Environmental Management and Health

Recycling construction and demolition wastes – a UK perspective

Nigel Lawson Ian Douglas Stephen Garvin Clodagh McGrath David Manning Jonathan Vetterlein
Article information:
To cite this document:
Nigel Lawson Ian Douglas Stephen Garvin Clodagh McGrath David Manning Jonathan Vetterlein,
(2001),"Recycling construction and demolition wastes – a UK perspective", Environmental Management and
Health, Vol. 12 Iss 2 pp. 146 - 157
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09566160110389898
Downloaded by SELCUK UNIVERSITY At 03:30 22 January 2015 (PT)

Downloaded on: 22 January 2015, At: 03:30 (PT)

References: this document contains references to 21 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 3485 times since 2006*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
O.O. FANIRAN, G. CABAN, (1998),"Minimizing waste on construction project sites", Engineering,
Construction and Architectural Management, Vol. 5 Iss 2 pp. 182-188 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/eb021073
Graham J. Treloar, Hani Gupta, Peter E.D. Love, Binh Nguyen, (2003),"An analysis of factors influencing
waste minimisation and use of recycled materials for the construction of residential buildings",
Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, Vol. 14 Iss 1 pp. 134-145 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/14777830310460432
Andrew R.J. Dainty, Richard J. Brooke, (2004),"Towards improved construction waste minimisation:
a need for improved supply chain integration?", Structural Survey, Vol. 22 Iss 1 pp. 20-29 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/02630800410533285

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by 549148 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for
Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines
are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as
providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee
on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive
preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

 The research register for this journal is available at
http://www.mcbup.com/research_registers
EMH
12,2
146
Downloaded by SELCUK UNIVERSITY At 03:30 22 January 2015 (PT)
Environmental Management and
Health, Vol. 12 No. 2, 2001,
pp. 146-157. # MCB University
Press, 0956-6163
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
http://www.emerald-library.com/ft
Recycling construction and
demolition wastes ± a UK
perspective
Nigel Lawson and Ian Douglas
School of Geography, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
Stephen Garvin
Building Research Establishment, East Kilbride, Glasgow, Scotland, UK
Clodagh McGrath
Building Research Establishment, Garston, Watford, UK
David Manning and Jonathan Vetterlein
Department of Agriculture and Environmental Science,
University of Newcastle upon Tyne, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
Keywords Waste, Recycling, Risk management, United Kingdom, Construction industry
Abstract In England and Wales, the construction industry produces 53.5 Mt of construction
and demolition waste (C&D waste) annually, of which 51 percent goes to landfill, 40 percent is
used for land reclamation and only 9 percent is crushed for future use or directly recovered. C&D
waste may be contaminated, either through spillage from industrial processes or contact with
contaminated land. There are no guidelines on how to classify C&D waste as contaminated or on
risk management for contaminated C&D waste. Research at the UK Building Research
Establishment and the University of Manchester has shown that new taxes are making disposal
of C&D waste to landfill uneconomic, that low grade ``land-modelling'' recycling is increasing, and
that disposal on-site is preferred. Sampling spatially of structures before demolition and
temporally of processed C&D waste emerging from crushers is enabling sources of contamination
and exceedance of guideline values to be compared with natural background levels. Improved
sampling procedures and recommendations for risk assessment for the re-use of C&D waste are
being prepared.
Introduction
Construction and demolition (C&D) waste is increasingly being seen as a
valuable source of engineering materials for the construction industry in the
UK. Using C&D wastes potentially reduces reliance on primary aggregates and
lowers the environmental impact of construction. The Environment Agency
(England and Wales) estimates that the construction industry currently
produces approximately 53.5 million tonnes of construction and demolition
waste annually (Bell, 1997). At present C&D waste is disposed of as follows:
. 27.4 million tonnes (51.2 percent) are disposed direct to landfill;
. 21.2 million tonnes (39.6 percent) are exempt from licensed disposal and
are primarily used for land modelling during the construction projects;
This work is supported by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council Waste
Minimisation in Industry (WMR3) Programme, grant references GR/M50485 and GR/M50515.
 . 5 million tonnes (9.2 percent) are either crushed to produce a graded Recycling
product or directly recovered. construction
The 1995 UK Government White Paper Making Waste Work (DoE, 1996) had
targets for increasing the use of waste and recycled materials as aggregates to
30 million tonnes per year by 2006. The UK Consultation Paper on sustainable
construction Opportunities for Change (DETR, 1998) highlights the need for 147
incentives to encourage the use of recycled material and acknowledges the
importance of economic considerations. It also recognises constraints linked to
the quality of the available waste and asks the question: ``What changes are
needed to specifications and standards to encourage or require the use of
recycled or reclaimed materials?''
The tax on the disposal of waste materials to landfill imposed as a ``green''
Downloaded by SELCUK UNIVERSITY At 03:30 22 January 2015 (PT)

