Circular economy; Construction and demolition waste; Decision-making; Facility location; Multicriteria analysis; Uncertainty analysis; Decision tool; Decisions makings; Facilities locations; Recycling facilities; The net present value (NPV); Waste facilities; Wastes recycling; Environmental Engineering; Water Science and Technology; Pollution; Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law; Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis
Abstract :
[en] Abstract: Construction and demolition waste (CDW) is a growing waste stream in the world. The implementation of the circular economy for its management requires decision-making tools based on multiple criteria to identify the most appropriate location for a CDW recycling facility. However, technical, economic, and social criteria do not have the same objectives. This research proposes a hybrid decision tool for site selection for CDW facilities in developing countries applying a multi-criteria analysis complemented by an economic evaluation. To accomplish this purpose, Geographic Information Systems (GIS), Fuzzy-Analytical Hierarchy Process (FAHP), Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS), and Monte Carlo simulation were used to rank the potential facility sites. Three criteria and nineteen sub-criteria were considered and weighted by experts. The results showed that: i) the technical criterion (55%) predominated over the social criterion (45%), with CDW quality (14.9%) and social acceptability (14.2%) sub-criteria, respectively; ii) the Monte Carlo simulation evidenced the feasibility of CDW treatment facility with a 94% probability that the Net Present Value (NPV) will be greater than $147,518. The results provide a theoretical basis for site selection of CDW management facility and tools for defining public policies for CDW utilization. Highlights: • A hybrid decision tool was developed for CDW recycling facility location. • 19 social, technical and economic sub-criteria were defined. • The tool was validated with a case study based in Colombia. • CDW quantity and operational costs have the greatest uncertainty about the NPV. • Economic indicators show feasibility of CDW with an NPV of $989,634.
Disciplines :
Engineering, computing & technology: Multidisciplinary, general & others
Author, co-author :
Soto-Paz, Jonathan; Faculty of Engineering, Research Group On Threats, Vulnerability and Risks to Natural Phenomena, Research and Development University (UDI), Santander, Colombia
Hernandez, Angélica; Faculty of Engineering, Research Group On Threats, Vulnerability and Risks to Natural Phenomena, Research and Development University (UDI), Santander, Colombia
Mejía Parada, Cristian Andres ; Université de Liège - ULiège > Urban and Environmental Engineering ; Faculty of Engineering, Research Group On Threats, Vulnerability and Risks to Natural Phenomena, Research and Development University (UDI), Santander, Colombia
Mora-Ruiz, Viviana; Faculty of Engineering, Research Group On Threats, Vulnerability and Risks to Natural Phenomena, Research and Development University (UDI), Santander, Colombia
Hernández, Wilson; Faculty of Engineering, Research Group On Threats, Vulnerability and Risks to Natural Phenomena, Research and Development University (UDI), Santander, Colombia
Luna-Guevara, Francisco; Faculty of Engineering, Research Group On Threats, Vulnerability and Risks to Natural Phenomena, Research and Development University (UDI), Santander, Colombia
Casallas-Ojeda, Miguel; Faculty of Engineering, Research Group Energy, Materials and Environment, Sabana University, Chía, Colombia
Parra-Orobio, Brayan A.; Department of Environmental and Health Sciences, GE&TES Research Group, Popular University of Cesar-Aguachica Section, Aguachica, Colombia
Language :
English
Title :
A Hybrid Decision Tool for Site Selection of Construction and Demolition Waste (CDW) Facilities in Developing Countries
Publication date :
June 2023
Journal title :
Environmental Processes
ISSN :
2198-7491
