Sustainability in the Built Environment: Why Materials Matter
•
1 like•154 views
Suzie Boxman, U.S. EPA Office of Resource Conservation & Recovery Susan Vescovi U.S. EPA Region 5 Land and Chemicals Division
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (11)
Similar to Sustainability in the Built Environment: Why Materials Matter
Similar to Sustainability in the Built Environment: Why Materials Matter (20)
More from Build Reuse formerly Building Material Reuse Association
More from Build Reuse formerly Building Material Reuse Association (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Sustainability in the Built Environment: Why Materials Matter
- 1. Sustainability in the Built Environment: Why Materials Matter 1 September 20, 2018
- 2. Presentation Overview 2 Why the Built Environment? What is EPA’s Role? Life Cycle of Materials in the Built Environment EPA Resources and Built Environment Forum 1 2 3 4
- 4. Why Focus on the Sustainable Management of Materials in the Built Environment? • Materials are being depleted at an increasing rate. • There is an increase in materials demand. • A significant amount of industrial materials are generated in the US each year. • Responsibility for our future society. 4
- 5. What is the breakdown for C&D • 534 million tons of total C&D debris generated in 2014. • From buildings, roads and bridges, and other structures. • Going forward, we will continue to improve our C&D debris measurement efforts. 5 Concrete 70%Asphalt Concrete 14%Wood Products 7% Asphalt Shingles 3% Brick & Clay Tile 2% Drywall & Plasters 3% Steel 1%
- 6. Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) 6 • Protect human health and the environment from potential hazards of waste disposal. • Conserve energy and natural resources. • Reduce the amount of waste generated. • Ensure that wastes are managed in an environmentally sound manner. EPA is charged with implementing RCRA
- 7. What is Sustainable Materials Management? “An approach to serving human needs by using/reusing resources productively and sustainably throughout their life cycles, generally minimizing the amount of materials involved and all associated environmental impacts.” Sustainable Materials Management: The Road Ahead, EPA (2009)
- 8. Life Cycle Thinking Life Cycle Assessment / Analysis Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs) Water Footprint Carbon Footprint Cost- Benefit Analysis 8
- 9. 9
- 10. Advantages of Life-Cycle Thinking • Life-cycle information offers greater “return on investment.” • Prioritizing and strategic planning. • Challenging preconceived ideas about where and how agencies should target their efforts and policy approaches to mitigate environmental issues. • Avoiding unintended consequences. • Identifying key partners and stakeholders. 10
- 11. EPA’s SMM Program • Built Environment (buildings, roads, bridges, infrastructure) • Sustainable Management of Food • Sustainable Packaging • Sustainable Electronics Management • Life Cycle Thinking • Measurement • International Efforts 11 17
- 12. • Quantifies the impacts of materials, products, and services used in single-family homes. • Provides estimates of environmental savings associated with proposed changes (increasing energy efficiency, recycling concrete at end-of life, etc). Single-Family Home Life-Cycle Analysis Materials Matter!
