DOCSLIB.ORG

Systems for Reuse, Repurposing and Upcycling of Existing Building Components

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Systems for Reuse, Repurposing and Upcycling of Existing Building Components Systems for Reuse, Repurposing and Upcycling of Existing Building Components Colin Rose Thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of the Doctorate of Engineering at University College London Faculty of Engineering Department of Civil, Environmental & Geomatic Engineering Centre for Urban Sustainability and Resilience April 2019 1 2 Declaration I, Colin Rose, confirm that the work presented in this thesis is my own. Where information has been derived from other sources, I confirm that this has been indicated in the thesis. 3 4 Abstract The construction industry uses natural resources intensively, and causes significant carbon emissions in processing resources to supply useful materials and components. Demolition generates considerable physical waste, accompanied by wastage of the impacts embodied in existing building components. This project explores the failure to capitalise on these embodied impacts, and adopts a mixed methods approach to develop interventions and identify potential mechanisms for change. The main contributions of the thesis are: Firstly, an exploration of the notion of ‘component management’. This challenges the assumption that components removed from the building stock must either be: a) directly reused, which can often be impractical, and is rarely given due attention, or b) sent to waste management, which wastes embodied impacts. Instead, the role and implementation of repurposing and upcycling are described, alongside a procedure for comprehensively checking the practicality of direct reuse; Secondly, the development of an urban-level ‘triage’: a process to separate out components for reuse, repurposing and upcycling, from those for which downcycling or energy recovery are the best option. Key to the triage is an information system; the thesis reviews current means of understanding existing buildings as material banks and presents a new approach to gathering this information; Thirdly, a proposal for an innovative manufacturing enterprise using secondary timber in a new product: cross-laminated secondary timber. This provides an exemplar case study of the potential for industrial-scale upcycling. A proof of concept study is presented, with a preliminary examination of technical feasibility and leading the way for additional investigation of socio- economic and environmental sustainability, and, ideally, future pilot- and commercial-scale implementation. The implications of this product case study are synthesised with the other parts of the thesis in a discussion of areas for future research, policy and practical action to evolve a more nuanced and sustainable management of existing building components. 5 Impact statement The impacts of the research range from immediate benefits in the local context of the project, through, for instance, facilitating the exchange of materials discarded from construction sites to new businesses and community projects in the London Borough of Tower Hamlets, to incremental take-up of ideas that could have an impact on an international level. Investigations into the urban-level management of existing building components have led to policy recommendations that could be adopted by cities in many contexts. These have been disseminated through articles published in international peer-reviewed journals and at conferences and academic workshops around Europe. Co-authors of journal papers and conference contributions have included academics, members of the industrial sponsor organisations and a practising engineer. Collaboration with another practising engineer led to the dissemination of a product innovation, cross-laminated secondary timber (CLST), through public engagement at the Victoria & Albert Museum in London. The collaborative approach taken in the project has involved supervision of six Master’s students’ dissertations relating to CLST. A further Master’s student produced a video based on this project’s initial findings, and intended to raise awareness of construction waste, which has been viewed more than 5,500 times on YouTube. Development of the concept of CLST has included a commercial pilot project that was carried out collaboratively with an architectural firm, a timber reclamation contractor, a reclaimed timber stockist and a new reuse enterprise. The physical outcomes of the pilot are in use in a co- working space. The non-physical outcomes include forming new connections in a reuse network, generating work for local carpenters and generating workshop rental income for the reuse enterprise. Publications arising from the research have sought to open new avenues for further thought by other researchers and identify specific areas of further research. The presentation of the idea of CLST has attempted to draw attention to a hitherto unexamined use of secondary timber and indicate the steps that will need to be taken to move the concept towards full-size pilot production and commercial implementation. Timber is a ubiquitous building material and, with incremental progress towards proving feasibility, plants producing CLST could come to serve regions in many parts of the world. In the long-term, this could lead to great environmental benefits (savings in embodied carbon emissions; avoidance of waste disposal), social benefits (employment in reclamation and manufacturing close to urban areas) and economic benefits (extracting greater value from discarded materials). Given that the Doctorate of Engineering is intended to be applied in an industrial context and to have impact both within and outside of academia, more detail of the impacts of the project are provided in the main body of the thesis. 