So how much is LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) affecting C&D recycling? What regulations helped or hindered C&D recycler sin 2007? Legislation? How are the markets going to be in 2008? How much C&D is generated in the United States every year, and how much is recycled?

No one has the exact answers to those questions, but this article will attempt to answer those queries to the best of the knowledge of the Construction Materials Recycling Association. However, it does seem that unlike no time in the past decade and a half of the CMRA’s existence has the industry been more scrutinized and sometimes attached than it is now.

One reason for that may be the market’s rapid growth, especially on the mixed C&D processing side. So now some powerful oxes are being gored, and their owners are fighting back. In addition, there are legitimate concerns and questions related to C&D recycling, some of which the SMRA is looking to answer, others that may not ever get answered.

There are no organized and reliable numbers of the size of the C&D recycling industry, one that takes in both the number of people and dollars in the recycling of concrete asphalt metals, gypsum, old corrugated cardboard (OCC), and asphalt shingles. One reason for that difficulty is that the recycling of these materials overlaps with other industries, such as road construction, waste handling and landfilling, and general contracting. But it is a best guess that the size of the C&D recycling industry could be about $8 billion, but who knows?

Other numbers for the C& recycling industry for which there is no certainly are how much C&D is generated annually and how much of it is recycled. Currently the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is evaluating the results of its last C&D waste characterization study, which took place in 2006 and looked at 2005 generation rates. There were problems with the estimate, so no figures have been released yet. However, the CMRA conservatively estimates that at least 350 million tons of C&D are generated every year. About 160 million tons of that are building related C&D, with the rest coming from road and bridge projects.

At the same time as it was conducting its C&D waste characterization study, the EPA asked the CMRA to estimate how much of that was recycled. After conducting a survey in conjunction with CMRA member GBB Inc., the CMRA estimated that about 140 million tons of concrete were recycled in 2005, and at least 28 million tons of mixed C&D. That figure has only gone up since 2005, although the current construction downturn is sure to slow the growth.

Still increasing are the number of recycling systems entering the market, both for concrete and asphalt recycling, and for mixed C&D. Indeed, on a percentage bass, the latter group is growing the fastest. Mixed C&D systems, which can easily cost millions of dollars each, are selling at a brisk pace with some equipment manufacturers barely able to keep up with demand.

One part of that demand is coming from increased emphasis on green building, especially thanks to the LEED program. How much is a good question. An informal poll of the CMRA’s board of directors garnered a response that was the concrete/asphalt sector didn’t really notice an impact. But mixed C&D recyclers report it is about 10% of their business. In addition, it has forced C&D recycling to happen in places where it is usually economically unfeasible.

But it is the regulatory and legislative front that is most affecting the C&D recycling industry, and unfortunately not all of it is positive. One major example is the recent legislation enacted in New Hampshire that bans the use of C&D wood as a biomass fuel product. The reasons for that are both simple and complex. Historically, there was a wood-burning power facility that wanted to use C&D material as a fuel. It was located within the hometown of the state’s current governor. Unfortunately, this proposed plant did not propose to have all of the “Best Available Control Technologies” (BACT) and therefore would emit pollutant loads that were deemed unacceptable by politicians and citizen groups. The entire industry does not propose to use inadequate pollution control devices, however, we as an industry are coupled together and stereotyped. Based on public pressure and stereotyping, solid science can take a back seat and legislation was passed even though the initial statements of the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services deemed that using BACT controls on this material was practical and safe.

In such a difficult environment the CMRA asked the University of New Hampshire to perform a life cycle analysis (LCA) of C&D wood in an effort to determine whether using this renewable biomass material for energy was environmentally better and responsible than landfilling it. The results of that study appear on page 26 of this magazine (C&D World’s January/February 2008 issue) and show that the best use for this biomass is indeed for energy production.

Such concepts know no boundaries and there are reports that other legislatures, including neighboring Massachusetts, are considering such legislation. If this were to happen there, it brings up a whole viability of Massachusetts C&D disposal ban.

