Lara, Beatriz Leão Evangelista de (2024) Construction and demolition waste prevention analysis of benefits in the context of social housing. PhD thesis, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Brazil.
Abstract
Construction and Demolition Waste (CDW) represents one of the biggest challenges for municipal authorities due to the high generation rates, large volume and environmental impacts generated. In this context, this research analyzed the environmental feasibility of CDW prevention measures applied to social housing (SH). Environmental feasibility was carried out through life cycle assessment (LCA), considering the cradle-to-delivery stages, and potential environmental impacts were assessed using the CML baseline methodology (v.3.05). Three scenarios were analyzed: base scenario (BS) – single-family residence built in masonry blocks; prevention scenario 1 (PS1) – BS with optimization of material consumption; prevention scenario 2 (PS2) – housing built with concrete walls cast in situ. The impact categories were selected in accordance with the European standard EN 15.978:2011: global warming potential, acidification, eutrophication, ozone layer depletion, photochemical oxidation, abiotic depletion and abiotic depletion – fossil fuels. Furthermore, an economic study of the scenarios was carried out, based on monetary data on construction materials. The prevention scenarios led to a reduction in CDW generation of 4% (PS1) and 36% (PS2). PS1 reduced environmental impacts by 5% while PS2 led to a 15% increase compared to BS. The most critical construction steps for BS and PS1 were cladding and superstructure, while for PS2 they were superstructure and painting. The material extraction and production stages represent around 90% of the total impacts. The critical materials for BS and PS1 were concrete, cement and steel, while for PS2 they were concrete, steel and paint. The most relevant categories for the three scenarios analyzed were global warming, abiotic depletion – fossil fuels, and acidification. The waste management stage contributed less than 1% in generating total impacts. Regarding the economic analysis, PS1 presented a 3% reduction in costs, while SP2 presented an increase of 15%. It is concluded that prevention measures were effective in reducing waste generation, however, environmental viability, as well as economic aspects depend on the construction technique and materials used.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Penteado, Carmenlucia Santos Giordano |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | social habitation; construction and demolition debris; waste minimization; life cycle assessment |
| Index terms: | fossil fuel, in-situ, construction material, depletion, cladding, social housing, prevention, waste generation, eutrophication, waste management, environmental impact, methodology, housing, economic analysis, consumption, minimization, global warming, life cycle assessment, construction and demolition |
| Subjects: | energy systems, building materials, housing and residential development, building construction, financial risk, algorithms, research methods, design analysis, environmental resource management, consumer economics, waste management, environmental impact, climate science, construction type |
| Topics: | Sustainability, Engineering Principles, Stakeholder Management, Construction Technology, Cost Management, Research Practice, Design Practice, Urban Studies, Digital Applications |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
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