IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jresou/v13y2024i6p76-d1407824.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Spatio-Temporal Analysis of Resources and Waste Quantities from Buildings (as Urban Mining Potential) Generated by the European Metropolis of Lille: A Methodology Coupling Data from Construction and Demolition Permits with Geographic Information Systems

Author

Listed:
  • Cédric Mpié Simba

    (Centre for Materials and Processes, IMT Nord Europe, Institut Mines-Télécom, University of Lille, F-59000 Lille, France)

  • Emmanuel Lemelin

    (Centre for Materials and Processes, IMT Nord Europe, Institut Mines-Télécom, University of Lille, F-59000 Lille, France)

Abstract

The aim of this article was to conduct a spatial and territorial analysis of the urban mining potential of the European Metropolis of Lille (MEL), which had 1,174,273 inhabitants in 2018. This involved quantifying construction and demolition waste (CDW) deposits and analyzing their spatial distribution. The chosen quantification approach utilized building and demolition permits as input data, along with waste diagnostics for Construction and Building Materials Products (CBMPs) obtained from stakeholders in the building sector. Waste quantities were estimated using the production rate calculation method (GRC). Specifically, the calculation based on surface area combined with GIS geographic information systems. CDW quantities were categorized by demolition rehabilitation and construction; by type (hazardous non-hazardous inert); and by urban fabric. For the MEL area, the findings revealed that building sites covered the largest surface area, with over 8 million m² being constructed between 2013 and 2022. The construction activity, including renovation, is expected to constitute approximately 20% of the MEL’s building stock from 2013 to 2022. During the same period, 5.51% of the MEL’s building stock was demolished. This corresponds to nearly 6 million tons of CDW being generated during this period, averaging 661318 tons per year. Demolition sites contributed 73% of the total CDW production, compared to 22% for new construction and 4% for renovation sites. Inert waste continued to dominate the composition of waste, accounting for 90% of the total with 9% for non-hazardous waste and 1% for hazardous waste. Semi-detached and grouped houses business fabrics and townhouses or collective fabrics were identified as the primary type of waste-producing urban fabrics. Furthermore, our GIS-based methodology enabled the analysis of CDW quantity distribution by municipality, providing essential data for understanding the urban mining potential and the disparity between construction material requirements for new buildings and resources derived from building demolition. This approach facilitates the assessment of (1) a geographical area’s reliance on construction materials, and (2) the significance of reusing and recycling products equipment materials and waste (PEMW) in new construction to achieve circular economy objectives and to comply with the Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) channel initiated in France in 2023. Over the period from 2013 to 2022, annual construction material requirements remained significantly higher than resources from building demolition and rehabilitation, ranging between 29% and 35%. Additionally, the analysis indicated a potential 41% rate of substitution of new construction materials with secondary primary materials in the MEL, varying by municipality and typology, with higher rates in rural communities and lower rates in urban communities.