- 13. • EPA’s two key documents are intended to: • Help improve consistency and quality of BU evaluations. • Identify key questions to ask when designing evaluations. • Provide a list of tools and other resources. • 2019: EPA will conduct outreach and technical assistance about how to use the methodology when considering C&D materials reuse. 13 Tools for Evaluating Impacts of the Use of Secondary Materials
- 14. – The State of the Practice of Construction and Demolition Material Recovery report – Waste Tracking in Portfolio Manager – Deconstruction Rapid Assessment Tool – Abandoned Mobile Home Toolkit 14 Other EPA Tools and Resources
- 15. FORUM ON LIFE CYCLE APPROACHES TO SUSTAINABLY MANAGE MATERIALS IN BUILDING AND INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS
- 16. Forum Outcomes • Participants expressed how valuable it was to engage with groups they do not typically work with • Conversations highlighted a critical need for data about materials and management tools to support decision making • Participants emphasized the importance of understanding what is in materials so people can balance risk and reuse decisions 16
- 17. Key Forum Themes 17 Enhancing Secondary Materials Markets Innovation & Research Shifting Paradigms Life-Cycle Data & Tools Telling a Better Story Collaboration & Partnerships
- 18. Potential Actions Collaboration & Partnerships: Host a similar forum in the future and work with others to ensure dialogue continues Innovation & Research: Demonstration projects as a proof-of-concept to Life-Cycle Data & Tools: Develop guidance on how to use EPDs, PCRs, HPDs, and LCAs Tell a Better Story: Help make a better economic case for sustainable materials approaches; gather and disseminate success stories & best practices Enhancing Secondary Materials Markets: Develop a risk assessment framework for recycled building products to inform reuse decisions Shifting Paradigms: Reduce quantity of materials needed upfront 18
- 19. Next Steps • Forum Summary Document Now Available on EPA’s web site – https://www.epa.gov/smm/summary-report-forum- life-cycle-approaches-sustainably-manage- materials-building-and • Engaging stakeholders around resiliency efforts • Exploring options for a clearing house of Built Environment Resources • Conducting outreach for using the Beneficial Use Methodology for C&D materials reuse • Planning future Built Environment-focused SMM Webinars 14
- 20. How does R5 fit into National Stakeholder Forum?
- 21. EPA Tools and Resources for better Demos and Deconstruction
- 22. ON THE ROAD TO REUSE RESIDENTIAL BID SPECIFICATION TOOL KIT http://1.usa.gov/15yzqyt • Pre-Demolition Survey • Waste Management Plan • Recycling and Salvage • Waste Handling and Disposal • Deconstruction • Asbestos NESHAP Compliance • Managing Harmful Dust • Impervious Surface Removal • Soils for Earthwork • Placement of Fill • Grading • Soil Stabilization and Seeding EPA Region 5 Residential Demolition Bid Specification Development Tool Earthworks Bid Specs Waste Management Bid Specs Menu of Bid Specification Modifications to Improve Demolition Practices
- 23. Self-Check: Are the following procedures outlined in the Deconstruction Work Plan? 1. Scheduling 2. Inventory of items to be salvaged 3. Inventory of materials to be diverted for recycling 4. Sequence of deconstruction 5. Contractor qualifications and experience 6. Training for deconstruction contractors 7. Salvage markets 8. Salvage Material Management Plan (to align with the Waste Management Plan) 9. Deconstruction permitting
- 24. Deconstruction Rapid Assessment Tool http://go.usa.gov/3sabR • Help cities, counties, land banks, etc help prioritize actions during demolition projects. • Record: • Site observations & hazards • Damage & deterioration • Materials inventory • Special consideration for architectural features
- 25. R5 EPA Disaster Debris Recovery Database Web Application and Raw Data for:• C&D Landfills • MSW Landfills • Hazardous Waste Landfills • C&D Recyclers • Electronics Recyclers • HHW Recyclers • Metal Recyclers https://www.epa.gov/large-scale-residential- demolition/disaster-debris-recovery-tool
- 26. R5 Demystifying Markets Grant • Identify existing and potential markets for building materials located in Region 5 and create a resource to improve understanding of the local economic opportunity recycling presents. • Goal: enhance and promote regional reuse and recycling.
- 27. R7 St. Louis Demolition Handbook • Delta assisting St. Louis with handbook to clarify appropriate steps in starting a demolition and incorporating best practices. • Recently added task to work with ReFab to identify candidate homes for deconstruction. • Will create a cost benefit analysis of demolition vs deconstruction of these homes.
