGRAM (WRAP), 2003a. AggRegain Material
Information-Recycled Tyres. Oxon, GB: WRAP.
WRAP, 2003b. AggRegain Materials Information-Recycled Plastics. WRAP
WRAP, 2003c. Standards and Specifications Affecting Plastics Recycling in the UK. WRAP.
WRAP, 2003d. Road refurbishment using recycled glass as a basecourse aggregate. WRAP.
WRAP, 2006. Environmental benefits of recycling- An international review of life cycle
comparisons for key materials in the UK recycling sector. Oxon, GB: WRAP.
WRAP, 2007 available at: <http://www.aggregain.org.uk/more_information.html> [accessed on 19
March 2007]
WRI (WORLD RESOURCE INSTITUTE), 2000. The Weight of Nations; Material Outflows from
Industrial Economies. Washington, USA: WRI
WSP (2003) Transport Vision 2030 - Final Report: an Investigation into the Long-term Challenges
and Opportunities for the UK's Strategic Highway Network
WU, S., Xue, Y., YE, O. and Y. CHEN, 2007. Utilization of steel slag as aggregates for stone
mastic asphalt (SMA) mixtures. Building and Environment 42, 2580-2585.
Zoorob, S.E. and L.B. Suparma, 2000. Laboratory Design and Investigation of the Properties of
Continuously Graded Asphaltic Concrete Containing Recycled Plastics Aggregates Replacement
(Plastiphalt). Cement and Concrete Composites 22: 233-242.

Page 11 of 11

View publication stats