eISSN :
2198-7505
Publisher :
Springer Science and Business Media Deutschland GmbH
Abdelhamid MS (2014) Assessment of different construction and demolition waste management approaches. HBRC J 10:317–326. 10.1016/J.HBRCJ.2014.01.003 DOI: 10.1016/J.HBRCJ.2014.01.003
Afshin K, Khanlari K, Abbasianjahromi H, Zoghi M (2020) Construction and demolition waste management: fuzzy analytic hierarchy process approach. Waste Manage Res 38:773–782. 10.1177/0734242X20910468 DOI: 10.1177/0734242X20910468
Aghajani Mir M, TahereiGhazvinei P, Sulaiman NMN et al (2016) Application of TOPSIS and VIKOR improved versions in a multi criteria decision analysis to develop an optimized municipal solid waste management model. J Environ Manage 166:109–115. 10.1016/J.JENVMAN.2015.09.028 DOI: 10.1016/J.JENVMAN.2015.09.028
Agrela F, Sánchez De Juan M, Ayuso J et al (2011) Limiting properties in the characterisation of mixed recycled aggregates for use in the manufacture of concrete. Constr Build Mater 25:3950–3955. 10.1016/J.CONBUILDMAT.2011.04.027 DOI: 10.1016/J.CONBUILDMAT.2011.04.027
Ajayi SO, Oyedele LO, Bilal M et al (2017) Critical management practices influencing on-site waste minimization in construction projects. Waste Manage 59:330–339. 10.1016/j.wasman.2016.10.040 DOI: 10.1016/j.wasman.2016.10.040
Akhtar A, Sarmah AK (2018) Construction and demolition waste generation and properties of recycled aggregate concrete: A global perspective. J Clean Prod 186:262–281. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.03.085 DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.03.085
Alexandridou C, Angelopoulos GN, Coutelieris FA (2018) Mechanical and durability performance of concrete produced with recycled aggregates from Greek construction and demolition waste plants. J Clean Prod 176:745–757. 10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2017.12.081 DOI: 10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2017.12.081
Alves MS, Lima GRR, Araújo ALC et al (2020) Monte Carlo simulation in the evaluation of failure probability in waste stabilization ponds. J Water Process Eng 38:101658. 10.1016/J.JWPE.2020.101658 DOI: 10.1016/J.JWPE.2020.101658
Araiza-Aguilar JA, Gutiérrez-Palacios C, Rojas-Valencia MN et al (2019) Selection of sites for the treatment and the final disposal of construction and demolition waste, using two approaches: an analysis for Mexico City. Sustanibilty 11:4077. 10.3390/su11154077 DOI: 10.3390/su11154077
Asgari A, Ghorbanian T, Yousefi N et al (2017) Quality and quantity of construction and demolition waste in Tehran. J Environ Health Sci Eng 15:. 10.1186/s40201-017-0276-0
ASTM (2006) American Society for Testing and Materials. Standard Test Method for Resistance to Degradation of Small-Size Coarse Aggregate by Abrasion and Impact in the Los Angeles Machine, ASTM C131, Annual Book of ASTM Standard
ASTM (2009) American Society for Testing and Materials. Standard Test Method for Bulk Density (“Unit Weight”) and Voids in Aggregate ASTM C29/C29M, Annual Book of ASTM Standard
ASTM (2012) American Society for Testing and Materials. Standard Test Method for Density, Relative Density, Absorption of Coarse Aggregate, ASTM C127, Annual Book of ASTM Standard
ASTM (2015) Standard Test Method for Relative Density (Specific Gravity) and Absorption of Coarse Aggregate. https://www.astm.org/c0127-15.html. Accessed 24 Apr 2023
Banias G, Achillas C, Vlachokostas C et al (2010) Assessing multiple criteria for the optimal location of a construction and demolition waste management facility. Build Environ 45:2317–2326. 10.1016/J.BUILDENV.2010.04.016 DOI: 10.1016/J.BUILDENV.2010.04.016
Bilal M, Khan KIA, Thaheem MJ, Nasir AR (2020) Current state and barriers to the circular economy in the building sector: Towards a mitigation framework. J Clean Prod 276:123250 DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123250
