Hans Saveyn, Peter Eder, Elena Garbarino, Lenka Muchova, Ole Hjelmar, Hans van der Sloot, Rob Comans, André van Zomeren, Jiri Hyks, Anke Oberender - PDF

Description
Study on methodological aspects regarding limit values for pollutants in aggregates in the context of the possible development of end-of-waste criteria under the EU Waste Framework Directive Hans Saveyn,

Please download to get full document.

View again

of 40
All materials on our website are shared by users. If you have any questions about copyright issues, please report us to resolve them. We are always happy to assist you.
Information
Category:

Economy & Finance

Publish on:

Views: 68 | Pages: 40

Extension: PDF | Download: 0

Share
Transcript
Study on methodological aspects regarding limit values for pollutants in aggregates in the context of the possible development of end-of-waste criteria under the EU Waste Framework Directive Hans Saveyn, Peter Eder, Elena Garbarino, Lenka Muchova, Ole Hjelmar, Hans van der Sloot, Rob Comans, André van Zomeren, Jiri Hyks, Anke Oberender Report EUR EN European Commission Joint Research Centre Institute for Prospective Technological Studies Contact information Hans Saveyn Address: Edificio Expo. c/ Inca Garcilaso, 3. E Seville (Spain) Tel.: Fax: https://ec.europa.eu/jrc https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en/institutes/ipts This publication is a Technical Report by the Joint Research Centre of the European Commission. Legal Notice This publication is a Technical Report by the Joint Research Centre, the European Commission s in-house science service. It aims to provide evidence-based scientific support to the European policy-making process. The scientific output expressed does not imply a policy position of the European Commission.Neither the European Commission nor any person acting on behalf of the Commission is responsible for the use which might be made of this publication. JRC91036 EUR EN ISBN (PDF) ISSN (online) doi: /1125 Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2014 European Union, 2014 Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged. European Commission Joint Research Centre Institute for Prospective Technological Studies Study on methodological aspects regarding limit values for pollutants in aggregates in the context of the possible development of end-of-waste criteria under the EU Waste Framework Directive Final Report September 2014 Hans Saveyn 1, Peter Eder 1, Elena Garbarino 1, Lenka Muchova 1, Ole Hjelmar 2, Hans van der Sloot 3, Rob Comans 4, André van Zomeren 4, Jiri Hyks 2, Anke Oberender 2 1. European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Institute for Prospective Technological Studies IPTS), Spain 2. DHI, Denmark 3. Hans van der Sloot Consultancy, The Netherlands 4. ECN, The Netherlands PREFACE The present document represents an edited and reviewed version of the tendered study performed by DHI (Denmark) in cooperation with ECN and Hans van der Sloot Consultancy for the Joint Research Centre Institute for Prospective Technological Studies. Objectives of the study The study was launched to provide a science-based analysis of how limit values for pollutants could be developed as part of end-of-waste criteria for aggregates in accordance with Article 6 of the Waste Framework Directive (2008/98/EC). In particular, the study had to: identify and assess the pollution risks of using aggregates derived from waste; review how the use of aggregates is regulated today in the EU with respect to avoiding pollution; assess the need for including limit values for pollutants in end-of-waste criteria; assess the suitability of different types of pollutant limit values; identify and assess the different methodological approaches for deriving pollutant limit values; identify the most suitable testing approaches and methods, including simplified modes of compliance; The study had to take into account the information and analyses from the 'Aggregates Case Study' in the 'End-of-Waste Criteria' report (EUR EN) and from the related background report on aggregates. Organisation of the study This study was commissioned to DHI and its co-operation partners ECN and Hans van der Sloot Consultancy (Contract no A08-DK). The work was started in 2011 by Ole Hjelmar (DHI, project manager), Hans van der Sloot (Hans van der Sloot Consultancy), Rob Comans (ECN), André van Zomeren (ECN), Jiri Hyks (DHI) and Anke Oberender (DHI). Several stakeholders and experts have contributed with data and information to the study. The work in progress was discussed by a limited group of representatives from environmental authorities, industry, consulting companies, research institutions and standardisation committees at a workshop held in Amsterdam on 7 July 2011, organised by the consultant consortium. The final report was delivered to in the summer of Subsequently, has verified and discussed data internally. Member States representative experts were contacted with requests for additional information in Scope The present study describes a possible way of establishing limit values for pollutants in waste-derived aggregates with a view of using such aggregates in a wide variety of construction projects. More specifically, the study focuses on aggregate substances that are subject to leaching and/or release through wear. The study does not focus on other aspects of possible pollution from using waste-derived aggregates such as emission of volatile substances from aggregates or radiation from aggregates. 