taxation measure in 1996 is an economic incentive to increase the recycling of

C&D waste.
The UK government has set targets that 60 percent of new developments
must be located on brownfield sites. Many of these sites are likely to be
contaminated and thus a number of difficulties have to be overcome before
development can proceed. Buildings that have existed on contaminated land
sites, particularly former industrial sites, may themselves be contaminated.
C&D waste could therefore be contaminated, either as a result of its proximity
to industrial processes, or by its association with contaminated land. In order to
maximise the recycling of C&D waste there is a clear need to develop a risk
assessment methodology based on knowledge of the contaminants present in
C&D waste and in their availability.
There are no guidelines on how to classify whether waste is contaminated or
not. Further there is no risk management measures for dealing with such
contamination when it is found. Indeed the concentrations and nature of
contamination in C&D waste is not necessarily problematic, but many potential
useful sources could be condemned to landfill for lack of suitable ways of
assessing the C&D wastes and the risk management of the contamination.
The Building Research Establishment (BRE) and the University of
Manchester are therefore undertaking research aimed at developing a risk
assessment methodology for contamination of C&D wastes.

Construction and demolition wastes

Recycling industry
Growing evidence suggests that previous studies considerably underestimated
the amount of construction and demolition waste being recycled or reclaimed.
In terms of recycling, the landfill tax has contributed to a big increase in the
number of fixed and mobile crushing and recycling sites. From an estimate of
less than 100 in 1994 (Howard Humphries and Partners, 1994), there are now
thought to be in excess of 400 sites (BRE, 2000). Some of these inert waste
recycling sites are experiencing shortages of materials or customers depending
on location.
 EMH Quantities
12,2 The C&D industry generates a significant quantity of waste (Table I), although
estimates of total amounts vary (Howard Humphries and partners, 1994;
Symonds, 1999; Hobbs and Collins, 1997; CIRIA, 1997).
The best estimate of the production and the disposal of controlled waste in
England and Wales are summarized in Table II.
148
Construction waste Mt y±1 Mt y±1

Concrete, bricks, blocks, aggregate 3.5

Metals 2.8
Excess mortar/concrete 1.2
Timber and products 0.8
Downloaded by SELCUK UNIVERSITY At 03:30 22 January 2015 (PT)

Plastic packaging and plastic products 0.9

Plasterboard and plaster 0.3
Paper and cardboard 0.2
Vegetation 0.1
Soil 0.1
Total construction waste 10.0
Demolition waste
Concrete 12.0
Masonry 7.2
Paper, cardboard, plastic and other 5.1
Asphalt 4.5
Wood based 1.0
Total demolition waste 30.0
Table I. Road planings 7.0 7.0
Quantities of waste Total 47.0
from various sources in
England Notes: Construction and demolition waste arising: housing 40 percent, other 60 percent

Total Other
production Landfilled Incinerated disposala
Waste type Mt pa % % % Recycled

Commercial and industrial 82.4 60.6 2.0 17.5 19.9

Demolition and construction 53.5 51.2 39.6 9.2
Municipal and household 25.8 88.6 5.0 6.4
Sewage sludge (dry solids) 1.0 10.5 8.1 29.8 51.6
Total 162.7 61.6 1.9 22.1 14.4
Notes: a Predominantly in house disposal e.g. fly ash, and waste disposal which is exempt
from licensing such as land-spreading paper pulp and food waste, material which can benefit
Table II. agricultural land and construction wastes using in land modelling schemes. Charges and the
Summary of controlled imposition of a landfill tax have increased abuse of exemption schemes (note Table I is
waste in England and England only)
Wales: production and
disposal Source: Douglas and Lawson (2000)
 Standards and specifications Recycling
British Standards (BS) covering aggregates for concrete are normally specified construction
to BS882: specification for aggregates from natural sources for concrete, with
BS1047 for air-cooled blast furnace slag or BS3797 for lightweight aggregates
sometimes being given as alternatives. Although good general guidance on
recycled aggregates is given in BS6543, this standard is rarely quoted in
contract documents. The Highways Agency Specification 1998 (Highways 149
Agency, 1998) permits the use of crushed concrete for pavement construction if
it complies with the ``quality and grading requirements of BS882''. Unbound
applications of recycled aggregates are covered in the Highways Specification
and BRE Digest 276 (BRE, 1995).
Following the publication in Japan, The Netherlands and Denmark of
Downloaded by SELCUK UNIVERSITY At 03:30 22 January 2015 (PT)