Chen K, Wang J, Yu B et al (2021) Critical evaluation of construction and demolition waste and associated environmental impacts: A scientometric analysis. J Clean Prod 287:125071. 10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2020.125071 DOI: 10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2020.125071
Coelho A, de Brito J (2013) Economic viability analysis of a construction and demolition waste recycling plant in Portugal – part I: location, materials, technology and economic analysis. J Clean Prod 39:338–352. 10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2012.08.024 DOI: 10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2012.08.024
Coronado M, Dosal E, Coz A et al (2011) Estimation of construction and demolition waste (C&DW) generation and multicriteria analysis of C&DW management alternatives: a case study in Spain. Waste Biomass Valorization 2:209–225. 10.1007/s12649-011-9064-8 DOI: 10.1007/s12649-011-9064-8
da Silva Souza F, Mendes JC, Morais LJB et al (2022) Mapping and recycling proposal for the construction and demolition waste generated in the Brazilian Amazon. Resour Conserv Recycl 176:105896. 10.1016/J.RESCONREC.2021.105896 DOI: 10.1016/J.RESCONREC.2021.105896
Demesouka OE, Vavatsikos AP, Anagnostopoulos KP (2013) Suitability analysis for siting MSW landfills and its multicriteria spatial decision support system: Method, implementation and case study. Waste Manage 33:1190–1206. 10.1016/J.WASMAN.2013.01.030 DOI: 10.1016/J.WASMAN.2013.01.030
Ding Z, Zhu M, Wang Y, Zhu J (2018) An AHP-GIS based model of C&D waste landfill site selection: A triangulation of critical factors. Proceedings of the 21st International Symposium on Advancement of Construction Management and Real Estate, 2016 163–174. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-6190-5_16/COVER
Ding T, Xiao J (2014) Estimation of building-related construction and demolition waste in Shanghai. Waste Manage 34:2327–2334. 10.1016/J.WASMAN.2014.07.029 DOI: 10.1016/J.WASMAN.2014.07.029
Doan T, Chinda T (2016) Modeling construction and demolition waste recycling program in Bangkok: benefit and cost analysis. J Constr Eng Manag 12:1–11. 10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001188 DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001188
Dosal E, Coronado M, Munoz I, Viguri JR, Andres A (2012) Application of multi-criteria decision-making tool to locate Construction and Demolition Waste (C&DW) recycling facilities in a northern Spanish region. Environ Eng Manag J 11:545–556 DOI: 10.30638/eemj.2012.067
Duan H, Miller TR, Liu G, Tam VWY (2019) Construction debris becomes growing concern of growing cities. Waste Manage 83:1–5. 10.1016/j.wasman.2018.10.044 DOI: 10.1016/j.wasman.2018.10.044
EN-933-11:2009 (2009) Tests for geometrical properties of aggregates - Part 11: Classification test for the constituents of coarse recycled aggregate. Spanish Association for Standardisation and Certification (AENOR): Madrid, Spain. https://standards.iteh.ai/catalog/standards/cen/b071a56c-697f-4b08-861c-ac39a16142f0/en-933-11-2009. Accessed 24 April 2023
Galán B, Viguri JR, Cifrian E et al (2019) Influence of input streams on the construction and demolition waste (CDW) recycling performance of basic and advanced treatment plants. J Clean Prod 236:117523. 10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2019.06.354 DOI: 10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2019.06.354
Gálvez-Martos JL, Styles D, Schoenberger H, Zeschmar-Lahl B (2018) Construction and demolition waste best management practice in Europe. Resour Conserv Recycl 136:166–178. 10.1016/J.RESCONREC.2018.04.016 DOI: 10.1016/J.RESCONREC.2018.04.016
Ghisellini P, Ulgiati S (2020) Economic assessment of circular patterns and business models for reuse and recycling of construction and demolition waste. Adv Constr Demolition Waste Recycl 31–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-819055-5.00003-6
Gil A, Toledo M, Siles JA, Martín MA (2018) Multivariate analysis and biodegradability test to evaluate different organic wastes for biological treatments: Anaerobic co-digestion and co-composting. Waste Manage 78:819–828. 10.1016/j.wasman.2018.06.052 DOI: 10.1016/j.wasman.2018.06.052
