SID 5 Research Project Final Report -...

SID 5 (Rev. 3/06) of 21

General enquiries on this form should be made to:

Defra, Science Directorate, Management Support and Finance Team,

Telephone No. 020 7238 1612 E-mail: [email protected]

SID 5 Research Project Final Report

Note

In line with the Freedom of Information Act 2000, Defra aims to place the results of its completed research projects in the public domain wherever possible. The SID 5 (Research Project Final Report) is designed to capture the information on the results and outputs of Defra-funded research in a format that is easily publishable through the Defra website. A SID 5 must be completed for all projects.

This form is in Word format and the boxes may be expanded or reduced, as appropriate.

ACCESS TO INFORMATION

The information collected on this form will be stored electronically and may be sent to any part of Defra, or to individual researchers or organisations outside Defra for the purposes of reviewing the project. Defra may also disclose the information to any outside organisation acting as an agent authorised by Defra to process final research reports on its behalf. Defra intends to publish this form on its website, unless there are strong reasons not to, which fully comply with exemptions under the Environmental Information Regulations or the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

Defra may be required to release information, including personal data and commercial information, on request under the Environmental Information Regulations or the Freedom of Information Act 2000. However, Defra will not permit any unwarranted breach of confidentiality or act in contravention of its obligations under the Data Protection Act 1998. Defra or its appointed agents may use the name, address or other details on your form to contact you in connection with occasional customer research aimed at improving the processes through which Defra works with its contractors.

Project identification

1. Defra Project code WRT177 / WR0115

2. Project title

Characterisation of Mineral Wastes, Resources and Processing technologies – Integrated waste management for the production of construction material

3. Contractor organisation(s)

Mineral Industry Research Organisation - MIRO

Building Research Establishment - BRE

University of Leeds - UoL

Akristos Ltd

National Industrial Symbisos Programme - NISP

54. Total Defra project costs £ £260,204.00

(agreed fixed price)

5. Project: start date ................ 01 July 2005

end date ................. 30 November 2007

SID 5 (Rev. 3/06) of 21

6. It is Defra‟s intention to publish this form.

Please confirm your agreement to do so. ................................................................................... YES NO

(a) When preparing SID 5s contractors should bear in mind that Defra intends that they be made public. They should be written in a clear and concise manner and represent a full account of the research project which someone not closely associated with the project can follow.

Defra recognises that in a small minority of cases there may be information, such as intellectual property or commercially confidential data, used in or generated by the research project, which should not be disclosed. In these cases, such information should be detailed in a separate annex (not to be published) so that the SID 5 can be placed in the public domain. Where it is impossible to complete the Final Report without including references to any sensitive or confidential data, the information should be included and section (b) completed. NB: only in exceptional circumstances will Defra expect contractors to give a "No" answer.

In all cases, reasons for withholding information must be fully in line with exemptions under the Environmental Information Regulations or the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

(b) If you have answered NO, please explain why the Final report should not be released into public domain

Executive Summary

7. The executive summary must not exceed 2 sides in total of A4 and should be understandable to the intelligent non-scientist. It should cover the main objectives, methods and findings of the research, together with any other significant events and options for new work.

The overall aim of the project was to undertake applied research to develop a characterisation screening protocol, and compile and complete a characterisation matrix for mineral waste in order to establish „fitness for purpose‟. A further aim was to enable the large volumes of mineral waste that are well suited for incorporation into construction products to be identified. The Characterisation matrix was undertaken by producing a Waste Product Pairing’ Database. There has been no strategic or overarching approach to understand how the specifications and demands of construction materials and product manufacturers are reflected in the type and level of information available or required on the character of mineral based wastes. To move beyond research and one-off or intermittent exchanges such an integrated and strategic approach is needed. This project helps address this requirement. Previous research work has not looked at the „hidden‟ mechanisms of the successful (and unsuccessful) use of alternative material use, nor have there been attempts to formulate a way of describing the various stages in the process. This project characterises the process and the exchange of knowledge required and also the type of knowledge required. The project undertook applied research to develop a screening protocol, and completed the production of a „Waste - Product Pairing Database (WPP Database) for a variety of mineral wastes for use in (predominantly 5) construction product sectors. The project deliverables help stakeholders to evaluate:

Issues of geographical distribution, The level of specific information required to allow waste producers to engage with particular

product manufacturing sectors. Provide at „strategic‟ level, generic information to inform planning, policy, strategy and initiatives

aimed at stimulating waste utilisation. The required level of detail at the „implementation‟ level (i.e. utilising waste)

The method used drew heavily on interaction with relevant industry representatives from operating companies‟ personnel, such as site manager, technical managers, and those responsible for R&D. The project focused on five manufactured construction products sectors: Cement Heavy Ceramic (primarily Brick) Manufactured Concrete Products

SID 5 (Rev. 3/06) of 21

Manufactured Aggregates Mineral Wool Insulation During the initial stages of the project it became apparent that the key to utilisation is a product focused approach (as opposed to waste-focused). Deciding on the suitability of an alternative raw material cannot take place immediately. Experience provided by industry highlighted the difficulty faced during testing of the incorporation of a waste or other alternative raw material in a product. The model represents a guide on the information needed for a successful exchange to develop and is classified into four different phases. Phase 1, Waste minimisation and environmental audits Phase 2, Information gathering Phase 3, Iterative processes taken to examine constraints versus opportunities Phase 4, Successful exchanges The WPP database and the 5 industry sector reviews characterise potential waste - product exchange and provide a commentary on barriers and benefits. Characteristics that could affect the process of exchanging waste for utilisation in a positive or negative way fall within the categories shown below:

Material related Composition, particle size distribution, functional use, handling, moisture content

Economic Potential gate fee, decreased disposal costs, increased handling, reduced processing costs

Environmental Decreased waste, decreased resource use, reduced CO2/energy use

Social Use of waste, workforce health and safety, reduced contaminant release

Legal Waste management licensing, waste protocols, use contaminated - hazardous material

Organisational Enhanced „green‟ credentials, enhanced corporate social responsibility

The hierarchy and importance of these indicators will be case specific therefore it would be inappropriate to base a decision on a simplistic scorecard basis but the clear message to potential users of the WPP database is that there are numerous factors, technical and non technical, that must be addressed. A key achievement of the project, through the database approach, has been to capture product sector in-house understanding of how raw material inputs contribute to the manufacturing process or end-product properties and to illustrate how wastes can deliver required functionality of a feedstock. Five Industry Sector Studies each include an introduction, or scope to the study; provide a brief resume of the current UK industry product sector, outline the key material requirements and functionalities for the manufacture of the product, discuss possible alternative materials and outline a characterisation framework for these materials. Overview of Results Alternative raw materials are considered for use by manufactures as a potential cost effective solution to access materials with desirable compounds / properties. One of the very clear outcomes from this project is the paramount importance of providing a bridge between suppliers and users of waste and a common understanding of criterion to be met. The greatest returns for the stakeholders are gained by becoming intelligent players in this market. It is the database that facilitates such understanding. In terms of making recommendations as to where greatest returns are – whilst these are identified generically in the 5 industrial sector studies results from the specific case studies illustrate those benefits and barriers are case specific. The presence of two new web based free access tools provides both „waste‟ producers and those wishing to utilise such materials the means to engage and identify the potential for themselves. Since the inception of the project, there has been a significant shift in emphasis towards actively supporting the process of developing more resource friendly rules for determining “end-of waste” criteria. There is now a clear method to follow in the UK for establishing when a waste can be considered a secondary material and be released from the burdens associated with waste status - Waste Protocols. The approach in this project has been to provide information that would be relevant to such a process – it has not been the aim to propose such specifications as this must be undertaken in the correct manner, i.e.

