Waste: A Game of Snakes and Ladders? : Construction
In an industry where there's no such thing as a half brick it is perhaps not surprising that the construction sector does not place great emphasis on waste management. Our survey finds the sector lagging behind the rest of UK industry - 45 per cent of companies express no interest in waste minimisation programmes at all and 42 per cent do not recycle any material whatsoever.
However, it is clear that government legislation, specifier influence and rising waste disposal costs will force the sector to consider waste management and this will have a corresponding influence on industry practice.
Take Back Liability is a prime example of this, since while the sector is aware of Duty of Care (84 per cent), only 25 per cent understand the implications of Take Back Liability. Yet, Take Back has the potential for costly ramifications, because, had it been in force some years ago, the construction industry might well have had to bear the enormous costs of clean-up and decontamination of buildings containing asbestos.
Legislation is not the only force that is placing demands on the sector; the construction specifier is a key influencer and this can be seen in the widespread adoption of BS5750. The findings show that over eight out of ten (82 per cent) have, or plan to seek, BS5750: not surprising as it is often a prerequisite for tender qualification. Currently, 32 per cent of construction companies have no plans to implement a formal environmental management system, but clients are likely to place increasing emphasis on the environmental policies of contractors.
However, above all it is financial pressure that is likely to make waste management an issue that the construction industry cannot afford to ignore.
Landfill has always been a cheap option for the large volumes of construction and demolition waste, and minimisation or recycling has usually been seen as a costly option. However, with landfill prices set to rise dramatically in the next five years, waste disposal costs could seriously threaten the industry's future profitability. With the industry expecting to produce 60 million tonnes of waste by the year 2000 (only half of which will be recycled at current levels), landfill is set to cost the industry 780 million per annum by the end of the century.
However, construction companies themselves seem to have a poor understanding of waste costs. Surprisingly, fewer than a third (30 per cent) of construction companies actually know how much they spend on waste compared with 56 per cent of companies across UK industry. Most (94 per cent) measure by the contractor cost of disposal, with only 53 per cent accounting for the purchase cost of waste materials. Only a third (33 per cent) think that total waste costs will rise even though they do not believe that they can actually cut down on the quantity of waste they produce. Only 23 per cent- far fewer than in any other sector - express confidence in reducing waste output. However, large construction companies, who are more likely to have waste minimisation policies, are also more likely to believe they can reduce waste output than small companies.
This spending on waste disposal is currently somewhere between 0.1 per cent and 0.2 per cent of turnover, a low figure which is explained by the fact that construction companies do not appreciate the potential impact of waste on the bottom line: about two-thirds (65 per cent) see waste as either a minor or irrelevant factor in terms of competitive edge.
The survey shows that with industry practice as it stands, waste is a serious financial threat to the sector - though organisations have yet to fully appreciate this. But where there is a great deal at stake, there is also potentially a great deal to gain.
Process change is currently a lower priority for the construction sector (45 per cent) than for the rest of UK industry; however, it is here that the potential for competitive advantage lies.
Using waste products such as plastic or rubble instead of costly new aggregates, designing buildings with recyclability in mind, and building on regenerated wasteland in order to conserve the greenbelt are areas where the construction sector can work with the waste industry to cut costs and minimise long term industry threats.
Behind such change lies a fundamental shift in attitude towards waste: it requires waste to be regarded as a resource rather than as 'waste'.
Companies interviewed included construction contractors, material suppliers and component manufacturers. These companies varied from those having an annual turnover of less than £10 million and employing less than 5 people to those having a turnover exceeding £100 million and employing over 60,000 people.
Main Findings
- Just three in ten (30 per cent) know the cost of waste to their business
- The construction industry has the greatest number of companies spending the least amount of money on waste disposal, compared with the rest of UK plc
- Only a quarter (25 per cent) of companies believe Take Back Liability has implications fo their business
- Only 30 per cent pre-sort waste materials on site
Industry Facts
The construction industry . . .
- was worth £50 billion in 1992
- involves 170 000 contractors
- employs two million people
- accounts for 10% of GDP
Legislation
- Proposed ecolabelling scheme for construction materials and equipment
- Proposed EC directive on civil liability for damage caused by waste
- Possible levy on mainland quarrying
- Contaminated land registry
- Zoning of extractive industries to coastal sites
- Restrictions on marine extraction
- Rise in landfill costs
Process Change
- Pre-sorting waste materials on site
- Schemes for sorting, storage and transfer of materials
- Dismantling rather than demolition
- Product substitution, eg waste plastic for concrete; rubber & glass for roads
- Reuse of rubble, rather than primary aggregates
- Building design for recyclability
- Reclaiming contaminated wasted land for construction
- Introduction of fitness for purpose specifications
- Energy efficient architectural standards
Environmental Effects
- Reduced local availability of landfill
- Absorbing waste from other industries
- Conservation of raw materials
- Preservation of urban greenfield
- Regeneration of inner cities