Hao J, Yuan H, Liu J et al (2019) A model for assessing the economic performance of construction waste reduction. J Clean Prod 232:427–440. 10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2019.05.348 DOI: 10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2019.05.348
Hoang NH, Ishigaki T, Kubota R et al (2021) Financial and economic evaluation of construction and demolition waste recycling in Hanoi, Vietnam. Waste Manage 131:294–304. 10.1016/J.WASMAN.2021.06.014 DOI: 10.1016/J.WASMAN.2021.06.014
Hossain MU, Ng ST, Antwi-Afari P et al (2020) Circular economy and the construction industry: existing trends, challenges and prospective framework for sustainable construction. Renew Sust Energ Rev 130:109948
Jung J-S, Song S-H, Jun M-H, Park S-S (2015) A comparison of economic feasibility and emission of carbon dioxide for two recycling processes. KSCE J Civ Eng 19:1248–1255. 10.1007/s12205-015-0708-2 DOI: 10.1007/s12205-015-0708-2
Kabirifar K, Mojtahedi M, Wang C, Tam VWY (2020) Construction and demolition waste management contributing factors coupled with reduce, reuse, and recycle strategies for effective waste management: A review. J Clean Prod 263:121265. 10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2020.121265 DOI: 10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2020.121265
Khadivi MR, Fatemi Ghomi SMT (2012) Solid waste facilities location using of analytical network process and data envelopment analysis approaches. Waste Manage 32:1258–1265. 10.1016/J.WASMAN.2012.02.002 DOI: 10.1016/J.WASMAN.2012.02.002
Lederer J, Gassner A, Kleemann F, Fellner J (2020) Potentials for a circular economy of mineral construction materials and demolition waste in urban areas: a case study from Vienna. Resour Conserv Recycl 161:104942. 10.1016/J.RESCONREC.2020.104942 DOI: 10.1016/J.RESCONREC.2020.104942
Leising E, Quist J, Bocken N (2018) Circular Economy in the building sector: Three cases and a collaboration tool. J Clean Prod 176:976–989. 10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2017.12.010 DOI: 10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2017.12.010
Li G, Liu J, Giordano A (2022) Robust optimization of construction waste disposal facility location considering uncertain factors. J Clean Prod 353:131455. 10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2022.131455 DOI: 10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2022.131455
Lin Z, Xie Q, Feng Y et al (2020) Towards a robust facility location model for construction and demolition waste transfer stations under uncertain environment: The case of Chongqing. Waste Manage 105:73–83. 10.1016/J.WASMAN.2020.01.037 DOI: 10.1016/J.WASMAN.2020.01.037
Liu J, Xiao Y, Wang D, Pang Y (2019) Optimization of site selection for construction and demolition waste recycling plant using genetic algorithm. Neural Comput Appl 31:233–245. 10.1007/S00521-018-3730-8/TABLES/8 DOI: 10.1007/S00521-018-3730-8/TABLES/8
Llatas C (2011) A model for quantifying construction waste in projects according to the European waste list. Waste Manage 31:1261–1276. 10.1016/J.WASMAN.2011.01.023 DOI: 10.1016/J.WASMAN.2011.01.023
Nasir MHA, Genovese A, Acquaye AA et al (2017) Comparing linear and circular supply chains: A case study from the construction industry. Int J Prod Econ 183:443–457. 10.1016/J.IJPE.2016.06.008 DOI: 10.1016/J.IJPE.2016.06.008
Oliveira Neto R, Gastineau P, Cazacliu BG et al (2017) An economic analysis of the processing technologies in CDW recycling platforms. Waste Manage 60:277–289. 10.1016/J.WASMAN.2016.08.011 DOI: 10.1016/J.WASMAN.2016.08.011
Purchase CK, al Zulayq DM, O’Brien BT et al (2022) Circular economy of construction and demolition waste: a literature review on lessons, challenges, and benefits. Materials 15(1):76. 10.3390/ma15010076
Robayo-Salazar RA, Valencia-Saavedra W, de Gutiérrez RM (2020) Construction and Demolition Waste (CDW) Recycling—As Both Binder and Aggregates—In Alkali-Activated Materials: A Novel Re-Use Concept. Sustainability 12:5775. 10.3390/SU12145775 DOI: 10.3390/SU12145775