specifications for the use of recycled aggregates in concrete, an international

document was prepared by RILEM in 1994 (RILEM, 1994). This has formed the
basis of specification clauses for recycled aggregate being prepared for
inclusion in European Standard specifications for aggregate (CEN Technical
Committee TC 154 ``Aggregates''). Some years will elapse before this integrated
approach can become operational. In the meantime the BRE has published
Digest 433 (BRE, 1998) on ``Recycled Aggregates'' to bridge the gap between
current UK practice and the introduction of standards for aggregate which will
give full coverage to the use of recycled materials.

Contamination of C&D waste

Waste from new construction is composed primarily of a mixture of unused or
damaged raw materials, as well as off-cuts (discarded cut material) and
packaging. Demolition waste includes actual building components, such as full-
length studs and concrete slabs. The largest component of demolition waste is
concrete, followed by brick and clay, wood and metals.
Waste materials from new construction are usually clean and relatively
uncontaminated, whereas demolition waste materials are often dirty or
contaminated and are mixed with other materials. These differences between
C&D wastes create specific opportunities and challenges for waste reduction.
Although C&D waste is generally inert, a number of hazardous or potentially
hazardous substances can be present (Table III).
Many of the materials on the above list are transformed during the
construction process into inert materials as they dry (paints and adhesives).
However, residual materials in partially used containers require proper
management and handling.
Work at the BRE (Gutt and Smith, 1976) noted that bricks, stones and
concrete from demolition sites were used extensively in the UK and Germany
after 1945. However, difficulties arose when gypsum, gypsum plasterboard,
mortar, wood and organics were present in the concrete mixes.
The contamination of construction and demolition wastes can take various
forms, as follows:
 EMH Acetone Cutting oil Methyl ethyl ketone
12,2 Acetylene gas De-emulsifier for oil Motor oil additives
Adhesives Diesel fuel oil Paint remover
Ammonia Etching agents Paint stripper
Antifreeze Ethyl alcohol Paint
Asphalt Fibreglass, mineral wool Pentachlorophenol
Benzene Foam insulation Polishes for metal floors
150 Bleaching agents Freon Putty
Carbon Black Gasoline Resins, epoxies
Carbon dioxide (in cylinders) Glues Sealers
Caustic soda Greases Solder flux
Chromate salts Helium (in cylinders) Solder, soft (lead)
Chromium Hydrochloric acid Solder, other
Cleaning agents Insulations Solvents
Downloaded by SELCUK UNIVERSITY At 03:30 22 January 2015 (PT)

Coal tar pitch Kerosene Sulphuric acid

Coatings Lime Transit pipe
Cobalt Lubricating oils Varnished
Concrete curing compounds Lye Waterproofing agents
Table III. Creosol Metals Wood preservatives
Hazardous substances
in C&D wastes Source: Magdich (1990)

. Mixed contamination ± resulting from mixing of materials during

excavation from site. Waste concrete removed, for example, from a floor
may be mixed with contaminated soil, other materials or other wastes.
Research at the BRE has supported the negative impact of gross
contamination on the potential for recycling concrete (Collins, 1986).
. Surface contamination ± materials that have been used in foundations,
road construction or in ground works are likely to have been in intimate
contact with soil. Surface contamination could also include coatings and
sheeting that have been used to protect the materials during their
service life but are a barrier to reuse.
. Absorbed contamination ± contaminants that are soluble and mobile can
potentially be absorbed into porous building materials. These contaminants
are likely to be present in groundwater or contaminated surface water.