- 28. Thank you! Suzie Boxman U.S. EPA Office of Resource Conservation & Recovery Boxman.Suzanne@epa.gov Susan Vescovi U.S. EPA Region 5 Land and Chemicals Division Vescoi.susan@epa.gov
Editor's Notes
- Today I’m going to introduce SMM in the built environment, discuss some key life cycle thinking concepts, and conclude by describing the outcomes of a forum that we had earlier this year on life cycle approaches to sustainably manage materials in building and infrastructure projects. 0:32
- I’m very excited about the presentation today as we’re going to cover quite a lot of ground! We’re going to start with talking about why SMM is important and why EPA is investing in the built environment; We’ll follow this with an overview of SMM and discuss its cornerstone: Life Cycle Thinking; Next, we’ll tie life cycle thinking into the built environment; Then, we’ll briefly discuss the Forum on Life Cycle Approaches to Sustainably Manage Materials in Building and Infrastructure projects, or the Built Environment Forum. Finally we will answer any questions during the question and answer session.
- Our world relies and thrives on the built environment. We live, work and often play in all types of buildings. We use roadways, bridges, and tunnels to get to the places that are important to us. Buildings and roadways can be the art that enriches our lives. We are constantly surrounded by, and engaged in, our built environment. 0:21
- However, these structures present a challenge. Creating our built surroundings requires materials and other inputs such as energy and water. We continue to deplete these materials at a greater and greater rate as we use them. In fact, globally we are seeing that the greatest increases in materials demand are for construction minerals, ores, and industrial materials such as clay, limestone, gypsum, and building stone {according to the International Resources Panel} [1] On top of that, our current infrastructure is in need of maintenance and will need to be rebuilt, putting additional demands on our material resources. In 2017 the American Society of Civil Engineers ranked America’s infrastructure as a D+. They found that over time the same problems are persisting, and that “[the] nation’s infrastructure is aging, underperforming, and in need of sustained care and action.” While we continue to prosper and build to meet the needs of society and improve our modern lifestyles, we also continue to see a demand for our natural resources and materials for the construction of these buildings, roads, and other infrastructure. At the same time, we need to find ways to maximize the use of available resources. Many opportunities exist for increasing safe reuse, recycling and safe disposal of industrial byproducts, building materials, and debris. Over 500 million tons of industrial materials are generated in the US each year. Over 110 million residences exist in the US, almost 70% of which are single-family homes with a wide range of materials, goods, and services used directly or indirectly in construction and potentially demolition. In addition, natural disasters can increase the amount of debris generated. For example, Hurricane Andrew generated 20 million cubic yards of debris – enough to fill a football field a mile high. Other materials also present opportunities. For example, in 2014, steam electric utilities generated nearly 130 million tons of coal combustion residuals (ACAA, 2014). The metal casting sector generates approximately 9.4 million tons of spent foundry sands each year (AFS, 2007). The construction and demolition sector generated approximately 548 million tons of building-related construction and demolition materials in 2015 (U.S. EPA, 2018) – and that number does not even include the hundreds of millions of tons of additional road-related C&D debris! Because of this, we need to come together to track and assess the trends in the Built Environment. We each play a role in creating our future. By coming together to work towards a better one, we will be able to devise strategies for reducing our use of raw materials, find efficiencies in our practices, and improve the bottom-line. 2:46 Source: [1]: (UNEP (2011) Decoupling natural resource use and environmental impacts from economic growth, A Report of the Working Group on Decoupling to the International Resource Panel. Fischer-Kowalski, M., Swilling, M., von Weizsäcker, E.U., Ren, Y., Moriguchi, Y., Crane, W., Krausmann, F., Eisenmenger, N., Giljum, S., Hennicke, P., Romero Lankao, P., Siriban Manalang, A., Sewerin, S.) }
- As our estimates show, the total C&D debris generation for 2014 is 534 million tons. The shear size of the C&D debris stream presents opportunities for sustainable materials management to increase safe reuse, recycling and safe disposal of this material. Our estimates also show that the total C&D debris generation has been increasing over time. For example, the total C&D debris generation has increased from 526 million tons in 2013, to 534 million tons in 2014. The pie chart displays the 2014 C&D debris generation from buildings, roads and bridges, and other structures by material. The pie chart breaks down the 2014 C&D debris generation composition by material. - Concrete (70%) - Asphalt concrete (14%) (this is asphalt) - Wood products (7%) - Asphalt shingles (3%) - Brick and clay tile (2%) - Drywall and plasters (3%) - Steel (1%) We will continue work on improving C&D debris measurement, including beginning to quantify the material management pathways for C&D materials (e.g., the quantities of C&D materials landfilled, recycled, or combusted).