SID 5 (Rev. 3/06) of 21

the waste protocols project. Two elements to obtain non-waste or by-product status are relevant:

1. The quality protocol - the over-riding guidance and clear assessment, monitoring, reporting criteria, and conditions of production and use for the specific waste type to be considered a by-product.

2. A specification document, usually a Public Available Specification (PAS) published by the British Standards Institute (BSI), details the characteristics (and possibly source) such material must exhibit to be accepted for the identified end-use(s).

The following table indicates where the current Defra/Environment Agency waste protocols project that aims to provide simplified routes to enable the use of material with limited legislative burdens may be applied to the product sectors investigated within this project.

Waste undergoing Protocol Products

Pulverised Fuel Ash (year 1) Cement, Brick, Manufactured Aggregates, Aerated concrete.

Blast furnace slag (year 1) Cement

Contaminated soils (year 1)

Boiler ash from combustion of paper sludge (year 2)

Cement

Steel slag (year 2) Cement, Concrete blocks

Incinerator bottom ash (year 2) Cement, manufactured aggregates, Concrete blocks, bricks

Gypsum from waste plasterboard (year 2) Cement

Project Report to Defra

8. As a guide this report should be no longer than 20 sides of A4. This report is to provide Defra with details of the outputs of the research project for internal purposes; to meet the terms of the contract; and to allow Defra to publish details of the outputs to meet Environmental Information Regulation or Freedom of Information obligations. This short report to Defra does not preclude contractors from also seeking to publish a full, formal scientific report/paper in an appropriate scientific or other journal/publication. Indeed, Defra actively encourages such publications as part of the contract terms. The report to Defra should include:

the scientific objectives as set out in the contract;

the extent to which the objectives set out in the contract have been met;

details of methods used and the results obtained, including statistical analysis (if appropriate);

a discussion of the results and their reliability;

the main implications of the findings;

possible future work; and

any action resulting from the research (e.g. IP, Knowledge Transfer).

SID 5 (Rev. 3/06) of 21

Characterisation of Mineral Wastes, Resources and Processing technologies – Integrated waste management for the production of construction material (MINRES).

1. Background 2. Introduction 3. Objectives 4. Methods 5. Deliverables and stakeholders 6. Results 7. Discussion and Reliability 8. Main implications 9. Future Work 10. Actions Resulting from Research 1. Background Characterisation studies have been undertaken for certain mineral wastes types with a view to their use in construction products [1,2], however, a recognised barrier to the increased use of these wastes is the lack of widely available data on their key properties (both physical and chemical) and their use in terms of fitness for purpose[3]. Other barriers often cited include supply chain/distribution issues and the variability of the waste streams in geographic location and time [4]. Recent trends to increase recycled content have shown that the construction industry is willing to use waste materials if they are available in sufficient quantities, have properties with variability within a predictable range that makes them fit for purpose and are cost effective [5]. The construction industry consumes approximately 420 million tonnes of material resources per year, with 16% this figure being from reclaimed/recycled sources [6]. Indeed, it is recognised that construction products have the potential to utilise large volumes of mineral based waste materials as constituents, often in high value applications. Pressure is being exerted on the construction industry to use higher levels of waste in their products [7]. However construction product manufacturers need to be assured of the wastes‟ characteristics and have confidence to use them. Waste producers are also being pressurised in a number of ways to find alternatives to landfill and use their waste in higher value applications [8]. Emerging legislation will also require waste from extractive industries to be characterised as an integral element in its management [9]. A recent review funded by Defra‟s Aggregates Levy Sustainability Fund has looked at the characterisation of quarry materials that cannot find traditional market. This provides a useful background data, but also follows a similar approach to this project [10]. For the continued use of „waste‟ minerals to be achievable, it is essential that industry (both construction and other industries) and policy makers have more effective models and guidance at both a strategic and implementation level on the availability and suitability of materials for a range of construction uses. 2. Introduction Despite the quantity of research work [see previous references and 11] undertaken there has been no strategic or overarching approach to understand how the specifications and demands of construction materials and product manufacturers are reflected in the type and level of information available or required on the character of mineral based wastes. To move beyond research and one-off or intermittent exchanges such an integrated and strategic approach is needed. This project helps address this requirement. Previous research work has not looked at the „hidden‟ mechanisms of the successful (and unsuccessful) use of alternative material use, nor have there been attempts to formulate a way of describing the various stages in the process. This project characterises the process and the exchange of knowledge required and also characterises the type and level of knowledge required at different stages in the process of utilising alternative resources. The project undertook applied research to develop a screening protocol, and completed the production of a „Waste - Product Pairing Database (WPP Database) for a variety of mineral wastes for use in (predominantly 5) construction product sectors. The project deliverables help stakeholders to evaluate:

SID 5 (Rev. 3/06) of 21

Issues of geographical distribution, The level of specific information required to allow waste producers to engage with particular

product manufacturing sectors. Provide at „strategic‟ level, generic information to inform planning, policy, strategy and initiatives

aimed at stimulating waste utilisation. The required level of detail at the „implementation‟ level (i.e. utilising waste)

The project partners were:

Mineral Industry Research Organisation (MIRO) The Building Research Establishment (BRE) The University of Leeds, School of Civil Engineering Akristos Ltd National industrial Symbiosis Programme (NISP)

3. Objectives The overall aim of the project was to undertake applied research to develop a characterisation screening protocol, and compile and complete a characterisation matrix for mineral waste in order to establish „fitness for purpose‟. A further aim was to enable the large volumes of mineral waste that are well suited for incorporation into construction products to be identified. Specific Objectives are provided in Table 1. As the project progressed, it became clear that some objectives needed to be revised (e.g. obtaining volumes of mineral wastes was commercially sensitive, so Objective 5 had to be adjusted). These variations are also shown in Table 1, together with the deliverable. In addition the WPP Database has also been provided as a web based tool. Delays to the project led to a 7 month extension being granted making the project 31 months in duration.

Table 1: Specific objectives and revisions of the project No Original Objectives Final Objectives Deliverables

1

To collect benchmarking data across a broad range of mineral-based wastes from all stages in the material cycle: from extraction through to end of life. - tonnes per annum (tpa).

No change Literature Review Report

2 To collect benchmarking data across a limited range of traditional and emerging mineral-based construction products. - market value £‟s/tpa.