Contaminated land
Risk assessment
Contamination of land results from industrial processes, landfill activities and
agricultural uses, as well as natural sources. Statistics of the extent of derelict
and contaminated land in the UK are only now becoming available through the
National Land Use Data Base (National Land Use Data Base, 2000). The latest
survey of returns from 90 percent of all local authorities in England show
15,590ha of previously developed land which is now vacant and where reuse
includes demolition and levelling and a further 17,260ha of derelict land and
buildings damaged by previous industrial use and incapable of reuse without
treatment.
 Contamination, or the potential for it, is a material planning consideration Recycling
that needs to be taken into account at various stages of the planning process. construction
When it is known, or suspected, that the proposed development would be
adversely affected by contamination the developer would need to carry out a
specialist investigation. Should the degree of contamination be such that
remedial action is required to protect users and buildings then planning
permission may be granted subject to specifying the measures to be carried out. 151
There are many types of sites on which contamination is potentially present.
In the UK the Government has produced industry profiles that indicate the
contaminants likely to be present on different types of sites.
Detailed investigation of contaminated land is important for establishing
sources and locations of pollutants. Work is in progress by UK agencies to
Downloaded by SELCUK UNIVERSITY At 03:30 22 January 2015 (PT)

develop procedures for the investigation and management of contaminated

land. The overall process contains risk assessment, remedial measures and risk
management. In the risk assessment phase the type, concentration and nature
of the contamination is assessed. This includes the following four stages:
(1) hazard estimation;
(2) hazard assessment;
(3) risk evaluation;
(4) risk estimation.
These stages include various activities such as desk research, site reconnaissance,
site investigation and reference to guideline values. Assessments of risks to
human health, water environments, plants, animals and buildings should be
made. Assessing the significance of contamination in soil has resulted in
difficulties for developers, and specialist consultants are employed to provide this
assessment.

Contaminated land and C&D wastes

When industrial plants and premises are closed, controlled decommissioning,
decontamination and demolition may be required to avoid risks to human
health and the environment from hazardous and other residues in or on plant
components or buildings, or as stockpiles of surplus materials (CIRIA, 1995).
Standard sampling and analytical methods for determination of the extent of
contamination present on building or equipment surfaces are not available.
However, a number of techniques can be applied to materials on the building
fabric. Surface samples can be taken using wet or dry phase wipes, while for
porous materials it is necessary to use cores or drillings. The highest
concentrations of contaminants are generally in cracks, crevices, corners and
other discontinuities. This should be taken into account in designing any
sampling strategy. Sampling for contaminants in a building using grid
patterns, or derivatives of them, could allow a picture to be built up of the
spread of contamination.
 EMH Sampling and analysis of contaminated C&D wastes can be undertaken at
12,2 any stage of the demolition and processing of the wastes. The methods
employed for the analysis of C&D wastes are no different from methods used to
assess the composition of building materials or soils. The following can be
used:
. Total (or acid soluble) concentrations ± for the assessment of inorganic
152 contaminants. The sample will be taken by coring, drilling or crushing
larger samples or structures. The material will be dried (in air) and crushed.
The sample is then dissolved in acid and the extract analysed by GC-MS
(Gas Chromatograph Mass Spectroscopy), ICP (Inductively Coupled Plasma)
techniques, etc. for the concentration of heavy metal, sulfate, chloride, etc.
Water soluble concentrations ± for the assessment of inorganic
Downloaded by SELCUK UNIVERSITY At 03:30 22 January 2015 (PT)

contaminants. A sample of material is shaken with water (e.g. 2:1

extract) and the resultant leachate is filtered off. The leachate is
subsequently assessed by GC-MS, ICP, etc.
. Leachates ± Suitable methods have been developed to assess the
concentration of contaminants in leachate. These include column and
diffusion tank tests (Mulder, 1991).