6 Acknowledgements I would like to thank my academic supervisor, Professor Julia Stegemann, for recognising in my original research proposal a topic worthy of investigation; for great conversations; and for backing me all the way. Many people have offered support in this project, and I am very grateful to them all. Of my colleagues at the Centre for Urban Sustainability and Resilience, I would like to thank Kell Jones for being a brilliant sounding board, and Victoria Maynard, Alejandro Romero, Loretta Tann and Dr Ine Steenmans for your help, enthusiasm and input. The UK Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council funded this research, with co- funding from Poplar HARCA and Tower Hamlets Homes. Many thanks to my industrial supervisors: Chris Johnson and Nick Martin at Poplar HARCA, and Nick Gopaul and Will Manning at Tower Hamlets Homes. Thanks to Paul Augarde at Poplar HARCA and Jamie Carswell at Tower Hamlets Homes for helping to instigate the project. Thanks to the Development and Regeneration Team and the Accents Team at Poplar HARCA and all of the many people who gave their time or became embroiled as case study participants. Thanks to Dr Philippe Duffour and Dan Bergsagel for offering your expertise. I am grateful to my parents, Malcolm and Barbara Rose, for helping me to become the kind of person who undertakes a project like this; and for all the love and support. Thanks to Joyce Daly for providing me with a desk and an ideal working environment, when London became too much. And finally, thanks to Jessica Daly for sticking with me through this whole process – I know it’s been difficult. Thanks for believing in me, doing so much to make our lives work, and being my best friend and number one fan. 7 Table of contents Abstract 5 Impact statement 6 Acknowledgements 7 List of tables 11 List of figures 13 List of abbreviations 16 Preface 17 1 INTRODUCTION 18 1.1 The problem with the construction industry’s use of materials 18 1.1.1 The construction industry and the fundamental processes of construction 18 1.1.2 Global impacts of flows of construction materials 18 1.1.3 Risks and resilience in the construction industry connected to its resource use 21 1.2 Responses to the stated problem 21 1.2.1 Areas of focus to address construction industry impacts 21 1.2.2 Design of new additions to building stocks 22 1.2.3 Management of existing building stocks 26 1.2.4 Management of building components removed from stock 28 1.3 Project aim and objectives 30 1.3.1 Longtermgoalandprojectaim 30 1.3.2 Research scope, objectives and thesis structure 31 1.3.3 Publications arising from this research 33 2 ACADEMIC BACKGROUND 36 2.1 Introduction to literature review 36 2.2 Quantifying C&D waste generation 36 2.2.1 Distinguishing construction waste and demolition waste 36 2.2.2 C&D waste generation and material recovery in grey literature 37 2.2.3 C&D waste generation and projections in academic literature 38 2.3 Order of preference for C&D waste management options 38 2.3.1 The waste hierarchy 38 2.3.2 The definition of waste 40 2.3.3 The definitions and benefits of prevention and reuse 40 2.3.4 Problems with recycling and downcycling 42 2.4 Increasing reuse: barriers and strategies to overcome them 43 2.4.1 Review of barriers reported in the literature 43 2.4.2 Systemic nature of the problem 50 2.4.3 Industry-focused strategies to address reported barriers 51 2.4.4 Reused material marketplaces 55 8 2.4.5 Macroeconomic, policy and regulatory interventions 56 2.5 Repurposing, upcycling, and the assessment of waste management options 59 2.5.1 The need for repurposing and upcycling 59 2.5.2 Life cycle assessment for waste management decisions 60 2.5.3 ‘Impact reduction potential’ applied to C&D waste management decisions 61 2.6 Summary and gaps in understanding 64 3 METHODOLOGY 66 3.1 Overview of research design 66 3.2 Research paradigm 67 3.2.1 Background to research philosophies
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Extended Producer Responsibility and the Role of Social Economy Re-Use Operators: Implementing a Socially Inclusive Waste Hierarchy
    27 August 2020 Extended Producer Responsibility and the role of social economy re-use operators: Implementing a socially inclusive waste hierarchy Introduction Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) is a tool placing responsibility on producers, importers and retailers to financially and/or physically manage the post-consumer phase of certain goods. EPR aims to prevent the unnecessary production of waste, manufacture better designed goods and participate in the achievement of waste collection, prevention, preparing for re-use and recycling targets. Various EPR models have developed organically across European countries, including France which covers the largest amount of waste streams (including textiles, furniture, and leisure equipment among others). In this context, distortion of the internal market may occur. This is why EU wide minimum requirements for EPR have been included within the updated Waste Framework Directive (WFD) published in 20181. In addition to waste streams such as WEEE where EPR is mandatory at EU level and high re-use potential exists, the new Circular Economy Action Plan (CEAP) also indicates that EPR for textiles should be considered at EU level2. However, according to the experience of RREUSE members, practical implementation of EPR often conflicts with the waste hierarchy3, prioritising recycling over re-use. Unfortunately, this usually limits the role that re-use operators, notably those from the social economy, play in implementing EPR. To counter this trend, this paper provides a number of practical suggestions as to how EPR, for example, if applied to household goods such as furniture, textiles and electronics, can better support re-use and waste prevention notably through targets, access to re-useable goods and encouraging better product design.