No change Literature Review Report

3 To develop & define a characterisation matrix for approximately 20 „mineral waste : construction product‟ pairings (for e.g. dredged silt : brick). Refine the matrix by piloting 6 – 8 pairs, in order to allow fit for purpose characterisation of the pairings to be assessed.

Development of a characterisation matrix for waste-product pairings for five Construction product sector

Waste-Product Pairings Database (add web address)

4 To conduct wider characterisation trials and generate new data on fitness for purpose of the 20 waste : product pairings, combine this data with that currently available, and to measure this data set and its application by converting data into 5-10 waste utilisation scenarios that will then be reviewed by selected stakeholders.

Produce 5 Industry Sector Reviews Produce 15 waste-product Case Studies

5 Industry sector reviews 15 Case Studies

5 To develop a Geographical Information System that integrates with BREMAP (current GIS system that covers construction and demolition waste only), to display characterisation data, processing plant location and volumes for mineral wastes.

No qualitative data on GIS - but there are links to enable companies to post relevant information

Updated BREMAP - GIS System (add web address)

6 To critically assess, in conjunction with stakeholder groups, the relationship between material characterisation data and level of process knowledge needed for pre-commercial viability, and to develop case studies using three empirical trials on emerging process technology, in order to provide an understanding of how a given waste stream may re-enter the chain of utility.

Production of a desk based review outlining the links between processing technology and the 5 industrial sectors

Processing Technology Review

7 To produce a final project report including recommendations identifying where the greatest returns for stakeholders are to be gained. (avoided „disposal costs &/or reduced „virgin‟ material consumption &/or recycled content in product).

No change This report

8 To hold an „updated‟ BREMAP launch event. Held March /April 08 Launch event

SID 5 (Rev. 3/06) of 21

4. Methods Used This project used contemporary examples of the potential and the proposed utilisation of alternative raw materials and successful cases of waste utilisation to develop a generic framework to help inform future waste exchange possibilities for a wide range of stakeholders. The literature review was undertaken using the library resources of the project partners and internet searches. This included material on specific examples of utilisation of waste, and strategic examples - such as the idea of industrial symbiosis and waste exchange; such strategic level work helped form the initial concept model. The structure of the method (shown diagrammatically in Figure 1) used draws heavily on interaction with relevant industry representatives from operating companies‟ personnel. These personnel were in positions such as site manager, technical manager, and those responsible for R&D. Initial contact was through two workshops but, as the project progressed, face to face meeting and site visits became the focus. In addition some direct characterisation work was carried out to act as a guide to the type of work required.

Figure 1: Methodology developed and used during the project

The various wastes were selected from the literature review and by discussions with industrial stakeholders. The five manufactured construction products sectors (five sectors) were chosen by those represented at the various workshops and other products that were stated in the original proposal (for example manufactured aggregates). The five sectors highlighted different aspects of waste utilisation:

Cement offers an established industry that is actively seeking to source materials and has examples (through work to develop alternative fuel markets) of dealing with wastes.

The heavy ceramic (brick) industry has an historic record of using „in-house‟ waste materials and is beginning to source a variety of other materials to provide a competitive edge, preserve resources and save energy / money. They are assisted in this by a small brokerage sector.

Manufactured aggregates are well used in other EU countries and can be produced entirely from mineral waste (for example Lytag made from pulverised fuel ash). In addition a large amount of laboratory research has been undertaken.

Mineral wool insulation is an industry sectors that is also actively seeking alternative materials but have a relatively low demand and a „niche‟ market.

The manufactured concrete sector uses a large volume and variety of alternative material and is also widespread geographically.

Initial Concept Model

Development of data-gathering methodology to reflect conceptual model

Data Gathering

Data Analysis and WPP database development

Characterisation framework development for 5 industrial sector studies

Stakeholder engagement

Refinement of Concept model and WPP database

Development of Sector and Case studies

Development of MINRES WPP Database and transfer to website

Production of GIS providing spatial information on waste sources and product production

Concept Model refining

SID 5 (Rev. 3/06) of 21

5. Deliverables and Audience Table 2 provides the various deliverables and there intended audience.

Table 2: Deliverables Web tools Purpose & Audience

MinRes WPP Database Tool to help understand use of wastes / alternative raw materials. Aimed primarily at waste producers and decision makers

MinRes/BEMAP GIS Tool to help find waste / alternative raw materials or a process that may accept such materials. Aimed at operating company managers / waste brokers.

Industry Sector Study Purpose & Audience

Cement More contextual and detailed information for waste producers looking for alternative to disposal or current management route. Aimed at waste producer managers, strategic decision makers, policy makers.

Manufactured Concrete Products

Heavy Ceramic (Brick)

Mineral Insulation

Manufactured Aggregate

Case Studies Purpose & Audience

Incinerated sewage sludge ash - Aircrete Examples of contemporary examples (some successful some less so) of utilisation of waste. Aimed at those approaching detailed technical and commercial aspects of a waste exchange. Operating company managers. Production facility managers. Academics/students.

Waste derived aggregates - Bitublock

Foundry dust - Facing bricks

Incinerated sewage sludge ash - Facing bricks

Incinerator Bottom Ash - Manufactured aggregate

Paper sludge/Paper sludge ash - Portland cement

Quarry fines/Paper sludge ash - Manufactured aggregate

FGD gypsum - Plasterboard (gypsum wall board)

Waste mineral fibre - Ceiling tiles

Crushed waste stone - Concrete landscaping products

Water treatment residues - Facing bricks

Spent foundry sand - Facing bricks

Dross from aluminium recycling - Portland cement

Aerated concrete - Green Roofs

Clay extraction waste mica -Roof tiles

Reports Purpose & Audience

Literature Review Background information. Aimed at those requiring background information

Core Report Provides discussion and context for waste exchange,. Aimed at strategic decision makers such as planners and those with an interest in how moves toward improved resource efficiency may be structured.

Final Report Summary of Project and Key findings. Policy makers, general public, industry and academae

SID 5 (Rev. 3/06) of 21

6. Results Obtained A range of data was collected to fulfil Objectives 1 & 2. This included both the volumes of waste materials (Table 3) and the volume of the markets and potential recycled contents for a range of construction products (Table 4).