The research
C&D waste treatment processes separate the coarse and fine fractions. The
former is suitable for use as aggregate, for which selection is based on
appropriate engineering criteria, and for which contamination may not be an
important issue. The fine fractions may be used as a soil according to criteria
set out in BS3882: 1994, which does not specifically address chemical
contamination arising as a consequence of previous use of the material. In the
absence of other guidelines, an initial assessment is made on the basis of
whether or not a waste product passes or fails criteria set out within the ICRCL
guidelines (Interdepartmental Committee on the Redevelopment of
Contaminated Land, 1987) or the Dutch list (Ferguson and Denner, 1994) (i.e. do
concentrations of an element or organic species exceed action or intervention
values?). In neither the Dutch list nor the ICRCL guidelines were the criteria
designed to be applicable directly to demolition and construction waste, and so
risk assessment using values from these sources strictly is not appropriate. The
Dutch list (in its most recent form) takes into account toxicological factors
relating to the tolerable daily intake (TDI) for humans, and so to some extent
reflects the availability of the contaminants for ingestion.
C&D waste contamination varies across and within sites, and thus has a
spatial dimension suitable for sampling procedures guided by geostatistics.
However, on demolition, the C&D waste enters a processing stream, passing
through a crusher, or at least being transported a short distance across a site. It
is then part of a materials flow stream that will vary in contamination with
time as different types of waste enter the process stream. Thus temporal
sampling strategies are needed to integrate contaminant levels over a period of
 time, enabling the frequency with which a given C&D waste process stream Recycling
fails trigger value criteria to be assessed. construction
In view of these uncertainties, the research programme at the Building
Research Establishment and the University of Manchester has the following
objectives:
. to develop a methodology and system of risk assessment for 153
contaminants in building and demolition waste;
. to develop standard guidelines for C&D waste sampling for use in
monitoring and assessing the risk of contamination;
. to produce clear, adaptable methodologies which are equally capable of
use and application by SME companies as well as larger construction
Downloaded by SELCUK UNIVERSITY At 03:30 22 January 2015 (PT)

and waste management organisations.

The programme is intended to address the risk assessment process and
requires that investigation is made of suitable sampling and analytical
techniques for contamination of C&D wastes. It also incorporates a study of
operator's decision-making processes and actions in recycling C&D wastes.

Sampling of uncontaminated waste streams

In order to address both the background levels in this type of waste and the
temporal changes of the levels of inorganic substances in the concrete, samples
are being taken from two recycling plants each week, one processing mixed
C&D wastes from demolished buildings and infrastructure and one processing
road planings. The samples are being tested for levels of metals, sulfates and
chlorides. These tests are intended to develop baseline data from which
contamination levels in ``uncontaminated'' sources can be assessed.
In addition, the natural chemical background levels present in various
building materials, such as differing varieties of bricks and concrete, are also
being established.

Sampling of contaminated sources

The strategy being used to develop the risk assessment of contamination in
C&D wastes is to undertake sampling and analysis of materials from
structures on former industrial sites.
Site assessment includes the following:
. Site walkovers to identify potentially contaminated structures and
foundations;
. Desk studies of available background information such as
environmental site investigations and reports;
. Discussions with the developer and previous staff. Empirical knowledge
of the site during its industrial use is an invaluable part of site
assessment;
 EMH . Identification of those areas of the site which are most likely to have
12,2 been in contact with contaminants.
The sampling of floor areas is undertaken by coring the concrete using
standard rotary coring equipment. Core diameters of 100 and 200mm are used
in the sampling. Difficulties in determining an appropriate sampling pattern
154 arise because:
. The positioning of machinery and the shape of the building can mean
that a grid structure is inappropriate and a regular sampling pattern or
randomised structure is not possible. The sampling strategy must
therefore concentrate on areas where contamination may exist, which
can even include driveways, tank farms, cellars and pits.
Downloaded by SELCUK UNIVERSITY At 03:30 22 January 2015 (PT)

. Concrete floors are of variable thickness, age and type; even within a few
metres the type of concrete can vary greatly. Some cores through all the
flooring strata can be extracted quickly and with ease, while others
present major removal problems.
Sample cores are split to allow chemical tests and physical tests to be
undertaken. Physical tests include strength and permeability. Electron
microscopy can characterise the materials. The chemical tests include total
contaminant concentrations on crushed samples from various depths in the core,
diffusion tank tests on bulk samples and leachate column tests. Where the C&D
waste is being crushed on site for reuse in land modelling, access roads on site or
off site sale, the fine materials are sampled on a daily basis for chemical analysis.
Most of the sites being investigated have ceased to operate. All contain a
variety of buildings where different industrial processes have taken place.
Samples are currently being taken from the following redevelopment sites:
. A 7ha paper mill complex on which paper was manufactured for over
100 years;
. A lead smelting house attached to an explosives factory;
. The foundations of a former silicone plant;
. A textile manufacturing complex and bleach works;
. A 100ha colliery complex where surface structures were demolished ten
years ago. The site incorporated a coal mine, a power station, a coke
manufacturing plant and coal washing facilities. It is still thought to
contain in excess of 350,000 tons of C&D waste.
Further sites so far identified as being of interest to the project and from which
samples will probably be taken include the following:
. A wire works
. Former chemical laboratories
. Multi-story apartment blocks
 . Gas work sites, including one site on which the production of gas ceased Recycling
50 years ago. Samples from such a site could provide a comparative construction
study of changes in degree of contamination over time.