    [Show full text]
  • Reduce Reuse Recycle Remanufacture
    STEEL - THE PERMANENT MATERIAL IN THE CIRCULAR ECONOMY AR ECONOMY BEN CUL EFI CIR TS E R R C E a U U w n D S m io E E a t t c R e u r i d a e l r s s c n o o n i s s s e i r v m a e t i 2 o O n C E n o E R i f t f U a ic R v o ie T n E n c C In y C Y FA C U LE N MA RE ts Jo duc bs pro Durable 1 CONTENTS Steel in the circular economy 3 Steel is essential to our modern world 5 Reduce 7 Decreasing the amount of material, energy and other resources used to create steel and reducing the weight of steel used in products. Use and reuse 11 Reuse is using an object or material again, either for its original purpose or for a similar purpose, without significantly altering the physical form of the object or material. Remanufacture 15 The process of restoring durable used steel products to as-new condition. Recycle 19 Melting steel products at the end of their useful life to create new steels. Recycling alters the physical form of the steel object so that a new application can be created from the recycled material. End notes 22 2 STEEL IN THE CIRCULAR ECONOMY A sustainable circular economy is one in which steel is fundamental to the circular economy. society reduces the burden on nature by ensuring The industry is continuing to expand its offer resources remain in use for as long as possible.
    [Show full text]
  • Rethinking the Waste Hierachy
    R ethinking the Waste H i erarchy Environmental ASSESSMENT INSTITUTE MARCH 2005 INSTITUT FOR MILJ0VURDERING E nvironmental Assessment Institute Reference no.: 2002-2204-007 ISBN.: 87-7992-032-2 Editors: Clemen Rasmussen and Dorte Vigs0 Written by: Clemen Rasmussen (project manager), Dorte Vigs0, Frank Ackerman, Richard Porter, David Pearce, Elbert Dijkgraaf and Herman Vollebergh. Published: March 2005 Version: 1.1 ©2005, Environmental Assessment Institute For further information please contact: Environmental Assessment Institute Linnesgade 18 DK -1361 Copenhagen Phone: +45 7226 5800 Fax: +45 7226 5839 E-mail: [email protected] Web: www.imv.dk E nvironmental Assessment Institute Rethinking the Waste Hierarchy March 2005 Recommendations A number of specific recommendations for achieving cost-effective waste policies can be made based on both the US experience presented by Ackerman and Porter and on the analysis of European waste management presented by Pearce and Dijkgraaf & Vollebergh. The results of this project relate to both the target setting and the regulatory implementation of waste policy in the EU. The main recommendations for future waste policies in the EU and Member States are: ■ The waste hierarchy must be considered a very general and flexible guideline for formulating waste policies. What is environmentally desirable is not always a preferred solution, when considered from a socio economic perspective. The reason is that some environmental benefits may come at a comparably so­ cially high cost. The marginal costs and benefits will vary depending on mate­ rial and locality. It is recommended that social costs and benefits of new recy­ cling schemes should be analysed and that a critical assessment be made on to determine if further steps are in fact socially desirable.
