Skip to main content

Economic viability analysis for fresh concrete waste reclaimers: The capacity of leftover concrete

Abstract

Many batching plants are reluctant in recycling the returned fresh concrete. However, leftover concrete may present great potential as it is always observed in truck-mixers. Therefore, viability of mechanical reclaimers was economically investigated considering the leftover concrete capacity. Toward this aim, availability of reclaimers in Turkey was revealed through a survey and the leftover concrete amount was measured. An economic selection algorithm for reclaimers was then introduced. Lastly, sensitivity and scenario analyses were performed for investment. In conclusion, most plants have poor views about recycling the leftover concrete although its percentage is 0.31%. With this amount, the annual leftover concrete amount in Turkey reaches a small plant’s annual production. Given viability, four inputs can have huge influence on viability and should be paid attention. Finally, the most likely and the best scenarios present an optimistic view even for small plants while the worst scenario has negative results and should be supported by incentives.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  • Arunvivek, G. K., Maheswaran, G., Kumar, S. S., Senthilkumar, M., and Bragadeeswaran, T. (2015). “Experimental study on influence of recycled fresh concrete waste coarse aggregate on properties of concrete.” International Journal of Applied Engineering Research, Vol. 10, No. 11, pp. 29809–29815.

    Google Scholar 

  • Babbie, E. (2007). The practice of social research, Wadsworth Publishing, Belmont.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bohne, R. A., Brattebo, H., and Bergsdal, H. (2008). “Dynamic eco-efficiency projections for construction and demolition waste recycling strategies at the city level.” Journal of Industrial Ecology, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 52–66, DOI: 10.1111/j.1530-9290.2008.00013.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, Z., Li, H., and Wong, C. T. C. (2002). “An application of bar-code system for reducing construction wastes.” Automation in Construction, Vol. 11, pp. 521–533, DOI: 10.1016/S0926-5805(01)00063-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coelho, A. and de Brito, J. (2013). “Economic viability analysis of a construction and demolition waste recycling plant in Portugal–part II: economic sensitivity analysis.” Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 39, pp. 329–337, DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.05.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Correia, S. L., Souza, F. L., Dienstmann, G., and Segadaes, A. M. (2009).“Assessment of the recycling potential of fresh concrete waste using a factorial design of experiments.” Waste Management, Vol. 29, pp. 2886–2891, DOI: 10.1016/j.wasman.2009.06.014.

  • Cosgun, N. and Esin, T. (2006). “A study regarding the environmental management system of ready mixed concrete production in Turkey.” Building and Environment, Vol. 41, pp. 1099–1105, DOI: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2005.06.012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CSI (The Cement Sustainability Initiative). (2009). Recycling concrete, World Business Council for Sustainable Development, Switzerland.

  • Curwin, J. and Slater, R. (1992). Quantitative methods for business decisions, Chapman & Hall, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dale, S. J. (1993). “Introduction to life cycle costing.” In: Bull, J. W. (Ed.), Life cycle costing for construction, Chapman & Hall, New York, pp. 1-22.

  • Fabrycky, W. J. and Blanchard, B. S. (1991). Life-cycle cost and economic analysis, Prentice Hall, New Jersey.

  • Fleming, D. (2000). “Concrete waste costs UK firms over £400m a year.” Construction News, July 20th, pp. 18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haddad, A. N., Cortes, B. G. F. R., and Evangelista, A. C. J. (2013). “Use of cement hydration stabilizer admixture at ready mix concrete to avoid material waste.” Advanced Materials Research, Vol. 818, pp. 24–29, DOI: 10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.818.24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hendriks, C. F. and Pietersen, H. S. (2000). Sustainable raw materials: construction and demolition waste, RILEM Publications, France.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kazaz, A., Ulubeyli, S., Er, B., Arslan, A., and Atici, M. (2016). “Identification of waste sources in ready-mixed concrete plants.” European Journal of Engineering and Natural Sciences, Vol. 1, pp. 9–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kazaz, A., Ulubeyli, S., and Turker, F. (2004). “The quality perspective of the ready-mixed concrete industry in Turkey.” Building and Environment, Vol. 39, pp. 1349–1357, DOI: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2004. 03.010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kou, S., Zhan, B., and Poon, C. (2012a). “Feasibility study of using recycled fresh concrete waste as course aggregates in concrete.” Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 28, pp. 549–556, DOI: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2011.08.027.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kou, S., Zhan, B., and Poon, C. (2012b). “Properties of partition wall blocks prepared with fresh concrete wastes.” Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 36, pp. 566–571, DOI: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2011.08.063.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OJEU (Official Journal of the European Union). (2008). On waste and repealing certain directives, 2008/98/CE of the European Parliament and of the Council, Brussels.

  • Moore, D. S., McCabe, G. P., and Craig, B. (2010). Introduction to the practice of statistics, W. H. Freeman, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paolini, M. and Khurana, R. (1998). “Admixtures for recycling of waste concrete.” Cement and Concrete Composites, Vol. 20, pp. 221–229, DOI: 10.1016/S0958-9465(97)00066-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Papi, J. A. F. (2014). “Recycling of fresh concrete exceeding and wash water in concrete mixing plants.” Materiales de Construccion, Vol. 64, No. 313, pp. 1–9, DOI: 10.3989/mc.2013.00113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters, W. (1984). “Alkali burns from wet cement.” Canadian Medical Association Journal, Vol. 130, pp. 902–904.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sealey, B. J., Phillips, P. S., and Hill, G. J. (2001). “Waste management issues for the UK ready-mixed concrete industry.” Resources, Conservation and Recycling, Vol. 32, pp. 321–331, DOI: 10.1016/S0921-3449(01)00069-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sepulveda, J., Souder, W., and Gottfried, B. (1984). Engineering economics, McGraw-Hill, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tam, V. W. Y. and Tam, C. M. (2007). “Economic comparison of recyclingover-ordered fresh concrete: A case study approach.” Resources, Conservation and Recycling, Vol. 52, pp. 208–218, DOI: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2006.12.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • TRMCA (Turkish Ready-Mixed Concrete Association). (2015). Statistics of the ready-mixed concrete industry, TRMCA, Istanbul.

  • Zaharieva, R. H., Dimitrova, E., and Bodin, F. B. (2003). “Building waste management in Bulgaria: Challenges and opportunities.” WasteManagement, Vol. 23, pp. 749–761, DOI: 10.1016/S0956-053X(03) 00037-0.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Aynur Kazaz.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kazaz, A., Ulubeyli, S. & Atici, M. Economic viability analysis for fresh concrete waste reclaimers: The capacity of leftover concrete. KSCE J Civ Eng 22, 12–23 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12205-017-1462-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12205-017-1462-4

Keywords

  • economic viability
  • fresh concrete waste
  • leftover concrete
  • reclaimed aggregate
  • reclaimer
  • truck-mixer