- There are several strategies for conserving natural resources that are all informed by the same overarching principle of using these natural resources in a sustainable manner while minimizing impacts on the environment and human health. The 3 R’s (reduce, reuse, recycle), resource efficiency, and circular economy are examples of these strategies. In 2009, the U.S. EPA published “Sustainable Materials Management: The Road Ahead,” which laid out the case that we were on an unsustainable trajectory and that our present use of materials is what is behind much of that trajectory. Growth projections from 2000 to 2050 are staggering: world population growth of 50%; global economic activity growth of 500%; and global energy and materials use growth of 300%. The Road Ahead furthered the argument that life cycle materials management held the keys to a sustainable path, and provided recommendations to government. It also provided a life cycle assessment of the U.S. economy to identify starting points for the transition to SMM. The Road Ahead serves as the foundation for our current and future materials management efforts. In a few slides we’ll showcase how our program takes the more impactful sectors from the report and inform the direction of our program. EPA pursues “Sustainable Materials Management” (SMM) - an approach for using and reusing materials effectively and efficiently while minimizing the amount of materials we use and all of the associated environmental impacts. SMM encourages life cycle-based decision-making and collaborative and integrative approaches to address the complex environmental challenges we face. It encourages the least costly, most beneficial system improvement, but does not prescribe any one particular practice. The major challenge for businesses, policy-makers, academic researchers, and consumers is deciding where and how to act to have the maximum positive impact. For any action, a balance must be struck between speed of response and the need to be informed by science-based evidence. Through a life cycle, or systems approach to managing materials: Businesses can find opportunities that enhance and sustain their value proposition while reducing risk; Governments can more strategically apply their policy instruments and resources; and Collaboration across society can be more effective in finding balance between societal needs and the planet’s capacity to provide. 2:07 ____________________ The backbone of the report is an LCA of the U.S. Economy identifying the 38 materials, products and services that represent potential significant contributors to environmental issues arising from US consumption of goods and services. they fall generally in 7 groups: food products & services, textiles, nonrenewable organics (e.g., coal, oil), metals, construction and development, forestry and miscellaneous. The analysis offers insight into potentially highly impactful goods and services in our economy and gives us a starting place from which to address sustainable materials management in policy and programs. We’ve built on this analysis by developing a LCA SMM Tool. I’ll talk about that a bit more in a moment.