    [Show full text]
  • Municipal Waste Compliance Promotion Exercise 2014-5
    Municipal Waste Compliance Promotion Exercise 2014-5 Executive Summary mmmll Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers to your questions about the European Union. Freephone number (*): 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 (*) The information given is free, as are most calls (though some operators, phone boxes or hotels may charge you). LEGAL NOTICE This document has been prepared for the European Commission however it reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein. More information on the European Union is available on the Internet (http://www.europa.eu). Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2016 ISBN 978-92-79-60069-2 doi:10.2779/609002 © European Union, 2016 Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged. Municipal Waste Compliance Promotion Exercise 2014-5 Table of Contents Table of Contents ............................................................................................. 2 Abstract .......................................................................................................... 3 Executive Summary.......................................................................................... 4 Background .................................................................................................. 4 Introduction to the project .............................................................................. 4 Method .......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Waste Technologies: Waste to Energy Facilities
    WASTE TECHNOLOGIES: WASTE TO ENERGY FACILITIES A Report for the Strategic Waste Infrastructure Planning (SWIP) Working Group Complied by WSP Environmental Ltd for the Government of Western Australia, Department of Environment and Conservation May 2013 Quality Management Issue/revision Issue 1 Revision 1 Revision 2 Revision 3 Remarks Date May 2013 Prepared by Kevin Whiting, Steven Wood and Mick Fanning Signature Checked by Matthew Venn Signature Authorised by Kevin Whiting Signature Project number 00038022 Report number File reference Project number: 00038022 Dated: May 2013 2 Revised: Waste Technologies: Waste to Energy Facilities A Report for the Strategic Waste Infrastructure Planning (SWIP) Working Group, commissioned by the Government of Western Australia, Department of Environment and Conservation. May 2013 Client Waste Management Branch Department of Environment and Conservation Level 4 The Atrium, 168 St George’s Terrace, PERTH, WA 6000 Locked Bag 104 Bentley DC WA 6983 Consultants Kevin Whiting Head of Energy-from-Waste & Biomass Tel: +44 207 7314 4647 [email protected] Mick Fanning Associate Consultant Tel: +44 207 7314 5883 [email protected] Steven Wood Principal Consultant Tel: +44 121 3524768 [email protected] Registered Address WSP Environmental Limited 01152332 WSP House, 70 Chancery Lane, London, WC2A 1AF 3 Table of Contents 1 Introduction .................................................................................. 6 1.1 Objectives ................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Five Principles of Waste Product Redesign Under the Upcycling Concept
    International Forum on Energy, Environment Science and Materials (IFEESM 2015) Five Principles of Waste Product Redesign under the Upcycling Concept Jiang XU1 & Ping GU1 1School of Design, Jiangnan University, Wuxi, China KEYWORD: Upcycling; Redesign principle; Green design; Industrial design; Product design ABSTRACT: It explores and constructs the principles of waste product redesign which are based on the concept of upcycling. It clarifies the basic concept of upcycling, briefly describes its current development, deeply discusses its value and significance, combines with the idea of upcycling which behinds regeneration design principle from the concept of “4R” of green design, and takes real-life case as example to analyze the principles of waste product redesign. It puts forward five principles of waste product redesign: value enhancement, make the most use of waste, durable and environmental protection, cost control and populace's aesthetic. INTRODUCTION Recently, environmental problems was becoming worse and worse, while as a developing country, China is facing dual pressures that economical development and environmental protection. However, large numbers of goods become waste every day all over the world, but the traditional recycling ways, such as melting down and restructuring, not only produce much CO2, but also those restruc- tured parts or products cannot mention in the same breath with raw ones. As a result, the western countries started to center their attention to the concept of “upcycling” of green design, which can transfer the old and waste things into more valuable products to vigorously develop the green econ- omy. Nevertheless, this new concept hasn’t been well known and the old notion of traditionally inef- ficient reuse still predominant in China, so it should be beneficial for our social development to con- struct the principles of waste products’ redesign which are based on the concept of upcycling.
