Emmer, M J (2009) A decision process model for closing the structural steel materials loop in construction. PhD thesis, University of Florida, USA.
Abstract
When a structure is slated for demolition, there is a significant opportunity to maximize reuse of existing materials by deconstructing rather than demolishing the building. Because deconstruction is time intensive and time is money in construction, project stakeholders choose demolition over deconstruction and send construction and demolition (C&D) materials to a landfill. C&D waste can make up a large portion of the materials handled on a typical construction project. Project stakeholders overlook the potential of reusing these materials in a new facility, capturing and preserving the embodied energy invested in these materials. At best, designers and constructors reuse a very narrow range of materials, “low hanging fruit,” so to speak, such as concrete, wood, and masonry. This approach ignores the true tenets of sustainability. When C&D materials are not recycled and introduced back into the material supply chain, new resources must be mined, processed and manufactured and their embodied energy is lost and must be made up somewhere along the line contributing to the further depletion of the earths’ non-renewable resources. Increased efforts in the sustainable reuse of building materials will lead to substantive and tangible results such as reduction in environmental damage, reduction in greenhouse gases, conservation of landfill space, reduced demand for new materials, and decreased raw materials’ mining. Structural steel, a significant component in most building projects, has enormous potential for reuse in future building projects. Testing and recertification of steel members to ensure they meet the performance characteristic requirements is achievable with applications of specific testing measures available in academia and/or independent testing labs. Structural steel components recovered for reuse have enormous potential in the construction materials marketplace and the material supply stream without causing further damage to the environment through various reproduction processes.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Kibert, C and Shanker, A |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | market; sustainability; construction project; landfill; masonry; certification; conservation; production process; reuse; designer; mason; project stakeholder; stakeholders |
| Index terms: | testing, embodied energy, conservation, mining, construction material, depletion, academia, building material, wood, mason, designer, decision process, landfill, greenhouse gas, stream, construction project, project stakeholder, construction and demolition, production process, certification, renewable resources |
| Subjects: | professional practice, energy systems, building materials, environmental resource management, environmental policy, climate science, practitioner, waste management, profession, administrative processes, geotechnical engineering, educational institutions, sociology, decision analysis, water management, production management, traditional and composite building materials, manufacturing engineering |
| Topics: | Project Management, Engineering Principles, Risk Management, Sustainability, Education, Construction Materials, Roles and Professions, Stakeholder Management, Design Practice, Contract Administration |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here