3 Moreover, the work centres on the possible use of recycled aggregates in construction projects. It does not envisage other applications, such as for instance the agricultural use of gypsum from recycled plasterboards. Furthermore, the current study does not deal in detail with the use of recycled excavated soils and stones, for which other environmental considerations may apply apart from possible leaching phenomena. Finally, it should be stressed that the current study concentrates on one, albeit important, condition for EU end-of-waste criteria, namely the possible adverse environmental or human health effects from using aggregate materials outside the waste legislative framework. Other end-of-waste conditions according to Article 6(1) of the Waste Framework Directive, such as the use, market conditions and technical requirements or legal standards are excluded from the scope of this preliminary study. In particular, requirements on geometry, durability and physical properties of waste aggregates are not being addressed in this document, but may be important when considering possible end-of-waste criteria for waste aggregates. Therefore, the present study should not be considered as a feasibility analysis for the establishment of EU end-of-waste criteria for aggregates. Building blocks of the proposed methodology in this study The proposed methodology to set leaching limit values, as outlined in this document is based on the steps outlined below and illustrated by examples: Steps Waste aggregates are classified in different groups according to their origin and composition. An initial detailed assessment of the leaching behaviour of a wide range of substances is made for every waste aggregate group by means of standardized tests (initial type testing). This assessment results in comprehensive information on the average leaching behaviour of every substance from materials belonging to a group, as well as on the spread of the leaching behaviour between different materials within the same group. A scientifically sound risk-based approach is used to model several typical use scenarios for (waste) aggregates. These scenarios consider the transport of leaching substances from the source (the used aggregate) following a pathway (through its surrounding environment) towards the receptor (generally a surface or groundwater body). Model calculations result in time-dependent concentration curves of the transported leached substances, at the receptor, for the expected lifetime of the construction project. Leaching limits for (waste) aggregates at the source are then determined based on the quality Illustrative examples* Waste aggregates are classified into categories such as recovered concrete, recovered bricks, etc. Many different recovered concrete material samples from a wide variety of suppliers are tested for leaching. This results in a database with leaching values for As, Cu, Pb, Hg, fluorides, chlorides, sulphates, etc. In the following sulphate is often used for the purpose of illustration, but it could be any other relevant substance of concern. Scenarios are modelled e.g. for recovered concrete used in pillars for a bridge spanning a river, for use in a highway road, for use in a warehouse, etc. Time dependent concentration levels for sulphate (or other substances of relevance) at a point of compliance in the nearby water body (river, underground aquifer, etc.) are calculated for a period of an appropriate length of time (which can exceed the lifetime of the construction project). It is calculated that for a maximum leaching value of X for sulphate in an aggregate used in 4 Steps requirements at the final receptor, viz. the maximum allowed concentration of substances at the receptor, at any time during or within a specified time after the lifetime of the construction project. As a result, various sets of leaching limits for (waste) aggregates may be established, depending on the typical pathway the leached substance will take in a given use scenario and the quality requirements at the receptor. The strictest leaching limits will be obtained for direct contact between the aggregate and the receptor, with more lenient limits for more shielded and remote uses of the aggregate. Specific shielding conditions may become part of conditions of use associated with end-of-waste status for various classes of materials associated with various sets of limit values. Through clustering all these various sets of leaching limits, a small number of distinct material classes may be defined at EU level, preferably in harmonised European standards under the Construction Products Regulation (305/2011). Apart from a set of leaching limits, a number of restrictions on the aggregate use are established for every material class, in line with the foreseen applications. These restrictions may thus range from none to very stringent. They may apply to the use during the service life of the aggregate as well as to the treatment and disposal at the end-oflife. Once