Current practice in C&D waste recycling

The study of operator's decision-making processes and actions in recycling
C&D wastes has revealed several problems relating to the recycling of C&D 155
wastes in the UK, notably:
. The imposition of the landfill tax, coupled with ever-increasing
transport costs and tipping charges, mean that the disposal of C&D
waste to landfill is rapidly ceasing to be a commercial option. However,
whilst this tax has indeed reduced the amount of C&D waste being
Downloaded by SELCUK UNIVERSITY At 03:30 22 January 2015 (PT)

disposed of to landfill, exemptions to the tax permit the unregulated

disposal of inert C&D waste as improvement to agricultural land or for
the development of recreational facilities. Increased disposal costs are
thus encouraging low grade recycling activities.
. Development time constraints, transport and disposal costs, and the low
monetary value of recycled C&D waste encourage the retention of C&D
waste ``on site'' for land modelling purposes, regardless of whether or not
this is environmentally desirable.
. Timber is a major problem to contractors recycling C&D waste. It
cannot be burned and it must be disposed to landfill. Separation from
concrete and bricks is costly.
. If a site is mainly covered by concrete, environmental site assessors only
dig trial pits in ``soft'' areas and only soils are analysed.
The decision on whether or not material is contaminated is made on the basis of
the contaminant levels found during soil analysis and on visual inspection
only. Time and cost constraints render the separate analysis of ``hard'' C&D
wastes uneconomical. The Environment Agency accepts this practice. The
Environment Agency take the view that it is preferable to concentrate on levels
of pollutants present in the finer particles because of their mobility and because
of the increased leachability of fine material. The prime concerns of the agency
are contamination to the wider environment and the subsequent reuse of the
site.
It is therefore reasonable to assume that contaminated C&D waste is being
reused and uncontaminated C&D waste is being condemned to landfill.

Discussion and conclusions

Large quantities of C&D waste are being used for low grade recycling
activities, be it due to the cost of disposal to landfill, transport costs, time
constraints or the low value of recycled material. Furthermore, contamination
of C&D waste is a potential barrier to recycling and reuse and much C&D
 EMH waste is incorporated in contaminated land and becomes part of the
12,2 contaminated land remediation process.
In order to reverse this situation appropriate tools are required for the risk
assessment of contamination in C&D wastes. This has not currently been
addressed by the construction industry in the UK.
Considerable effort has been directed over the past ten years, in the UK, at
156 developing risk assessment methodologies for contaminated land. There exists
considerable information on appropriate sampling strategies, sample
preparation and analytical methods for assessing contaminated land. Other
countries such as The Netherlands have addressed problems of leachate of
contaminants from building materials into soil and European standards are in
development to address this problem.
Downloaded by SELCUK UNIVERSITY At 03:30 22 January 2015 (PT)

A separate assessment of contaminants in ``hard'' C&D waste materials needs

to be made. The increased use of C&D waste as alternatives to newly quarried
aggregates will only become a reality with the development of appropriate risk
analysis geared specifically to these materials. The Environment Agency's
guidelines on the management of C&D waste need updating. The research
programme at the Building Research Establishment and the University of
Manchester is addressing this problem. By sampling both process streams and
contaminated material as well as existing background values, it will be able to
evaluate how well current practice deals with the risk of contamination.