- There are a variety of different tools and approaches to engage in Life Cycle Thinking. [click] Life Cycle Assessment or Life Cycle Analysis (commonly referred to as “LCA”) is a technique to make more informed decisions through a better understanding of the human health and environmental impacts of products, processes, and activities. This can include an evaluation of the air, water, land, and energy consequences of a product or process, and possible alternatives. It can be thought of as an environmental footprint of a building or building material LCA is just ONE approach, which, oftentimes can be complex, as it requires you to examine the bounds of your assessment and take meticulous detailed accounting of materials. EPA is working on an Open Source LCA tool to help bring everyone into this space. Hopefully, in the near future, a tool like this can help organizations understand where the biggest impacts are in their own value chain, so that they can be better stewards of their own resources and make the most effective use of them. Some of the key impact categories & indicators that are incorporated in an LCA are: [click] Carbon footprint, which is a measure of all greenhouse gas emissions associated with all activities in the product’s life cycle. Water use or water footprint is similar to carbon footprint, just looking & quantifying the amount of water used instead of greenhouse gas emissions. Besides the life cycle assessment, there are other tools and techniques that I’m sure people are more familiar with. Tools like a cost-benefit analysis that is used to make better business decisions is an example of a life cycle approach tool. It’s when these tools are used together that they can support SMM. [click] Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs) provide quantifiable environmental data to compare and contrast products that fulfill the same function. We can think of EPDs as kind of like nutrition fact labels for materials. 1:50 – prob can be cut in about half
- As we’ve been talking about, Life-Cycle Thinking is critical to SMM. Life Cycle Thinking (LCT) is about going beyond the traditional focus on production and manufacturing processes to include social and economic impacts of a product over its entire environmental life cycle. The main goals of Life Cycle Thinking are to reduce a product’s resource use and emissions to the environment as well as improve its impact on society and economic performance throughout its life cycle. This may facilitate links between the economic, social ,and environmental dimensions within an organization and throughout its entire value chain. You probably already think with a life cycle in mind, because it oftentimes resembles a typical supply chain. We start at the left where we “extract raw materials,” (let’s say cutting down a tree) then move to the next step where we have “material processing/manufacturing” (taking that wood and making it into a useful piece of building lumber), oftentimes happening in parallel with this is the “planning and design” phase (how that lumber will be incorporated into the design) and then “construction, both onsite and offsite” (building the structure with the wood and that structure doing its job). From this point a material is being used in the “use, operation & maintenance” phase until eventually something happens where it ends and is “demolished or deconstructed” (maybe the building is torn down for the land to be used differently). In each of these lifecycle stages we have inputs in the form of water, new & recycled materials, and energy. Also, in each stage are outputs: waste & releases. Now there is a decision to be made with the material wastes, it can go to a landfill for disposal, or can see new life through processing or direct reuse and have its inputs going back into the stages, completing the loop. Using life cycle thinking we can be very purposeful in how we manage our resources and we can be the most responsible stewards of the planet and the resources that we have. In each of these life cycle stages, there are professionals who provide advise and make decisions on how and what materials are incorporated and how they are used. On this slide are many of those professionals who can influence the future of our Built Environment. Some will influence design to use less raw materials and more recycled materials. Some professionals will help set the standards for reused materials that not only have less of an impact on the environment, but perform even better than their virgin material counterparts. Still others will find ways to put materials from a deconstruction site to its best use, or find new markets for these materials. Others will design forward-thinking policies to encourage and facilitate new sustainable practices. The life cycle of the built environment is complex. It is a world where ”staying in your own lane” will hinder innovation. When we discuss the Built Environment and EPA, we think about all of the players in the life cycle and work to find the connections and networks they have in each of the life cycle stages. For example, if architects and deconstruction experts communicate in the early stage of building design, we could create buildings that are easier to deconstruct with building materials intact for their next life. One of our goals in the SMM program is to help facilitate this life cycle thought process and help you all make these unique cross-industry connections that will help us reduce the quantity of materials that are wasted. 3:24