material classes have been established from use scenarios and a waste aggregate group has been comprehensively characterized inter alia by collection and assessment of extensive leaching data, subsequent routine testing (factory production control) for a certain material in that group will focus on the most relevant substances for the specific group. Whether a substance is relevant for routine testing depends on its typical leaching behaviour (average and spread) in that Illustrative examples* the highway road, the drinking water quality norm of Y mg/l sulphate in the underground aquifer will never be exceeded during a specified period of time (generally longer than the lifetime of the construction project). For example rather strict sulphate leaching limits will be obtained for a pillar in direct contact with the water in a small lake or an aquifer. More lenient sulphate leaching limits will be obtained for an aggregate shielded e.g. by an asphalt cover in a highway road 20 m above the aquifer. For example, four material classes could be established (Class 1, 2, 3, 4) Use scenarios involving direct contact between aggregates and surface water or groundwater could be grouped in Class 1 with very strict leaching limits for sulphate (and other substances). Use scenarios for covered base materials in roads at a safe distance from the groundwater table or similar construction projects could be clustered in Class 3 with more lenient leaching limits for sulphate (and other substances). No use restrictions might apply for Class 1 materials. An aggregate of Class 3 should for example not be used in construction projects with a distance to the nearest water body of less than 50 metres and it would have to be removed after the end of its service life). The initial leaching assessment for the group of recovered concrete aggregates may have indicated that many waste concrete materials are not likely to meet the strict sulphate limits for Class 1 (direct water content). Waste concrete materials might therefore have to undergo routine sulphate leaching testing when applying for Class 1 use. Nonetheless, a waste concrete material may e.g. be exempt from routine testing on sulphate leaching for use in Class 3, given the 5 Steps waste aggregate group and the leaching limits imposed by the material class. If the candidate material passes the routine tests it may receive end-of-waste status and be categorized in the corresponding material class. In principle, this would allow the end-of-waste aggregate material to be used for the purposes described in its material class, provided the corresponding conditions on use and end-of-life treatment are respected. If the material does not pass the tests for the envisaged material class, it may be subject to further treatment before undergoing renewed tests or it may be classified in a different material class with less strict conditions. Illustrative examples* less strict sulphate leaching requirements compared to Class 1 seen in view of the initial type testing. A waste concrete material may not pass the routine sulphate tests for Class 1, but pass the test for Class 2 and be declared end-of-waste for use as a Class 2 material. Alternatively, the waste concrete material may undergo additional treatment and be retested to check whether it meets Class 1 requirements. A certain level of routine testing should be required to uphold the end-of-waste status for a given waste-derived aggregate. Even though material classes may exist at EU level, Member States might be given the possibility to impose additional restrictions on the use of certain materials or to exclude certain classes, e.g. in order to protect sensitive areas. Member State Z may decide to exclude any waste derived aggregates for use in wetlands declared as protected natural reserves. * These examples just serve to illustrate the corresponding steps and in some cases may be completely fictive. Hence, they should not be seen as having any scientific or legal validity. Strengths and limitations of the proposal in this study The methodology proposed in this study for the establishment of leaching limits for waste aggregates in the context of possible end-of-waste criteria has a number of clear strengths as well as some limitations. Strengths The proposed methodology mimics the existing EU methodology used for acceptance of waste at landfills and is largely compatible with the current views and approaches to waste aggregates in many Member States. The methodology is comprehensive and could provide an EU level playing field that reaches beyond the end-of-waste scope, as it is built on harmonized European standards under the Construction Products Regulation that may also apply to natural or industrially manufactured aggregates. The current document indicates that several non-waste aggregates may exhibit pronounced leaching behaviour as well, whereas few Member States currently have comprehensive regulations in place to control leaching from non-waste aggregates. The methodology is risk based and hence provides a clear scientific background for proposing limit values, in line with Article 6(1)(d) of the Waste Framework Directive. 