References
Bell, A. (1997), Regional Waste Strategy Manager, Environment Agency, NW Region, Personal
communication, 17 December.
Building Research Establishment (BRE) (1995), BRE Report BR276. Sulfate and Acid Attack on
Concrete in the Ground: Recommended Procedures for Soil Analysis, CRC, Garston.
Building Research Establishment (BRE) (1998), Digest 433: Specifications for Recycled
Aggregates, BRE, Garston.
Building Research Establishment (BRE) (2000), Research paper IP7, CRC, Garston.
Collins, R.J. (1986), ``Low-grade and manufactured aggregates ± a review of prospects and
utilisation'', Resources and Conservation, Vol. 13, pp. 1-12.
Construction Industry Research and Information Association (CIRIA) (1995), Remedial
Treatment for Contaminated Land, Volume V, Excavation and Disposal, CIRIA, SP105,
CIRIA, London.
Construction Industry Research and Information Association (CIRIA) (1997), Waste
Minimisation and Recycling in the Construction Industry. Funders Report/CP/44, CIRIA,
London.
DoE (1996), Making Waste Work, HMSO, London.
DETR (1998), Opportunities for Change: Consultation Paper on a UK Strategy for Sustainable
Construction, HMSO, London.
Douglas, I. and Lawson, N. (2000), ``The human dimension of geomorphological work in Britain'',
Journal of Industrial Ecology.
Ferguson, C.C. and Denner, J.M. (1994), ``Developing guideline trigger values for contaminants in
soil: underlying risk analysis and risk management concepts'', Land Contamination and
Reclamation, Vol. 2, pp. 117-23.
 Gutt, W.H. and Smith, M.A. (1976), ``Aspects of waste materials and their potential for use in Recycling
concrete'', Resource Recovery and Conservation, Vol. 1, pp. 345-67.
Highways Agency (1998), Manual of Contract Documents for Highway Works: Volume 1
construction
Specification for Highway Works, The Stationery Office, London.
Hobbs, G and Collins, R. (1997), Demonstration of Reuse and Recycling of Materials: BRE Energy
Efficient Office of the Future. Information Paper IP3/97, CRC 1997, Building Research
Establishment, Garston.
Howard Humphries and Partners (1994), Managing Demolition and Construction Wastes. Report
157
of the Study on the Recyling of Demolition and Construction Wastes in the UK, for the
Department of the Environment, HMSO, London.
Interdepartmental Committee on the Redevelopment of Contaminated Land (1987), ``Guidance on
the assessment and redevelopment of contaminated land'', ICRCL Guidance Note 59/83,
2nd ed.
Downloaded by SELCUK UNIVERSITY At 03:30 22 January 2015 (PT)

Magdich, P. (1990), Construction and Demolition by Pollution Prevention Handbook, California

Department of Health Services, Los Angeles, CA.
Mulder, E. (1991), ``The leaching behaviour of some primary and secondary raw materials used in
pilot-scale road bases'', in Goumans, J.J.J.R., van der Sloot, H.A. and Aalbers, Th.G., Waste
Materials in Construction, Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp. 225-64.
National Land Use Data Base (2000), http://www.nlud.org.uk/STATS/Bulletin/table2.gif
RILEM (1994), ``Specifications for concrete with recycled aggregates, RILEM TC-121-DRG, Task
Force 1 Report'', Materials and Structures, Vol. 27, pp. 557-9.
Symonds (1999), Construction and Demolition Waste Management Practices, and Their
Economic Impacts, Report to DGXI, European Commission, Symonds Group, East
Grinstead.
 This article has been cited by:

1. Adam Buttress, Aled Jones, Sam Kingman. 2015. Microwave processing of cement and concrete materials
– towards an industrial reality?. Cement and Concrete Research 68, 112-123. [CrossRef]
2. A. Rodríguez-Orejóna, M. Del Río-Merinoa, F. Fernández-Martíneza. 2014. Caracterización de la
mezcla de yeso grueso con adición de residuos tratados de placas de yeso laminado. Materiales de
Construcción 64:314, e018. [CrossRef]
3. Christof Knoeri, Esther Sanyé-Mengual, Hans-Joerg Althaus. 2013. Comparative LCA of recycled and
conventional concrete for structural applications. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 18:5,
909-918. [CrossRef]
4. T. Chinda, W. Engpanyalert, A. Tananoo, J. Chaikong, A. Methawachananont. 2013. The Development
of the Construction and Demolition Waste Dynamic Model. International Journal of Engineering and
Technology 617-621. [CrossRef]
Downloaded by SELCUK UNIVERSITY At 03:30 22 January 2015 (PT)