    [Show full text]
  • Higher-Quality Electric-Arc Furnace Steel
    ACADEMIC PULSE Higher-Quality Electric-Arc Furnace Steel teelmakers have traditionally viewed Research Continues to Improve the electric arc furnaces (EAFs) as unsuitable Quality of Steel for producing steel with the highest- Even with continued improvements to the Squality surface finish because the process design of steelmaking processes, the steelmaking uses recycled steel instead of fresh iron. With over research community has focused their attention 100 years of processing improvements, however, on the fundamental materials used in steelmaking EAFs have become an efficient and reliable in order to improve the quality of steel. In my lab steelmaking alternative to integrated steelmaking. In at Carnegie Mellon University, we have several fact, steel produced in a modern-day EAF is often research projects that deal with controlling the DR. P. BILLCHRIS MAYER PISTORIUS indistinguishable from what is produced with the impurity concentration and chemical quality of POSCOManaging Professor Editorof Materials integrated blast-furnace/oxygen-steelmaking route. steel produced in EAFs. Science412-306-4350 and Engineering [email protected] Mellon University Improvements in design, coupled with research For example, we recently used mathematical developments in metallurgy, mean high-quality steel modeling to explore ways to control produced quickly and energy-efficiently. phosphorus. Careful regulation of temperature, slag and stirring are needed to produce low- Not Your (Great-) Grandparent’s EAF phosphorus steel. We analyzed data from Especially since the mid-1990s, there have been operating furnaces and found that, in many significant improvements in the design of EAFs, cases, the phosphorus removal reaction could which allow for better-functioning burners and a proceed further.
    [Show full text]
  • Redesign. Rethink. Reduce. Reuse. Go Beyond Recycling
    REDESIGN. RETHINK. REDUCE. REUSE. GO BEYOND RECYCLING. WHAT IS ZERO WASTE? the entire lifecycle of products used within a facility. With TRUE, your facility can demonstrate to the world what you’re doing to minimize Zero waste is a philosophy that encourages the redesign of resource your waste output. life cycles so that all products are reused; a process that is very similar to the way that resources are reused in nature. Although recycling is HOW DOES CERTIFICATION WORK? the first step in the journey, achieving zero waste goes far beyond. By focusing on the larger picture, facilities and organizations can reap The TRUE Zero Waste certification program is an Assessor-based financial benefits while becoming more resource efficient. program that rates how well facilities perform in minimizing their non-hazardous, solid wastes and maximizing their efficient in the use According to the EPA, the average American generates 4.4 pounds of of resources. A TRUE project’s goal is to divert 90 percent or greater trash each day, and according to the World Bank, global solid waste overall diversion from the landfill, incineration (waste-to-energy) and generation is on pace to increase 70 percent by 2025. For every can of the environment for solid, non-hazardous wastes for the most recent garbage at the curb, for instance, there are 87 cans worth of materials 12 months. that come from extraction industries that manufacture natural resources into finished products—like timber, agricultural, mining and Certification is available for any physical facility and their operations, petroleum. This means that while recycling is important, it doesn’t including facilities owned by: companies, property managers, address the real problem.
    [Show full text]
  • Reduce, Reuse and Recycle (The 3Rs) and Resource Efficiency As the Basis for Sustainable Waste Management
    CSD-19 Learning Centre “Synergizing Resource Efficiency with Informal Sector towards Sustainable Waste Management” 9 May 2011, New York Co-organized by: UNCRD and UN HABITAT Reduce, Reuse and Recycle (the 3Rs) and Resource Efficiency as the basis for Sustainable Waste Management C. R. C. Mohanty UNCRD 3Rs offer an environmentally friendly alternatives to deal with growing generation of wastes and its related impact on human health, eco nomy and natural ecosystem Natural Resources First : Reduction Input Reduce waste, by-products, etc. Production (Manufacturing, Distribution, etc.) Second : Reuse Third : Material Recycling Use items repeatedly. Recycle items which cannot be reused as raw materials. Consumption Fourth : Thermal Recycling Recover heat from items which have no alternatives but incineration and which cannot Discarding be recycled materially. Treatment (Recycling, Incineration, etc.) Fifth : Proper Disposal Dispose of items which cannot be used by any means. (Source: Adapted from MoE-Japan) Landfill disposal Stages in Product Life Cycle • Extraction of natural resources • Processing of resources • Design of products and selection of inputs • Production of goods and services • Distribution • Consumption • Reuse of wastes from production or consumption • Recycling of wastes from consumption or production • Disposal of residual wastes Source: ADB, IGES, 2008 Resource efficiency refers to amount of resource (materials, energy, and water) consumed in producing a unit of product or services. It involves using smaller amount of physical