6 Referring directly to harmonized European standards applicable for aggregates could help simplify any possible end-of-waste legislation for aggregates, therefore minimizing possible administrative and legal burden. A better insight in long term leaching behaviour and factors controlling leaching can be obtained from more extended initial type testing or characterization tests. In addition, the proposed tests also provide the potential for modelling release under conditions beyond the scope of the laboratory tests. By categorizing aggregates into a limited number of classes, each with their own set of limits, the methodology provides for limit values that are in accordance with the foreseen use of the aggregates. On the one hand, it is more flexible than a single set of robust but extremely strict all-purpose limits that would be impossible for most waste aggregates to meet and might thus enable more materials to receive end-of-waste status. On the other hand, once established, it provides for a relatively simple and workable approach to the wide variety of (waste) aggregate materials and applications that exist, while ensuring appropriate environmental and human health protection. Limitations Unless direct reference could be made to relevant harmonized European standards under the Construction Products Regulation regulating the leaching limits and use conditions of aggregates for different purposes, end-of-waste criteria would have to provide for detailed leaching limits and possible use restrictions for various applications of different waste aggregates. Moreover, without such clear product standards under the Construction Products Regulation, the shift in aggregate status from waste to product could be hampered by possible adverse environmental or human health impacts. It has to be noted indeed that current requirements in many Member States are much less stringent for natural or industrial aggregates with product status than for waste aggregates. As such, current waste legislation for aggregates often provides better environmental and human health safeguards than existing product legislation for aggregates. In this context, it should be noted as well that the development of uniform harmonized European standards for aggregates under the CPR may take several years to be completed. Extensive initial type testing for every type of aggregate and performing routine leaching tests could be resource-intensive and costly. Moreover, an independent body might be needed to guard the data quality and maintain a centralized Community database on leaching data for different (waste) aggregate material groups in order to ensure a level playing field across Member States. For the development of material classes, it might be very challenging to cluster the wide spectrum of possible use scenarios into a limited series of material classes with matching restrictions. Moreover, this clustering exercise should take into account differences in climatic conditions (e.g. rainfall and temperature patterns) as well as geological differences across Europe. Monitoring and enforcing the correct use of end-of-waste aggregates, including checking whether certain restrictions with regard to shielding such aggregates from water bodies have been respected, could possibly pose practical challenges. Monitoring and enforcing any prescribed end-of-life treatment and disposal actions for end-ofwaste aggregates could possibly pose organisational and legal challenges, especially given the long life time of many construction projects (e.g. change of ownership, bankruptcy, etc.). 7 Disclaimer It should be stressed that, at this point, the European Commission has not undertaken any steps for the preparation of end-of-waste criteria for waste aggregates. Therefore, the following should be noted: the present document does not constitute the opinion of the European Commission regarding the feasibility of end-of-waste criteria for waste aggregates and its required methodology, nor regarding feasibility and methodology for setting limit values for pollutants as part of possible end-of-waste criteria for waste aggregates; the present document does not constitute any commitment by the European Commission to start work on the development of end-of-waste criteria for waste aggregates or related preparatory work. 8 TABLE OF CONTENTS TERMS AND DEFINITIONS ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS Executive Summary Introduction Background Objectives Aggregates and potential pollution in relation to EoW Aggregates for consideration in the study The basic conditions and concepts of the assessment of the pollution potential of aggregates in relation to EoW Basic safety conditions dictated by EoW status of aggregates Conceptual risk assessment model Source term scenarios Pathway/transport scenarios Receptor scenarios and primary quality criteria at the point of compliance Health related criteria (not based on leaching) Summary of basic conditions and scenarios Release
Related Search
Similar documents
View more...
We Need Your Support
Thank you for visiting our website and your interest in our free products and services. We are nonprofit website to share and download documents. To the running of this website, we need your help to support us.

Thanks to everyone for your continued support.

No, Thanks