Currently in Massachusetts, concrete, asphalt, brick, wood, metals, and OCC are banned from landfill disposal if they are accepted at any Massachusetts solid waste handling facility. But the current market for wood remains wood fuel, and most of that lies in Maine or even Canada. There are other limited opportunities for pristine wood for land-applied applications but using C&D as fuel for power generation is a needed outlet. Hence, Massachusetts – indeed, all states that want to see C&D recycled – should support the use of the wood as a fuel product.

New England probably has the most sophisticated C&D recycling infrastructure in North America, although other areas are catching up. Another issue throughout the area, and in the rest of the country, is what to do with C&D fines. It has been estimated that between 15% and 30% of the material that enters a C&D recycling facility will become a “fines” material. The recycling opportunities for these fines are limited and have diminished significantly during the past several years. The most viable, economically feasible, and environmentally responsible use is as a shaping or grading material, or more commonly as alternative daily cover (ADC).

However, because there is typically gypsum residue within the fines it can impose negative effects. When improperly used to either application, hydrogen sulfide gas can be created. While ordinarily a nuisance, this gas can become strong enough to sicken or even kill humans, under the right conditions. There have been reports of the hydrogen sulfide gas developing in many locations throughout the country including New England. Based on this, the regulators response has been to put tight restrictions on the use of the ADC product, to the point that the restrictions and compliance related costs tend to make this application unfeasible. Yet C&D recycling operations need an economically feasible alternative to straight landfilling for these materials so that they may extract and reuse other commoditized within the C&D waste stream. We all know that even though recycling feels “good,” recyclers must be able to be competitive with the cost of disposal. The C&D recycling industry needs to maintain support from all the state regulatory officials in New England to make sure those markets are open and that human health and safety are guaranteed. Those should not be mutually exclusive options.

In California, there is still strong support among the general public, state government, and private interests for the recycling of C&D. Of course, noting is easy in the Golden State. The much ballyhooed AB 32, the Green-house Has Bill, has the potential to threaten the market for recycled wood as a fuel product, although the bill’s exact reach into the boiler plants, which supply the state with much of its power, is not yet known.

What will have a tremendous impact on the entire construction and demolition industry in California are the state’s Air Resource Board regulations on off-road diesel emissions. With the admirable goal of improving the state’s air quality, the effect on the entire industry using the equipment could be catastrophic. By tightening the emission standards in 2011, hundreds of pieces of equipment will no longer be allowed to operate in the state, and those regulations only get tighter in later years. For more information about the regulations, visit www.arb.ca.gov/diesel/ag/presentations/111606bhring.pdf.

One development that bears watching is the new gasification systems that could provide market outlets for C&D recycling residuals. These systems, different than incineration, can take in a variety of materials to produce power. While they are still in development and may be years from deployment, the gasification systems can take C&D fines and other difficult-to-recycle materials from the C&D waste stream and use them in an economically feasible manner for the benefit of society.

Asphalt shingles are one material that should not need help from gasification techniques. As the price of oil has climbed, so has the value of the bitumen that is part of the ubiquitous shingle. This has made recycling the material quite attractive, even the more difficult to recycle tear-off. Several state departments of transportation are looking at shingle as a way to save money on road projects while doing the correct thing environmentally.

Despite these issues, the general outlook for the C&D recycling industry remains bullish. No entity tracks the industry’s size or growth, although it is estimated that the growth has been as least 10% per year for many years. The slowdown in the construction market affects many sectors of the North American economy, and this one is no different. The estimate here is that growth may be flat to maybe 5%. The reason for this much optimism is that C&D recycling is an industry that is the darling of many groups pushing for its success, including some governmental entities.

William Turley is the associate publisher and editor of C&D World and executive director of the CMRA.

For more waste recycling, reusing and reduction news, read our current email bulletin at http://www.wastecapwi.org/bulletin_archive.htm.