5. Aimaro Sanna, Marco Dri, Matthew R. Hall, Mercedes Maroto-Valer. 2012. Waste materials for carbon
capture and storage by mineralisation (CCSM) – A UK perspective. Applied Energy 99, 545-554. [CrossRef]
6. P. Renforth. 2012. The potential of enhanced weathering in the UK. International Journal of Greenhouse
Gas Control 10, 229-243. [CrossRef]
7. Issam Srour, Wai Kiong Chong, Fan Zhang. 2012. Sustainable recycling approach: an understanding of
designers' and contractors' recycling responsibilities throughout the life cycle of buildings in two US cities.
Sustainable Development 20:5, 350-360. [CrossRef]
8. Hee Sung Cha, Ki Hyun Kim, Chan Kyu Kim. 2012. Case Study on Selective Demolition Method for
Refurbishing Deteriorated Residential Apartments. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
138:2, 294-303. [CrossRef]
9. Christof Knoeri, Claudia R. Binder, Hans-Joerg Althaus. 2011. Decisions on recycling: Construction
stakeholders’ decisions regarding recycled mineral construction materials. Resources, Conservation and
Recycling 55:11, 1039-1050. [CrossRef]
10. Andy Spoerri, Daniel J. Lang, Claudia R. Binder, Roland W. Scholz. 2009. Expert-based scenarios for
strategic waste and resource management planning—C&D waste recycling in the Canton of Zurich,
Switzerland. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 53:10, 592-600. [CrossRef]
11. Ming Lu, Sze-Chun Lau, Chi-Sun Poon. 2009. Simulation Approach to Evaluating Cost Efficiency of
Selective Demolition Practices: Case of Hong Kong’s Kai Tak Airport Demolition. Journal of Construction
Engineering and Management 135:6, 448-457. [CrossRef]
12. Anjula Gurtoo, S.J. Antony. 2009. Deliberating indirect consequences of environmental legislations
on economy and business. International Journal of Environment and Sustainable Development 8:2, 113.
[CrossRef]
13. M. Osmani, J. Glass, A.D.F. Price. 2008. Architects’ perspectives on construction waste reduction by
design. Waste Management 28:7, 1147-1158. [CrossRef]
14. Anjula Gurtoo, S.J. Antony. 2007. Environmental regulations. Management of Environmental Quality: An
International Journal 18:6, 626-642. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
15. Vivian W. Y Tam, Khoa N Le. 2007. Predicting Environmental Performance of Construction Projects
by Using Least-Squares Fitting Method and Robust Method. Journal of Green Building 2:1, 143-155.
[CrossRef]
 16. Ming Lu, Chi-Sun Poon, Lap-Chi Wong. 2006. Application Framework for Mapping and Simulation of
Waste Handling Processes in Construction. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management 132:11,
1212-1221. [CrossRef]
17. Vivian W. Y. Tam, C. M. Tam, L. Y. Shen, S. X. Zeng, C. M. Ho. 2006. Environmental performance
assessment: perceptions of project managers on the relationship between operational and environmental
performance indicators. Construction Management and Economics 24:3, 287-299. [CrossRef]
18. M. Osmani, A. Price, J. Glass. 2006. Architect and contractor attitudes to waste minimisation. Proceedings
of the ICE - Waste and Resource Management 159:2, 65-72. [CrossRef]
19. Raj RajaramIssues in sustainable mining practices 45-89. [CrossRef]
20. Chi Sun Poon, Ann Tit Wan Yu, Sze Wai Wong, Esther Cheung. 2004. Management of construction
waste in public housing projects in Hong Kong. Construction Management and Economics 22:7, 675-689.
[CrossRef]
21. S. X. Zeng, P. Tian, C. M. Tam, Vivian W.Y. Tam. 2004. Implementation of Environmental Management
Downloaded by SELCUK UNIVERSITY At 03:30 22 January 2015 (PT)

in the Construction Industry of China. Architectural Science Review 47:1, 19-26. [CrossRef]
22. Andrew R.J. Dainty, Richard J. Brooke. 2004. Towards improved construction waste minimisation: a need
for improved supply chain integration?. Structural Survey 22:1, 20-29. [Citation] [Full Text] [PDF]
23. S. X. Zeng, C. M. Tam, Z. M. Deng, Vivian W. Y. Tam. 2003. ISO 14000 and the Construction Industry:
Survey in China. Journal of Management in Engineering 19:3, 107-115. [CrossRef]
24. C.S. Poon, Ann T.W. Yu, L.H. Ng. 2003. Comparison of low‐waste building technologies adopted in
public and private housing projects in Hong Kong. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management
10:2, 88-98. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]