Table 3 : Arisings of the agreed mineral „waste‟ materials

Table 4: Recycling potential for given end products. Product material

consumed m tonnes (kt)

Value (£m) „standard‟ recycled content %

Standard - recyclate (kt)

„best‟ recycled content %

„best‟ recyclate (kt)

Ceramic 12,232 1,084 5 % 612 20 % 2446

Manufactured concrete

11,225* 520 c. 10 %* 1,122 60 %* 6,735

Insulation 138 115 50 69 50 69

Manufactured aggregates

N/A N/A 5 - 90 % N/A 100% N/A

Cement 12,000 750 5 600 60 7,200 *Made of a variety of blocks, kerbs and paving all of which have different levels of recycling - lightweight blocks can have a standard inclusion of up to 50%

Table 4 shows sales figures for the selected product sectors and volumes of materials used. The highest tonnages sold are for ceramic products (of which ~ 50 % is for brick). A close second is manufactured concrete products (which has a variety of products included such as lightweight and dense walling blocks, aerated blocks and a variety of paving element and concrete tiles). A standard rate of recycling is the contemporary amount of material currently used. „Best‟ recycled content is extrapolation of that suggested in various research data to be achievable [12]. During the initial stages of the project it became apparent that the key to utilisation is a product focused approach (as opposed to waste-focused). Deciding on the suitability of an alternative raw material cannot take place immediately. Experience provided by industry highlighted the difficulty faced during testing of the incorporation of a waste or other alternative raw material in a product. A step by step approach must be adopted and the final decision on whether or not to use a material commercially can only be based on the results obtained from full scale trials. Initially some laboratory scale experimentation takes place. Commonly the user is provided with some samples of waste material plus

Material group sub-type Arisings

(K tonnes)

Landfilled or stockpiled

(approx) Ktonnes

Quarry wastes/by-products (source: Ref 6)

Waste from Quarry products 58,700 -

Ashes (source: BRE Information Paper IP9/05: using small volume wastes in construction)

Pulverised Fuel Ash (PFA) widely used Furnace Bottom Ash (FBA) widely used Municipal Waste Incinerator Bottom ash (IBA) Incinerated Sewage Sludge Ash (ISSA) Meat and Bone-meal ash

4,200 1,300 in 1998-99 in England and Wales. 640 from 11 incinerators in 2000 – likely to increase 100 of dry waste in 2002 in UK 55 in 2005 in UK

2,600 26 in 1998-99 in England and Wales

Industrial process residue (hazardous and non hazardous) (source: Environment Agency strategic waste management assessment report)

Industrial mineral waste and residues (EA definition)

12,800 -

Dredgings and gully waste (Source: Dredged silt as raw material: Collins, 1980)

Dredgings Limited info on gully waste

> 30,000 -

Excavation materials, trench arisings (source: Construction Industry mass balance)

Excavation materials/soils Soils – 29,000

SID 5 (Rev. 3/06) of 21

any available analytical data describing its composition (i.e. chemical analysis). The user examines the effect on desirable properties especially those required for the product to conform the relevant standard (BS / EN / ISO). This staged approach was considered when undertaking work on Objectives 3 & 4, which required a generic model on how and what type of characterisation was needed when utilising waste. Figure 2 and the following sections present the conceptual model developed that provided the generic approach toward utilising alternative minerals (and possibly other wastes) in a construction product. One of the key outcomes of this project is that such utilisation must be considered an „exchange‟ as once a commercial situation has developed there may be commitments needed from the waste producer to standardise the characteristics of the waste that is to be used this may have implications on the operations that produce the waste or the way it is handled/treated. This idea of „waste exchange‟ continues throughout this report (and within the other project deliverables). More on the waste exchange approach taken and the understanding gained during this work can be found in the associated report titled „Core Report‟. The model represents a guide on the information needed for a successful exchange to develop and is classified into four different phases. In phase 1, waste minimisation and environmental audits are processes that assist the identification and description of the characteristics and amounts of waste produced as these need to be real and stable into the medium term. Phase 1 needs to be carries out by each party independently and it is considered critical for the future of waste exchange.

Waste producer Waste user

Phase one Audit & minimisation study. On site

optimisation of process(es) and

management of waste-flows

Audit & minimisation study. On site

optimisation of product and raw materials

usage

Initial characterisation of residual

waste to “waste-exchange” level

detail

Initial review of feedstock needs -

“fitness for purpose” characterisation at

“waste exchange” level detailPhase two

Phase Three

Waste exchange – brokerage service activity

• preliminary option matching

• identification of detailed waste-product

characterisation studies

• review of options to bridge gaps

Business case review

Product option

development

• existing

• novel

Information gap

analysis

Business case review

Waste availability

• existing sources

• new sources

information gap

analysis

Generic activity processes

waste - product matching

Phase four

Producer-user direct activities leading to exchange

• highly specific activity ranging from simple contract for direct

substitution to major process/infrastructure development

Figure 2: Conceptual model used to produce the WPP Database

In phase 2 the waste producer and user are required to gather the information needed to make a preliminary match. This stage of the model assesses whether the information available is sufficient to proceed to an exchange. This phase and will identify a list of criteria that are likely to be required. Phase 3 will be case specific and it aims to explore the iterative process taken by involved parties during waste exchange. The information will examine constraints versus opportunities where all adverse factors are weighed against the benefits gained from an exchange process. These factors are not only of a technical nature; a particular alternative material or waste may be a suitable substitute but the cost of using this waste material (i.e. cost of processing or high transport cost) may determine the exchange process as non feasible. Waste exchange characteristics are presented later for the 5 sectors covered in the project.

SID 5 (Rev. 3/06) of 21

In phase 4, the examination of all those different routes considered during phase 3 will lead to successful exchanges, which is the end point of this (generic) model. MINRES - Geographical information System The Geographical Information System (GIS) BREMAP is a well established and recognised GIS tool that links sources of construction and demolition waste with processing facilities in the local area. The development of a new MINRES section on the BREMAP GIS system has been completed and is accessible via www.minres.co.uk The new section provides the deliverable for Objective 5 and includes the following:

GIS interactive maps that allow construction product manufacturers to search for potential waste sources in their area and find contact details.

The maps also allow waste producers to similarly identify local manufacturing plants. Each type of plant or waste is illustrated by a different symbol and combinations of several waste sources and production plants can be displayed on the map simultaneously

Links to the fifteen MINRES case studies and five sector studies

A link to the MINRES WPP database

Contact details to allow users to apply to have information added to the GIS system or MINRES database

The GIS data includes the locations of production plants for seven construction products (aerated concrete, ceramic products, manufactured aggregates, plasterboard, cement, mineral wool insulation and manufactured concrete products) and the eleven categories of waste producer (incinerated sewage sludge ash, pulverised fuel ash, steelwork by-product, municiapal waste incinerator ash, flue gas desulphurisation gypsum, colliery spoil, biomass energy plant ash, quarry by-products, water industry residues). The location of quarries and other extraction sites is based on data held by the British Geological Survey and contact details for these sites are not included in the BREMAP GIS due to confidentiality issues. However, the user is directed to BGS, where they can make further enquiries. The GIS system does not include volumes of „waste‟ material / product production volumes as it was not possible to obtain this for the sites listed. However, there is the potential to upload such information to the GIS system / MINRES database. The Waste-Product Pairings (WPP) database (the revised deliverable for Objectives 3 & 4) was developed to provide characterisation requirements, and barriers and benefits to utilising specific mineral based waste materials and other mineral by-products in the following five construction product sectors:

Cement

Heavy Ceramics (bricks, tiles etc)

Mineral wool insulation

Manufactured concrete

Manufactured aggregate

The WPP database used the conceptual model outlined in Figure 2. The WPP database (and the 5 industry sector reviews - see below) show that where interactions between waste producers and waste users take place, the decision whether to proceed is likely to involve consideration of various factors. These factors are used to characterise potential waste - product exchange and provide a commentary on barriers and benefits. Characteristics that could affect the process of exchanging waste for utilisation in a positive or negative way fall within the „indicators‟ shown below:

Material related Composition, particle size distribution, functional use, handling, moisture content

Material / process characteristics: The utilisation of waste within a given product an end use may present benefits or barriers to the properties and technical specifications of the end product. Alterations to the processing route may be required.

