Waste reduction final report -4 - Test Input

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Percent 43% 57% 100% Table 3 Estimated C&D waste generation, 2003 (million metric ton )- (EPA, 2009) Residential Non-residential Totals Million Million Million Metric tons Percent Metric tons Percent Metric tons Percent Construction 9.07 15% 4.53 5% 13.60 9% Renovation 34.47 57% 29.93 32% 64.41 42% Demolition 17.23 28% 58.96 63% 76.20 49% Totals 60.78 100% 93.44 100% 154.22 100% Percent 39% 61% 100% 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Construction Renovation Demolition Residential 1996 Residential 2000 Residential 2003 Figure 1 Residential C&D waste in MMT (1996 vs 2000 vs 2003) 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Construction Renovation Demolition Non-Residential 1996 Non-Residential 2000 Non-Residential 2003 Figure 2 Non-residential C&D waste in MMT (1996 vs 2000 vs 2003) 133
180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 1996 2000 2003 TOTAL C&D RESIDENTIAL NON RESIDENTIAL Figure 3 Total C&D generated in USA in last decade, MMT Franklin Associate data shown above assumes a value for C&D waste generated per unit area of buildings and uses that value to calculate the total C&D waste generation based on the annual volume of construction. The report uses 21.5 Kg/m 2 of waste generation for residential and 19.5 Kg/m 2 for non-residential construction in their calculations. These numbers coincide with other reports that a 187 m 2 house produces 3,630 Kg of debris. Demolition wastes were estimated based on 550 Kg/m 2 for residential and 850 Kg/m 2 for nonresidential buildings. These numbers will be used later in this report to establish benchmarks for better, good and standard practices for waste generation on a site depending on Residential or Non- Residential building. A different approach is to calculate the total C&D waste based on population. Table 4 shows the waste collected from various landfills throughout U.S. The collected data has been divided into three categories: a) C&D disposed (excluding recycled materials, b) C&D generated (including recycled materials), and c) C&D generated as a percentage of total MSW (30%). Based on the population of a region and the waste generated, one can find the waste per capita per day using the following formula: Waste in Kilogram per capita per day = Waste in MMT x 1000 Population x 365 As illustrated in Table 4, the C&D waste generation rate per capita per day ranges from 0.64 to 1.46 kilograms. Considering a recycling rate of 25% the average generation rate for the first category may be estimated to be: 0.90 / 0.75 = 1.20 kg per capita. Overall average per capita per day may be calculated as follows: (1.20 + 1.02 + 0.99) / 3 = 1.07 Kg per capita per day Using the average per capita rate of 1.07 kilograms and U.S. population the total waste generated in each particular year can be calculated: 1. Total waste generated in 1996 Population of U.S. in 1996 – 266,490,000 Total C&D Waste generated in 1996 = 104.08 MMT 134
Page 1 and 2:
Publication 364 W115 - Construction
Page 3 and 4:
Table of Contents Foreword 3 Introd
Page 6 and 7:
Introduction This report has been p
Page 8 and 9:
• Benchmarks for waste production
Page 10 and 11:
Canada (with a focus on Ontario) Co
Page 12 and 13:
Canada 8,961,583 9,238,376 16,265,1
Page 14 and 15:
Table 5: Projected tonnage of CRD w
Page 16 and 17:
• conduct an audit of the waste t
Page 18 and 19:
Standard that is now a requirement
Page 20 and 21:
while reducing the amount of useful
Page 22 and 23:
components. However, recycling of s
Page 24 and 25:
170409 170503 170504 170505 170506
Page 26 and 27:
Organic waste Since the Disposal Ac
Page 28 and 29:
Israel Contributed by: Gil Peled -
Page 30 and 31:
includes: • Stopping the illegal
Page 32 and 33:
4. Guidance documents/ reports link
Page 34 and 35:
The Plan includes: • Prevention b
Page 36 and 37:
The Jaffa Slope was a landfill on t
Page 38 and 39:
One of the first community gardens
Page 40 and 41:
The amount of recycled and landfill
Page 42 and 43:
Roles and responsibilities Manufact
Page 44 and 45:
est outcome. This includes applying
Page 47 and 48:
(1) Resource consumption. Upper: Be
Page 49 and 50:
Norway Contributed by: Anne Sigrid
Page 51 and 52:
2. Policies, strategies and legisla
Page 53 and 54:
Singapore Contributed by: Dr Edward
Page 55 and 56:
Figure 2 - Composition of Demolitio
Page 57 and 58:
Figure 4 - Concrete Usage Index (CU
Page 59 and 60:
Figure 5: Use of Incineration Botto
Page 61 and 62:
STRATEGIC THRUST 5: Setting minimum
Page 63 and 64:
Table 2(a) - Framework and Point Al
Page 65 and 66:
4. Guidance documents/ reports link
Page 67 and 68:
GREEN PRACTICES (50%) GREEN PRACTIC
Page 69 and 70:
vehicles and machinery to reduce em
Page 71 and 72:
Practices methods/ machines to addr
Page 73 and 74:
5. Exemplars, case studies The foll
Page 75 and 76:
installation of photocell sensors a
Page 77 and 78:
Figure 2: Treatment of waste collec
Page 79 and 80:
• registration of buildings with
Page 81 and 82:
The GDP (PPP) 22 of Switzerland is
Page 83 and 84: are chosen according to the buildin
Page 85 and 86: Asphalt 0.3 Wood 0.5 Plastics 0.5 C
Page 87 and 88: Even if other materials than the ab
Page 89 and 90: In this chapter, an overview on Swi
Page 91 and 92: engineering, the aim of the revisio
Page 93 and 94: Discussion Many legal texts and imp
Page 95 and 96: Figure 7: Annual outputs of waste m
Page 97 and 98: Table 3: Construction waste materia
Page 99: All plants in Switzerland currently
Page 102 and 103: Table 6: Sales volumes of recycling
Page 104 and 105: study mentioned before claims that
Page 106 and 107: view, avoidance of landfill fees br
Page 108 and 109: viewpoint of sustainable developmen
Page 110 and 111: The Association of Operators of Swi
Page 112 and 113: - www.bauteilnetz.ch, which is run
Page 114 and 115: Discussion Treatment of the main co
Page 116 and 117: References Internet: accessed 06/12
Page 118 and 119: 43) KIWE-Ca 2009. Düngkalkprodukte
Page 120 and 121: Turkey Contributed by: Soofia Tahir
Page 122 and 123: 5. Exemplars, case studies Not avai
Page 124 and 125: Figure 2 illustrates this shift tow
Page 126 and 127: Table 1: Waste Benchmark Data by Pr
Page 128 and 129: 3. Policies, strategies and legisla
Page 130 and 131: Sustainable Construction Task Group
Page 132 and 133: BeAware The Technology Strategy Boa
Page 136 and 137: 2. Total waste generated in 2000 Po
Page 138 and 139: (SOURCE: http://www.portlandonline.
Page 140 and 141: 7. The Sustainable Development Poli
Page 142 and 143: of waste materials. The 2003 final
Page 144 and 145: Recycling Economic Worksheet sample
Page 146 and 147: Wood/ Green Waste Asphaltic Concret
Page 148 and 149: FY 2001 / 2002 FY 2002 / 2003 Dispo
Page 150 and 151: Discussion Contributed by: Gilli Ho
Page 152 and 153: essentially links concrete use to f
Page 154 and 155: Appendices 153
Page 156 and 157: . the surplus to be used to cover l
Page 158 and 159: Regulation on encumbrances on the s
Page 160 and 161: Standard Title (Year) (2001) constr
Page 162 and 163: Standards on use of construction bu
Page 164 and 165: CIB Mission we focus on: Constructi
Page 166 and 167: DISCLAIMER All rights reserved. No
show all

Waste reduction final report -4 - Test Input

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?