European Commission puts forward end-of-waste standards for construction and demolition

A new report, prepared for the European Commission, sets out a hierarchy of materials for construction and demolition End-of-Waste (EoW) criteria to prioritise. The study comes as part of the EU’s Circular Economy Action Plan, which includes an aim to reduce construction and demolition waste.

What are End-of-Waste criteria?

End-of-Waste (EoW) criteria define when a waste material ceases to be classified as waste and can be considered a product or secondary raw material. These criteria are crucial for promoting recycling and reducing waste by creating legal certainty and a level playing field, as well as removing unnecessary administrative burdens.

Report details

The report examined ten specific waste streams and scored them on a set of criteria including stakeholder support, current recycling rates, market demand, and the potential to recover raw materials.

The results showed that aggregates, concrete, fired clay bricks, and gypsum had the highest potential for EoW criteria development due to their low reuse/recycling rates, higher economic impact and market value and expected environmental impacts.

Asphalt, inert insulation, plastic foam insulation, rigid plastics, and wood were identified as having average potential. Building products for reuse was consistently identified as lower potential because of data and information gaps between its sub-material streams.

The construction industry is the largest single waste and by-product stream, currently accounting for over a third of all waste generated in the EU.

Common challenges and problems recognised across all waste streams included contamination, consistent quality, lack of demand, economic disincentives, high emissions from recycling and transportation, and lack of proper sorting at construction sites.

The study also emphasised the possible environmental benefits of introducing EoW criteria. This could include increasing the amount of recycled waste, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and incentivising technological developments in waste management.

In addition, damage to ecosystems, human health, and resource availability were assessed in the report. In all cases, the study found that the environmental impact indicators were lower with the implementation of EoW criteria.

Recommendations and potential actions

The report advocates for several key actions to implement effective EU-wide EoW criteria:

• Focus initial efforts on developing EoW criteria for aggregates, concrete, fired clay bricks, and gypsum due to their high potential impact.
• Set high standards for the purity and consistency of recycled materials to ensure they meet or exceed the performance of virgin materials.
• Implement robust systems to certify recycled materials and trace them through the supply chain, ensuring transparency and quality assurance.
• Require detailed documentation and regular reporting on recycling practices and outcomes to monitor progress and ensure compliance.
• Establish systems to monitor the performance of recycled materials in practice, ensuring their safe and effective use in new construction projects.
• Create financial incentives for companies that meet or exceed recycling targets and penalties for non-compliance to drive adoption of new practices.
• Encourage or mandate design practices that facilitate easier recycling of materials at the end of their life.
• Promote the development and adoption of new technologies that enhance recycling efficiency and the quality of recycled materials.
• Explore the potential for grouping certain inert waste streams (e.g., aggregates, asphalt, fired clay bricks, concrete) under common EoW criteria, as some EU countries have done nationally.
• Ensure that any EU-wide criteria recognize and align with existing national and regional criteria to minimise bureaucratic burden.

The impact of introducing EoW policy

Although the report did not detail specific implications for construction companies, it suggested that new EU-wide EoW policies could involve adjusting waste management practices to meet standardised recycling and reuse requirements. This could potentially disrupt markets in regions where local EoW criteria are already in place. However, introducing these criteria is expected to enhance market potential and sales.

The study concludes that ‘the advantages of possible future EU-wide EoW criteria (clear material status, less administration, environmental benefits and improved market) outweighed the disadvantages (market disruption where local EoW criteria already exist and environmental risks)’.