Economic Potential gate fee, decreased disposal costs, increased handling, reduced processing costs

http://www.minres.co.uk/

SID 5 (Rev. 3/06) of 21

The question asked is whether the specific engagement is an economically viable option. The purchase, transport and processing costs required to utilise a waste material should be examined against the overall benefits gained.

Environmental Decreased waste, decreased resource use, reduced CO2/energy use Environmental impact and sustainability: The scope of waste exchange is to provide an alternative, environmental friendly and sustainable solution for dealing with waste. There might be cases however that the diversion of waste to an end use produces adverse environmental impacts (i.e. increased greenhouse emissions or energy consumption), hence the objective of sustainability is not satisfied.

Social Use of waste, workforce health and safety, reduced contaminant release The willingness and perception of workforce and wider society regarding waste matters may benefit or discourage waste exchange

Legal Waste management licensing, waste protocols, use contaminated or hazardous material Legal/ regulatory barriers or opportunities: the legislation and regulatory regime that relate to a specific exchange may encourage its accomplishment or complicate the process. Therefore licence registrations and compliance matters should be considered in advance.

Organisational Enhanced „green‟ credentials, enhanced corporate social responsibility Organisational and social factors: Businesses‟ objectives, corporate social responsibility, customer requirements and the perception of society regarding waste matters may benefit or discourage waste exchange.

The decision to proceed to an exchange and long term engagement will be based upon the outcomes (positive or negative) collected from each one of the waste exchange indicators discussed above. The hierarchy and importance of these indicators will be case specific therefore it would be inappropriate to base a decision on a simplistic scorecard basis but the clear message to potential users of the WPP database is that there are numerous factors, technical and non technical, that must be addressed. The database developed captured much of the information gathered by discussions with industry (primarily waste users but also waste producers). It provides waste-product pairings (over 100) where the particular technical and non-technical issues are presented in a common structural format. A key achievement of the project, through the database approach, has been to capture product sector in-house understanding of how raw material inputs contribute to the manufacturing process or end-product properties and to illustrate how wastes can deliver required functionality of a feedstock. The Five Industry Sector Studies form part of the deliverable for Objective 4 (and to lesser extent Objective 6) and are based on the work undertaken in compiling the WPP database. They present an insight into the current and potential future utilisation of a variety of alternative mineral materials in each of the sectors. They each include an introduction, or scope to the study; provide a brief resume of the current UK industry product sector, outline the key material requirements and functionalities for the manufacture of the product, discuss possible alternative materials and outline a characterisation framework for these materials. They close with an assessment of the future potential of alternative material utilisation in the product sector. A brief summary of the current and future utilisation potential for wastes (from the sector studies) is provided below. The waste materials presented here are primarily considered to be ones most well suited to utilisation or to introduce a particular barrier. Not all materials covered in the 5 sector reviews are provided here.

SID 5 (Rev. 3/06) of 21

Ceramic (Brick) There are over 90 ceramic plants in the UK - mainly brick works. When considering the brick industry (which forms the majority of the heavy ceramic industry) there is a sectoral desire (Brick development association - BDA) to be more efficient on resource use, both mineral and energy. Some things such as internal recycling (clay off cuts and to a lesser extent „grog‟) and town ash may be commonly used (and have been for a while - see inside some later Victorian bricks). Table 5 shows a summary of the barriers and benefits for certain waste streams potentially used in brick manufacture.

Table 5: Utilisation of waste in brick manufacture Recycled material

Function

Potential benefits

Potential barriers

Progress

Pulverised fly ash

Fuel Body filler Clay substitute

Green strength Reduced (direct)

emissions Durability

Significant: Compositional variability Important: Transport cost Less Important: Particle size Handling / storage

In use

Saw dust Fuel Body filler

Recycled content Improved company

profile Reduced emissions

Less Important: Increased emissions Handling / storage

In use (1 site)

Incinerated sewage sludge ash

Flux Body Filler Colourant

Reduced emissions Improved company

profile Reduced emissions

Important: Availability Less Important / Future work: Storage End product properties Further processing

In use (1 site)

Water treatment residue (WTR)

Colourant Plasticity Clay substitute

Reduced emissions Improved company

profile

Less Important / Future work: Handling / storage Transport Processing

In use (1 site)

Bone ash Flux Body filler Clay Substitute

Reduced emissions

Important: End product properties Limited testing facilities Less Important: Handling / storage

Laboratory trials

Container glass Flux Improved strength Reduced emissions

Significant: Purchase cost Important: Processing cost Particle size Less important: Handling / storage

Works trials

Dredged harbour sediment

Colourant Clay substitute

Important: Handling / storage Limited testing facilities

Laboratory trials

Future work should take place to establish the use of the above alternative materials as common practice. Where single cases of waste utilisation occur (for e.g. water treatment residue) they may help to stimulate competition within the sector. The behaviour of brick industry regarding the use of alternative materials can be summarised:

1. The industry already uses some well established alternative materials and is considering others 2. The market of brick focuses mainly on facing bricks, where aesthetic properties are very

important 3. A sustainability strategy exists that includes the use of alternative materials.

SID 5 (Rev. 3/06) of 21

4. Almost all companies have performed lab-scale trials with various waste materials 5. Few of these trials have progressed to commercial utilisation. 6. Companies are moving towards the use of alternative materials at different rates

Cement UK consumption of cement is 13.5 million tonnes per annum. The calcining reactions also emit some 500 kg CO2/tonne of clinker. The cement sector has a range of environmentally based targets and activities both internationally and in the UK. Currently nearly 5% mass of raw material feed is from alternative sources. Table 6 shows a summary of the barriers and benefits for certain waste streams potentially used in cement manufacture as additive to the kiln meal. Further examples are provided on blended cements and alternative fuels in the Cement sector review.