Rondinel-Oviedo DR (2021) International Journal of Construction Management ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tjcm20 Construction and demolition waste management in developing countries: a diagnosis from 265 construction sites in the Lima Metropolitan Area Construction and demolition waste management in developing countries: a diagnosis from 265 construction sites in the Lima Metropolitan Area. https://doi.org/10.1080/15623599.2021.1874677
Schiller G, Lützkendorf T, Gruhler K et al (2019) Material flows in buildings’ life cycle and regions-material inventories to support planning towards circular economy. IOP Conf Ser Earth Environ Sci 290:012031. 10.1088/1755-1315/290/1/012031
Shah B (2021) Sustainable landfill site selection for construction and demolition waste management using GIS and AHP. Lect Notes Civ Eng 142 LNCE:135–142. 10.1007/978-981-33-6695-4_13/COVER DOI: 10.1007/978-981-33-6695-4_13/COVER
Sheikh IR, Shah MY (2021) Performance evaluation of construction and demolition waste aggregates as an alternative base course material in highway construction. J Struct Integr Maint 6:58–66. 10.1080/24705314.2020.1823555 DOI: 10.1080/24705314.2020.1823555
Silgado SS, Calderón Valdiviezo L, Domingo SG, Roca X (2017) Multi-criteria decision analysis to assess the environmental and economic performance of using recycled gypsum cement and recycled aggregate to produce concrete: The case of Catalonia (Spain). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.11.023
Singh J, Ordoñez I (2016) Resource recovery from post-consumer waste: important lessons for the upcoming circular economy. J Clean Prod 134:342–353. 10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2015.12.020 DOI: 10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2015.12.020
Soltani A, Hewage K, Reza B, Sadiq R (2015) Multiple stakeholders in multi-criteria decision-making in the context of Municipal Solid Waste Management: A review. Waste Manage 35:318–328. 10.1016/J.WASMAN.2014.09.010 DOI: 10.1016/J.WASMAN.2014.09.010
Soto-Paz J, Ricardo Oviedo-Ocaña E, Cesar Manyoma P et al (2019) A multi-criteria decision analysis of co-substrate selection to improve biowaste composting: a mathematical model applied to Colombia. Environ Processes. 10.1007/s40710-019-00387-6 DOI: 10.1007/s40710-019-00387-6
Souza FDS, de Carvalho JMF, Silveira GG et al (2021) Application of construction and demolition waste in civil construction in the brazilian amazon—case study of the city of rio branco. Materials 14:. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14092247
Tsyganok VV, Kadenko SV, Andriichuk OV (2012) Significance of expert competence consideration in group decision making using AHP. Int J Prod Res 50:4785–4792. 10.1080/00207543.2012.657967 DOI: 10.1080/00207543.2012.657967
Wang H, Pan X, Zhang S (2021) Spatial autocorrelation, influencing factors and temporal distribution of the construction and demolition waste disposal industry. Waste Manage 127:158–167. 10.1016/J.WASMAN.2021.04.025 DOI: 10.1016/J.WASMAN.2021.04.025
Xu X, Luo Y, Sreeram A et al (2022) Potential use of recycled concrete aggregate (RCA) for sustainable asphalt pavements of the future: A state-of-the-art review. J Clean Prod 344:130893. 10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2022.130893 DOI: 10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2022.130893
Zaetang Y, Sata V, Wongsa A, Chindaprasirt P (2016) Properties of pervious concrete containing recycled concrete block aggregate and recycled concrete aggregate. Constr Build Mater 111:15–21. 10.1016/J.CONBUILDMAT.2016.02.060 DOI: 10.1016/J.CONBUILDMAT.2016.02.060
Zoghi M, Rostami G, Khoshand A, Motalleb F (2021) Material selection in design for deconstruction using Kano model, fuzzy-AHP and TOPSIS methodology. Waste Manage Res 40:410–419. 10.1177/0734242X211013904 DOI: 10.1177/0734242X211013904