- Life cycle thinking, or life cycle-based decision-making is critical to SMM. It offers greater return on investment by systematically and methodically identifying opportunities in a material’s life cycle. By investing in areas where the most impact can be made, a similar return on investment can be had. Life cycle information can help the government set priorities and can help target program resources to where they may be most effective (i.e., hotspots with real opportunities) in achieving significant environmental impact reductions. The SMM in the Built Environment priority area came from this analysis using life cycle thinking. Life cycle thinking can challenge preconceived ideas about appropriate targets and policies to mitigate environmental issues. It can help us develop policies and programs that do not shift environmental burdens, or create other unintended consequences. And it helps identify key partners and stakeholders for collaboration. 0:53
- In 2015 we released our SMM Strategic Plan for FY2017-2022. These seven areas in the Strategic Plan were informed by the results of the life cycle assessment of the U.S. economy in The Road Ahead report that was mentioned earlier. The first four sectors you see listed - built environment, food, electronics, and packaging – are a focus because they potentially pose significant life cycle impacts and, if addressed from a systems perspective, present real opportunities to conserve natural resources and reduce negative impacts. Measurement is another critical area, and part of our focus is on enabling web-based data collection. We also support international efforts such as those to promote resource efficiency under international governmental organizations (G7, G20, and OECD), as well as those efforts to increase the amount of research and data available to support resource efficient policies, such as the International Resource Panel. 1:13
- This leads us to our forum on life cycle approaches to sustainably manage materials where we worked to accomplish exactly that, brining people from across the life cycle of the built environment together to establish unique connections and solutions to improving resource efficiency. We held the event January 30-Feb 1, 2018. Overall, the Forum went very well and we have received positive feedback from many of the participants and the external stakeholders who contributed to scoping and planning the event. I wanted to first give a brief reminder about the goals and development of this event. It was designed to be a kick-off event for EPA’s work in the built environment as outlined in the SMM Strategic Plan for FY2017-2022. Our goal was to bring stakeholders together from across the life cycle of building and infrastructure projects to assess the challenges and opportunities to advance SMM in built environment by the built environment community as a whole. We put the event together with a small regional planning team and group of external stakeholders actively working in this area. With the help of these groups we designed an agenda to foster dynamic and constructive conversations between participants. Over 100 people attended the Forum and contributed their insights as participants and presenters. The Forum roadmap above illustrates the flow of the agenda. The group began with a discussion of incentives, requirements, and benefits for adopting sustainable materials approaches. Then moved on to discuss next life markets to reflect the important concept of beginning with the “next” life of materials in mind. The group then explored topics related to design and construction and wrapped up with sessions that were designed to prompt additional thinking on topics not already covered. The Forum was designed to be broad in scope – both in terms of types of participants and in the topics discussed. Discussions were meant to be a starting point for further conversations and actions as opposed to in-depth discussions about specific topics or sectors. 2:00
- One of the main outcomes was the appreciation we heard from participants that they were able to interact with diverse groups and people they would not normally work with. People were able to learn new things by engaging with participants from other parts of the project life cycle or other industry sectors. Everyone recognized that it is important for us not to remain in our silos and that to advance SMM in the built environment, collaboration across groups is necessary to prevent duplication of effort. Conversations highlighted the need for innovation in this sector and that sustainable solutions are often innovative solutions, but also that there is a great need for data and management tools to support this innovation and support decision makers. Decision makers are increasingly being asked to make difficult decisions about complex problems and while some of this information is increasingly available, there are still issues with consistency in how it is reported. Also, not all of it is accessible, and it can be difficult to interpret the often highly technical information. Participants acknowledged that while some secondary materials may have hazardous components, they may not pose a risk due to how the materials could be reused. Throughout the event participants emphasized the importance of understanding what is in materials and what their associated hazards are so that people can balance risk and reuse decisions. 1:26
- Six key themes were identified from the forum as seen here. Collaboration & partnerships, innovation & research, life-cycle data & tools, telling a better story, enhancing secondary material markets, and shifting paradigms. We put together a summary document that includes more detailed descriptions of each theme and some of the potential action items that came out of the Forum discussions. This summary document is posted and available on the SMM website. 0:35