Table 6: Utilisation of waste in cement manufacture (as additive to the kiln meal) Recycled material

Ingredient Potential Benefits Potential Barriers Progress

APC residues Si+Al+Fe Reduced virgin materials Potential Gate fee Reduced landfill Reduced waste disposal costs

Important: low availability compositional variability heavy metals content

Not in use

Bottom ash Ca+Si+Al+Fe Reduced virgin materials Potential Gate fee Reduced landfill Reduced waste disposal costs

Important: heavy metals content

Trials

Fly ash (PFA) Ca+Si+Al+Fe Si+Al+Fe

Reduced virgin materials Potential Gate fee Reduced landfill Reduced waste disposal costs Improve company‟s

environmental profile Reduce emissions Large availability

Significant: geographical proximity Less Important: compositional variability not common practice to be used pre-kiln

In use

Foundry sand Si Potential Gate fee Reduced landfill Large availability Grinding avoided

Significant: low availability Less Important: particle size- reactivity

In use

Quarry fines Si+Al+Fe Reduced virgin materials Potential Gate fee Reduced landfill Reduced waste disposal costs Improve company‟s

environmental profile

Less Important: composition

Trials/ in use

Spent pot liners from aluminium manufacture

Si+Al Reduced virgin materials

N / A Not in use

White dross non metallic residues

Al +(Si) Reduced virgin materials Potential Gate fee Reduced landfill Reduced waste disposal costs Improve company‟s

environmental profile

Important: low availability geographical proximity Less Important: composition handling problems

Not in use

All cement industries own quarries therefore virgin material sources are readily available to them at relatively low cost and with guaranteed continuity of supply. The use of alternative materials needs to provide clear benefits to the sector, such as desirable properties, or a profit (i.e. through charging a gate fee) to be an attractive option. The substitution of part of limestone with some other calcium-rich (CaO) materials (i.e. pulverised fuel ash, paper ash) could lower CO2 emissions. To date only a few alternative materials find use in kiln‟s feed, but it is anticipated that higher utilisation of a number of the above wastes will be seen in the near future, in order the sector to achieve the 60% material substitution target set in their sustainability strategy.

SID 5 (Rev. 3/06) of 21

Manufactured Concrete This sector has been split into two for the purpose of this project. A) Pre-cast concrete elements and B) Aerated Autoclave concrete (AAC). Table 6a and 6 b show a summary of the barriers and benefits for certain waste streams potentially used in pre-cast concrete element and aerated autoclaved concrete manufacture respectively.

A) Pre-cast concrete elements

The Concrete Centre (the concrete sector body) is concerned with improving the sustainability of the sector and give details on their website. The main sectors of the industry that are currently accepting or actively seeking new alternative materials (other than the usual pfa, ggbs or their own production waste) are as follows:

a) Manufacturers of hard landscaping products (eg block paving, paving slabs)

b) Concrete block/masonry manufacturers

c) Concrete roof tile manufacturers

Table 6a and 6 b shows a summary of the barriers and benefits for certain waste streams potentially used in pre-cast concrete elements and Aerated autoclaved concrete manufacture respectively.

Table 6a: Utilisation of waste in pre-cast concrete elements Recycled material

Ingredient - product

Potential benefits Potential barriers Progress

Incinerated sewage sludge ash

Fine aggregate Walling block -

Raw material cost savings

Significant: mixing variability Important: public perception

Trials

Incinerator bottom ash

Fine / coarse aggregate Walling block -

Raw material cost savings Large tonnages, widely

available (potentially)

Significant: Uncertain durability Important: Public perception

Formerly used

Glass Fine / coarse aggregate Walling block -

Raw material cost savings Large tonnages, widely available (potentially)

More work required: Durability

Trials

Quarry waste Fine / coarse aggregate Walling block -

Large tonnages, widely available (potentially)

None In use

Copper Slag Decorative aggregate

Aesthetic appearance In use

Stent (China clay waste)

Decorative aggregate

Aesthetic appearance Large tonnages - regionally

In use

There is interest in the use of low carbon (alternative) cements, which may have a high content of industrial by-products such as ground granulated blast-furnace slag or pulverised fuel ash as a partial replacement for cement. The use of alternative materials can be summarised:

o Alternative aggregates actively are sought where there is a cost saving and/or it assists the company‟s environmental policy

o In landscaping products and tiles, there can be clear aesthetic benefits in alternative materials and more of a customer interest in eco-products, particularly in the home-improvement market.

The barriers to the use of alternative by-products forward are:

o Location of raw materials relative to production plant may make waste exchange uneconomic o Cost and consistent supply guarantees o Limited information on alternative materials to those used currently

Future developments in the sector are expected to include the greater use of alternative ashes and aggregates as further quality protocols are introduced. Recycling of waste from construction and

SID 5 (Rev. 3/06) of 21

refurbishment is likely to increase with the introduction of more take-back schemes. The drive for sustainable procurement (promoted by WRAP and others) is also a strong source of influence on producers of concrete products.

B) Autoclaved Aerated Concrete (AAC)

The AAC manufacturers are keen to achieve access to a wider source of raw materials, principally to

minimise costs associated with transport of these raw materials (e.g. pulverised fuel ash - itself a

traditionally utilised waste) from power stations and/or natural sand quarries (the latter also attracts the

aggregates levy). Manufacturers consider it unnecessary to risk using sources of by-product lime or

aluminium which offer limited gains as they are relatively minor components in the mix.

Table 6b: Utilisation of waste in aerated autoclaved concrete Recycled material

Function Potential benefits Potential barriers Progress

Run-of-station pfa

Fine aggregate / pozzolan

Widely available

Important: Transport

In use

Waste glass cullet

Fine aggregate Flexibility in sourcing aggregate Significant: Insufficiently fine May need grinding

Works Trials

Foundry sand Fine aggregate Flexibility in sourcing aggregate Significant: Potential odour

Works Trials

Assessment of suitable materials involves a step-by-step approach. Initial screening takes place by comparing the material against the raw materials envelope. Information on its chemical composition is considered and any gaps in the materials information are filled. Pilot scale trials are conducted with promising materials. The use of alternative materials can be summarised:

o Alternative aggregates are only sought where there is not a local source of pulverised fuel ash or sand

o There is no driver to use alternatives to pulverised fuel ash under other circumstances o The barriers to the use of alternative by-products forward are: o Cost and reliable supply of materials such as ground glass of sufficient fineness o Limited information on other alternative materials o Readily available, local and large supplies of primary sand and/or pulverised fuel ash.

Mineral Insulation Mineral wool (or stone wool) is a non-metallic, inorganic product manufactured using stone/rock (volcanic rock, typically basalt (or dolorite or gabbro) together with blast furnace or steel slags as the main components. In addition some „formstones‟ made from process waste are also added. These

materials are melted in a cupola furnace at approximately 1500C. Table 7 provides a summary of some of the materials trialled.

Table 7: Summary of waste materials trialled in mineral wool insulation Recycled material Progress Ingredient Comment

Post-consumer mineral wool and ceiling tile waste

Routinely used

Si + Al + Ti + Fe + Ca + Mg + Na + K

Take-back schemes are available. Amounts expected to increase as construction site management plans become compulsory.