Suggested Citation

  • Cédric Mpié Simba & Emmanuel Lemelin, 2024. "Spatio-Temporal Analysis of Resources and Waste Quantities from Buildings (as Urban Mining Potential) Generated by the European Metropolis of Lille: A Methodology Coupling Data from Construction and D," Resources, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-22, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jresou:v:13:y:2024:i:6:p:76-:d:1407824
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/13/6/76/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/13/6/76/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. C. S. Poon & Ann Yu & L. Jaillon, 2004. "Reducing building waste at construction sites in Hong Kong," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(5), pages 461-470.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Benson Teck Heng Lim & Bee Lan Oo & Charlie McLeod & Pengqi Yang, 2024. "Institutional and Actor Network Perspectives of Waste Management in Australia: Is the Construction Industry Prepared for a Circular Economy?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(2), pages 1-21, January.
    2. Esa, Mohd Reza & Halog, Anthony & Rigamonti, Lucia, 2017. "Strategies for minimizing construction and demolition wastes in Malaysia," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 219-229.
    3. Wang, Jiayuan & Li, Zhengdao & Tam, Vivian W.Y., 2014. "Critical factors in effective construction waste minimization at the design stage: A Shenzhen case study, China," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 1-7.
    4. Rosaria E.C. Amaral & Joel Brito & Matt Buckman & Elicia Drake & Esther Ilatova & Paige Rice & Carlos Sabbagh & Sergei Voronkin & Yewande S. Abraham, 2020. "Waste Management and Operational Energy for Sustainable Buildings: A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-21, July.
    5. Baldwin, Andrew & Poon, Chi-Sun & Shen, Li-Yin & Austin, Simon & Wong, Irene, 2009. "Designing out waste in high-rise residential buildings: Analysis of precasting methods and traditional construction," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 34(9), pages 2067-2073.
    6. R. Navon & O. Berkovich, 2006. "An automated model for materials management and control," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(6), pages 635-646.
    7. Ademilade Aboginije & Clinton Aigbavboa & Wellington Thwala, 2021. "A Holistic Assessment of Construction and Demolition Waste Management in the Nigerian Construction Projects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-14, June.
    8. Lu, Weisheng & Yuan, Hongping, 2010. "Exploring critical success factors for waste management in construction projects of China," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 201-208.
    9. Lanfang, Liu & Issam, Srour & Chong, Wai K. & Christopher, Hermreck, 2015. "Integrating G2G, C2C and resource flow analysis into life cycle assessment framework: A case of construction steel’s resource loop," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 143-152.
    10. Li, Jingru & Ding, Zhikun & Mi, Xuming & Wang, Jiayuan, 2013. "A model for estimating construction waste generation index for building project in China," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 20-26.
    11. Li, Jingru & Tam, Vivian W.Y. & Zuo, Jian & Zhu, Jiaolan, 2015. "Designers’ attitude and behaviour towards construction waste minimization by design: A study in Shenzhen, China," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 105(PA), pages 29-35.
    12. Mok, Ken L. & Han, Seung H. & Choi, Seokjin, 2014. "The implementation of clean development mechanism (CDM) in the construction and built environment industry," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 512-523.
    13. Niluka Domingo & Heshani M. Edirisinghe & Ravindu Kahandawa & Gayan Wedawatta, 2024. "Generalised Linear Modelling for Construction Waste Estimation in Residential Projects: Case Study in New Zealand," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(5), pages 1-14, February.
    14. Seungho Cho & Seunguk Na, 2017. "The Reduction of CO 2 Emissions by Application of High-Strength Reinforcing Bars to Three Different Structural Systems in South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-24, September.
    15. Musa Mohammed & Nasir Shafiq & Ali Elmansoury & Al-Baraa Abdulrahman Al-Mekhlafi & Ehab Farouk Rached & Noor Amila Zawawi & Abdulrahman Haruna & Aminu Darda’u Rafindadi & Muhammad Bello Ibrahim, 2021. "Modeling of 3R (Reduce, Reuse and Recycle) for Sustainable Construction Waste Reduction: A Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-22, September.
    16. Chau, C.K. & Hui, W.K. & Ng, W.Y. & Powell, G., 2012. "Assessment of CO2 emissions reduction in high-rise concrete office buildings using different material use options," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 22-34.
    17. Li, Mei & Yang, Jay, 2014. "Critical factors for waste management in office building retrofit projects in Australia," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 85-98.
    18. Zhang, Xiaoling & Wu, Yuzhe & Shen, Liyin, 2012. "Application of low waste technologies for design and construction: A case study in Hong Kong," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(5), pages 2973-2979.
    19. Reza Esmaeilifar & Mohammad Iranmanesh & Mohd Wira Mohd Shafiei & Sunghyup Sean Hyun, 2020. "Effects of low carbon waste practices on job satisfaction of site managers through job stress," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 115-136, February.
    20. Dongoun Lee & Seungho Kim & Sangyong Kim, 2016. "Development of Hybrid Model for Estimating Construction Waste for Multifamily Residential Buildings Using Artificial Neural Networks and Ant Colony Optimization," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-14, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jresou:v:13:y:2024:i:6:p:76-:d:1407824. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.