- The summary document includes additional actions but here are a few that were discussed during the forum. Collaboration & Partnerships: Since the forum itself was so well received, participants suggested that the event be repeated or some participants suggested reviving the Beneficial Use Summits EPA sponsored in the past. At a minimum, the built environment community should work to ensure that the dialogue continues at other built environment related annual events. Innovation & Research: Participants suggested that the government (federal, state or local) could facilitate the testing of new materials/approaches. Governments could do this by having demonstration projects as a proof-of-concept that would enable engineers and government officials to adopt them easier. Life-Cycle Data & Tools: It was suggested that the built environment community needs to develop consistent quality and application of product category rules (PCRs), environmental product declarations (EPDs), LCAs, and health product declarations (HPDs). All are methods of reporting similar, but slightly different product life cycle information which is confusing to both industry members and consumers. Tell a Better Story: We heard stories during the forum about how new industries and jobs were created locally through SMM approaches. We need to gather and disseminate this information as well as best practices on different topics related to materials management in the built environment to help tell the story about the positive economic and environmental impacts of SMM. Enhancing Secondary Materials Markets: Developing a risk assessment framework for recycled building products to inform reuse decisions is one potential area to focus on. EPA’s Beneficial Use Methodology could be used as a starting point for this endeavor. Also, having stakeholder conversations on reverse supply chain connections could open markets for reuse. Shifting Paradigms: Several important paradigm shifts were noted throughout the forum. In particular, one that came up multiple times, was to reduce the quantity of materials needed. The idea of reduce should be a fundamental starting point for any project and we need to make sure we are working to do better with less. To facilitate these paradigm shifts, education is critical and participants expressed a need to develop a list of the tools already available to be shared at the state and regional level. In addition to the final document, we are continuing to engage with participants from the Forum and the external planning team. 2:13
- So in addition to a lot of exciting potential future efforts, we have a lot currently underway that align with the key forum themes. We’ve mentioned that our forum summary document is now available on our EPA SMM website. So we encourage you to take a look at that. We’re also initiating a process to engage stakeholders in exploring issues relating to community resiliency to natural disasters through improved planning and managing of disaster debris. To increase lifecycle data and tools as well as collaborate, we’re exploring options for a clearing house for built environment related resources. In addition to this, we will be conducting outreach to our stakeholders in the C&D recycling community to explain how they can use our existing methodology to support decision-making about appropriate uses for C&D materials. Lastly, we hope to include more built environment focused topics and have more talented speakers like Kate and Joe on future editions of this SMM Webinar Series.
- HQ Forum looked at the life cycle of buildings and infrastructure and how to bests incorporate SMM topics. R5 has historically positioned itself in Theme 5: Enhancing Secondary Materials Markets. Good fit for us- recession, housing crisis, and vacancies that followed left R5 and our stakeholders with questions about best practices and how to best handle materials. Also, historically a engaged on the topic of beneficial reuse, holding several forums that were referenced during the stakeholder forum. We also have several great partners in the Midwest that have helped us shape our work Within this Theme 5, I want to remind the audience of some of the tools developed in our office and update the audience on some exciting up coming grant work happening here in in Region 7.
- Residential Demolition Bid Specification Tool- help those entities in charge of bid specs incorporate good management practices when managing wastes and outlines considerations to incorporate to into bids for site finishing. Can help those writing the bid specs come up with the “who, what, when, why and how” of wastes to make sure those in charge of project clearly lay out expectations. Section on Deconstruction as an option for incorporating into bid spec.
- This section describes what to consider when incorporating deconstruction into a bid spec.
- The Deconstruction Rapid Assessment Tool enables organizations to triage building stock slated for demolition; it assembles data that can help prioritize structures for deconstruction and salvage. Make decisions about best candidates for deconstruction depending on entities’ goals Benefits of deconstruction: Blight management. • Reduce public health and environmental impact. • Workforce development and job training. • Improved construction waste diversion. • Materials market development.
- When you or partners are looking where to take the rest of the materials Expanding this tool to other regions (ex R10, R7)- may include reuse facilities in the future. Search for of facilities in a designated geographic area Provide contact information for facilities Create driving directions/routes for materials from your site
- Small Grant competition in 2017 to: Identify existing and potential markets for building materials located in Region 5 and create a resource to improve understanding of the local economic opportunity recycling presents. This grant topic came from a discussion during a SMM stakeholder forum held in R5. – Awarded to the Delta Institute who spoke earlier regarding this project The final product will bring together different informational resources from around the region into a comprehensive resource that will better define market opportunities and hurdles unique to our region and stakeholders.
- Untangling a process that had not been revised for a significant period of time. Demolition Pilot, and Cost Benefit Analysis