Recycled mineral wool from demolition

Not in use Si + Al + Ti + Fe + Ca + Mg + Na + K

Collection facilities do not exist. Concerns about contaminants and segregation on construction sites

Old blast furnace slag Trials Si + Al + Ca + Mg Trialled but chemistry inappropriate

Steel/converter slag Trials Fe + Ca + Mg + Si Trialled but chemistry inappropriate

Olive pulp pellets Trials C - fuel Trialled but chemistry inappropriate

Spent pot linings from aluminium smelting

Trials C - fuel Successful trial. Increased fluoride emissions Nevertheless, still economically viable. Material does not contribute chemically to the final product

Steel slag fines Not in use Fe + Ca + Mg + Si Particle size inappropriate

Other steel-works wastes (e.g. electric arc furnace dust)

Not in use Various Particle size inappropriate

The demand for insulation materials is expected to grow significantly. With its good environmental credentials, mineral wool insulation is expected to play a key role in meeting this demand. The mineral

SID 5 (Rev. 3/06) of 21

wool industry is already well placed and already accepts alternative raw materials. A breakthrough in processing to allow the incorporation of rock and flux with relatively small particle size would open up possibilities for a whole range of alternative raw materials derived from minerals extraction and metals smelting. Manufactured Aggregates For both thermally produced aggregates and those chemically bound (also called cold bonded). The bulk chemistry (SiO2, Al2O3, FeO/Fe2O3, CaO); the mineralogy (especially the clay minerals and the rock forming Al/Ca/Mg Silicates); and the particle size distribution (PSD) are all important factors in assessing a suitable alternative mineral material. Use of manufactured aggregate is currently less than a million tonnes per annum. This is both produced nationally and imported from continental Europe. Manufactured aggregates are more commonly used in continental Europe. The aggregate imparts more thermally efficient properties into products in which it is incorporated. Being lightweight it also means construction can be more material resource efficient. It can be made entirely from waste / by-product material. Table 8 shows the benefits and barriers of using certain wastes in making thermally produced manufactured aggregates. The Manufactured Aggregate sector review also includes information on chemically bonded manufactured aggregates.

Table 8: Barriers and benefits of using wastes in making thermally produced manufactured aggregates Recycled material Function Potential Benefits Potential Barriers Progress

Pulverised fuel ash Body material additional fuel

Reduced use virgin materials Reduced fossil fuel CO2 Large volumes

Less important: Compositional variability Geographic proximity

Commercial

Quarry fines Body material Reduced use virgin materials Environmental profile Large volumes

Less important: Compositional variability Geographic proximity Particle size distribution

Research / pilot

Incinerator bottom ash

Body material Bloating agent

Reduced use virgin materials Gate fee Reduced temperature Lightweight material

Important: Compositional variability Geographic proximity Excessive processing Heavy metals Particle size distribution

Research

Fullers Earth (spent)

Body material additional fuel

Reduced use virgin materials Gate fee Reduced fossil fuel CO2 Lightweight material

- Commercial

Dredgings (river / harbour / canal)

Body material Reduced use virgin materials Gate fee Reduced temperature Lightweight material Reduced fossil fuel

Important: Compositional variability Geographic proximity Heavy metals (possible) Handling /processing problems

Commercially used

Glass (post consumer / industry)

Flux / coating Reduced use virgin materials Environmental profile Reduced fossil fuel CO2 Lightweight material

Less Important: Excessive processing Particle size distribution

Research / pilot

Excavated Clay Body material Reduced use virgin materials Large volumes

Less important: Compositional variability Geographic proximity

Pilot

Material related benefits are seen from the reduced use of virgin materials, and from reduced processing. Importantly, there are also potential benefits from a continuous supply and those materials that show some desirable function in the production of manufactured aggregates, specifically the ability to induce bloating. Environmental benefits are seen from diverting waste from disposal and in some cases, such as the inclusion of a fluxing material, a slight reduction in fuel and CO2 emissions. Finally the use of alternative materials assists the sector to improve its environmental profile and to move towards the production of greener products. Barriers include the low availability of adequate quantities of resources, the compositional variability, or adverse minor elements in the composition of waste derived materials (i.e. heavy metals), as well as the lack of geographical proximity of a desirable source.

SID 5 (Rev. 3/06) of 21

Case studies Further detail on the type of characterisation required in utilising waste (and providing the deliverables for Objective 4) was provided by 15 case studies mainly drawn from the 5 industrial sectors covered by the Industrial sector studies. Each of the case studies provides more specific detail on the type of information required from product manufacturers. It is not possible to generalise. The case studies were chosen as they provide examples of laboratory and pilot scale trials that were successful or that show potential if some of the various barriers discussed above can be overcome. One of the key aspects is that it is necessary to take an end product focus - whether utilising waste or not the end product has to meet some kind of recognised standard as well as meet aesthetic criteria of the market place. Overview of Results Alternative raw materials are considered for use by manufactures as a potential cost effective solution to access materials with desirable compounds / properties. Such materials are normally priced cheaper than raw materials and for certain streams there may be a direct financial benefit by charging producers a gate fee. This project highlights these properties and indicates where they may be provided by a waste or other by-product. One of the very clear outcomes from this project is the paramount importance of providing a bridge between suppliers and users of waste and a common understanding of criterion to be met. Simplifying this to statements such as the “brick Industry could achieve a 25% raw materials substitution rate” fails to recognise the huge variation in financial, environmental and technical performance associated with the precise waste and function that waste provides to the brick manufacturer. The greatest returns for the stakeholders are gained by becoming intelligent players in this market. It is the database that facilitates such understanding. Thus, in terms of making recommendations as to where greatest returns are – whilst these are identified generically in the 5 industrial sector reviews, results from the specific case studies illustrate those benefits and barriers are case specific. The presence of two new web based free access tools provides both „waste‟ producers and those wishing to utilise such materials the means to engage and identify the potential for themselves. Table 4, above, provides some indication of the levels of substitution possible in the „best‟ recycling rate percentages. However the ability for this „potential‟ to be realised is dependant on a number of factors. Often these factors are associated with geographical proximity. Many of the materials used are of relatively low value and are also dense and as such transport costs are significant. It is for this reason that brick works and cement kilns are sited next to the geological resources they require. The ability to visualise the possible links using the MINRES GIS tool provides the potential for companies to assess the potential of a variety of wastes in an area. This project provides an integrated strategic approach on the utilisation of waste amongst a number of different sectors. An example is provided by the brick manufacturing industry (see ceramic sector review). The brick manufacturing sector currently uses specific alternative materials such as colliery spoil, pulverised fuel ash and town ash. The sector took the decision to use these alternative materials after several steps of experimentation and considerations of parameters such as the geographical proximity. All of these „traditional alternative materials‟ do not represent a one-off exchange. Their utilisation is built upon a strategic approach that includes characterisation as a key aspect. These same materials can also be utilised in a number of other products and the information required by those wishing to use them will have some similarities but the final decision to use them will be based on a variety of factors that are based on commercial decisions about the final product. 7. Discussion & Reliability of Results Significance of barriers provided in this report and also in the WPP database and the 5 sector reviews is somewhat subjective. However it is based on contact with industry and / or experience of research in this area. The nature of the information and data captured is dependent on the source. This will show some generic attributes, however the project shows that variability of the characteristics that make a waste-

SID 5 (Rev. 3/06) of 21

product exchange successful varies case by case. The web tool produced by the project provides a mechanism that will enable a significant body of knowledge to be built up to inform future decisions and opportunities. 8. Main Implications The constraints seen for moving towards the use of waste are summarised below:

The compositional variability of waste is a critical issue as it affects the consistency of the end product.