    [Show full text]
  • Industrial Waste Exchange by Ashley Sapyta, Mike Marcus, and Jonathan Locklair
    Industrial Waste Exchange by Ashley Sapyta, Mike Marcus, and Jonathan Locklair TE S GE A AN WCH EX E AST W ANGE EXCH Industrial Waste Exchange Help in Getting to Sustainable Operations This primer helps companies find the right industrial waste exchange in order to achieve corporate sustainability goals. em • The Magazine for Environmental Managers • A&WMA • March 2017 Industrial Waste Exchange by Ashley Sapyta, Mike Marcus, and Jonathan Locklair The drive to achieve corporate sustainability goals can leave offering to match waste producers with material purchasers. an industrial facility searching for alternatives to disposal of Wastes with easily-monetized intrinsic values began to be wastes from their production process. Ideally, manufacturing segregated into a recycling market. processes could be adjusted to eliminate the waste stream. However, when not possible to reduce, the next greenest waste The Internet brought major changes to the waste exchange alternative is reuse (see Figure 1). For more than four decades, market. As the waste exchanges moved from paper catalogs industrial waste exchanges have provided a mechanism for to online databases, wastes were exchanged more efficiently. connecting facilities that generate waste with other companies There was an initial increase of waste exchanges in the local that can beneficially use that material (the industrial application markets. Because recycling consumes energy and raw materials of the old saw… one person’s trash is another’s treasure). and produces waste residues itself, recycling is typically not During these 40-plus years, waste exchanges have changed as green as reuse but is often more profitable. The Internet in size and in service and utilized the latest technologies to facilitated the strengthening of the recycling network to the stay applicable to current market needs.
    [Show full text]
  • 5 Steps to Responsible E-Waste Management at Your School
    By Caprice Lawless Steps to Responsible E-waste 5 Management at Your School aste management infra­ Step 1. Educate yourself about local, national, and international legislation. structure is expanding While recycling standards and certifications are still in the developmental stag­ Was we wrestle with how es, many cities and states are leading the way with ambitious and comprehen­ best to gather, sort, and recycle the sive programs addressing the situation. California’s landmark Electronic Waste 50 million tons of e-waste we are Recycling Act of 2003, for example, requires retailers to collect a fee from con­ generating annually worldwide. sumers on covered electronic devices. The fees are then submitted to the state Awareness and education are the to pay for recycling efforts. first steps, followed by programs In February 2008, New York City became the first U.S. city to pass a manda­ and industries to address the issue. tory producer-responsibility ordinance. The law requires computer, TV, and Schools, districts, and colleges of MP3 manufacturers to take responsibility for the collection of their own elec­ education contribute their share of tronic products for New Yorkers who discard 25,000 tons of e-waste each year. e-waste and need to be concerned In January 2008, New Jersey joined California, Connecticut, Maine, Minnesota, with its disposal, but they can also North Carolina, Oregon, Texas, and Washington, in passing “take-back” laws put into place their own refurbish­ requiring manufacturers to collect and recycle e-waste. It is already illegal to ing programs and partnerships and dump e-waste in 10 states, with similar legislation pending in many others.
    [Show full text]
  • Resource Efficiency, Extended Producer Responsibility And
    Resource Efficiency, Extended Producer Responsibility and Producer Ownership A presentation to the Annual Symposium of the Greening Growth Partnership and Economics and Environmental Policy Research Network By Professor Paul Ekins University College London and International Resource Panel Ottawa February 27th, 2020 The imperative of increasing resource efficiency The promise of double decoupling Key messages from the Summary for Policy Makers http://www.unep.org/resourcepanel/KnowledgeResources/AssessmentAreasReports/Cross-CuttingPublications/tabid/133337/Default.aspx Headline Message: “With concerted action, there is significant potential for increasing resource efficiency, which will have numerous benefits for the economy and the environment” By 2050 policies to improve resource efficiency and tackle climate change could • reduce global resource extraction by up to 28% globally. • cut global GHG emissions by around 60%, • boost the value of world economic activity by 1% How to increase resource efficiency? Waste/resource management focus • Make it easier to recycle materials by differentiating between wastes and recyclables (definition of waste, by-products) • Increase the quality of collected recyclates (separate collections) • Create markets for recycled materials through product specifications and green public procurement (standards and regulation) • Ban the incineration of recyclables • Facilitate industrial clusters that exchange materials while they are still resources to prevent them from becoming wastes (industrial symbiosis)
    [Show full text]