Several testing trials must take place prior to use and rigorous monitoring must be established to allow the continuity of the production process.

Often primary materials are cheap to use. Alternative materials will be considered only if they contribute desirable aesthetic properties at minimal cost to the industry.

A waste management licence may be required for some of the waste materials.

Local and regional variation in natural materials (such as clays, shales and carbonates) used in product manufacture mean that potential utilisation of wastes will also vary.

Companies may be required to invest in new facilities (i.e. storage) or alterations in the manufacturing process in order to allow the use of alternative materials.

The significance of non-material related barriers for “new” waste streams are difficult to estimate.

Sustainability strategies have energy efficiency issues higher on their agenda than the use of alternative materials.

Disposal costs for inert waste are low compared to other waste types which may discourage recycling by making even simple processing too expensive.

Waste Protocols The Review for sustainable construction published in 2006 (DTI) sets future targets and visions with an expected to reduction in the utilisation of primary materials by 50% and 90% by 2015 and 2025 respectively. This favourable policy environment is very recent for mineral based waste streams. In addition the European Commission Communication (CEC 2007) entitled “Interpretive communication on waste and by-products” provides criteria and practical examples for a production residue to be classified as a by-product. By-products may be produced during the manufacturing process and have a fit-for–purpose end market, without this being the initial objective of the industry. Once established as by-products, they will not be subject to waste legislation in subsequent storage, transport, handling and processing operations. This change in emphasis (note, the legal definition of waste has not changed) has already stimulated the UK regulatory authorities to initiate the waste protocol project (EA 2006). In this rapidly changing legal and economic landscape, the precise status for a given waste type or potential waste user is governed by these general trends as well as specific technical and local circumstances. Hence, in constructing the database and undertaking the waste-product pairing reviews, it has been important to capture this general information on relevant drivers and constraints as they affect specific waste types and/or product sectors. This information enables the user (waste supplier/waste user) to quickly understand the general climate regarding waste exchange before investing in the more detailed research and costly steps of making the potential opportunity a reality. Since the inception of the project, there has been a significant shift in emphasis towards actively supporting the process of developing more resource friendly rules for determining “end-of waste” criteria. There is now a clear method to follow in the UK for establishing when a waste can be considered a secondary material and be released from the burdens associated with waste status - Waste Protocols. The approach in this project has been to provide information that would be relevant to such a process – it has not been the aim to propose such specifications as this must be undertaken in the correct manner, i.e. the waste protocols project. Two elements to obtain non-waste or by-product status are relevant:

SID 5 (Rev. 3/06) of 21

3. The quality protocol - the over-riding guidance and clear assessment, monitoring, reporting criteria, and conditions of production and use for the specific waste type to be considered a by-product.

4. A specification document, usually a Public Available Specification (PAS) published by the British Standards Institute (BSI), details the characteristics (and possibly source) such material must exhibit to be accepted for the identified end-use(s).

Table 9 suggests where the outcomes from this project may help feed into developing both Waste Protocols and Publically Available Specifications.

Table 9: Waste materials selected for consideration under the Quality Protocol Project and selected products. Waste undergoing Protocol Products

Pulverised Fuel Ash (year 1) Cement, Brick, Manufactured Aggregates, Aerated concrete.

Blast furnace slag (year 1) Cement

Contaminated soils (year 1)

Boiler ash from combustion of paper sludge (year 2) Cement

Steel slag (year 2) Cement, Concrete blocks

Incinerator bottom ash (year 2) Cement, manufactured aggregates, Concrete blocks, bricks

Gypsum from waste plasterboard (year 2) Cement

9. Future Work There will be many trials that need to be undertaken before wastes are further utilised. The WPP database and the MINRES GIS provide tools to help these occur in a coordinated fashion. There is a need to continue to provide dissemination material regarding the presence of the MinRes database and the GIS websites to ensure they are known about and utilised. Performance data on construction products with mineral waste recycled content showing it is as good as or no worse than primary need to be collated this maybe a role for WRAP 10. Actions Resulting from Research The provision of a web-based database is beyond the initial aims of the research and as such provides the potential for ongoing work and information (including characterisation and case study information) to be collated and where necessary analysed. Obviously this is beyond the scope of this project; however the partners have a commitment to undertake periodic reviews (every 6 months). In addition there has been interest from the Sustainable Development Group of the Institute of Materials Minerals and Mining who think the project and the web tools could be used beyond the scope of this project. Tentative actions are being carried out to explore this option.

References to published material

9. This section should be used to record links (hypertext links where possible) or references to other published material generated by, or relating to this project.

SID 5 (Rev. 3/06) of 21

1. Manning D., Exploitation and use of quarry fines, MIST project reference MA/2/4/2003 2. ODPM (2001). Survey of arisings and use of secondary minerals as aggregates in England and Wales, ODPM, London 3. Barritt J C (2003) Overcoming barriers to recycling. Liverpool, John Moores University 2nd Int Conf Pavement Engineering and asphalt technology, Feb 2003 15pp

4. Reid J.M. (2003) A Strategy for construction and demolition and excavation waste as a recycled aggregate, DTI/WRAP Aggregates Research Programme, WRAP, Banbury 5.

Moulinier F., Harrex R. M. and Dunster A., (To be published), The use of small volume wastes in

construction, BRE Information paper, BRE Bookshop, Garston 6. VIRIDIS (2003 The Construction Industry Mass Balance: resource use, wastes and emissions, Vridis Report VR4(Revised). 7. Sustainable Buildings Task Group (2004), Better Buildings - Better Lives: the Sustainable Buildings Task Group Report, London 8. For example, the Landfill Tax, the Landfill Regulations 2002, WRAP‟s targets for aggregates 9.

Proposed EU Directive on the management of waste from extractive industries.

10. Petavratzi, E 2008 - Sustainable Provision of Aggregates: Sustainable Utilisation of Quarry By-products - Defra/MIRO - available from www.sustainableaggregates.org from March 2008. 11. see for example the WASCON series of publications. For example: Woolley et.al. (eds.) 2000 WASCON 2000 - Waste Materials in Construction - Proceedings of the Int. Conf. on The Science and Engineering of Recycling fro Environmental Protection. Pergamon, and Urbina & Goumans (eds.) 2003 Wascon 2003 Progress on the Road to Sustainability - 5

th Int. Conf. on Environmental and Technical

Implications of Construction with Alternative Materials. ISCOWA. Also see www.iscowa.org 12. WRAP 2004, Market share of recycled construction in construction procurement.

http://www.dti.gov.uk/construction/sustain/EA_Sustainable_Report_41564_2.pdf

http://www.dti.gov.uk/construction/sustain/EA_Sustainable_Report_41564_2.pdf

http://www.sustainableaggregates.org/

http://www.iscowa.org/

SID 5 Research Project Final Report -...

Documents

Transcript of SID 5 Research Project Final Report -...