Recycling Construction, Renovation, and Demolition Plastic Waste: Review of the Status Quo, Challenges and Opportunities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract End-of-life treatment of construction, renovation, and demolition (CRD) plastic waste generated from day-to-day applications of plastics in the construction industry can negatively impact the environment if not handled properly. Addressing this issue is crucial considering the current unprecedented increasing rate of the use of plastics in the construction industry all over the world. Globally, the current option for managing CRD plastic waste is mainly landfill due to inadequate guidelines and standards, avoidance of risk, and lack of knowledge and experience in recycling CRD plastic waste. This trend counteracts the efforts towards a circular economy and crude oil independency. Therefore, developing commercially feasible end-of-use recycling technologies is indispensable to guarantee a sustainable future for the plastics employed in the construction sector. Despite the high theoretical recyclability of the plastics, recycling CRD plastic waste is economically unattractive since the material is contaminated and difficult to sort and separate. In addition, the cost of recycling is hardly recovered because of the material’s low value. This paper reviews the status quo, technologies, challenges, barriers, opportunities and recent initiatives on recycling CRD plastic waste. The paper identifies the framework and technology modifications required to overcome the current obstacles to implementing commercial-scale recycling. It emphasizes the importance of establishing an effective collection network, imposing price signals by authorities to impress landfilling of CRD plastic waste, and developing policies and regulations to enforce manufacturers to take end-of-life responsibilities by up-designing the product considering facilitated recycling. The paper concludes with a focus on investigating recent global state-of-art measures taken to tackle barriers against CRD plastic waste recycling. This study will assist the plastic construction sector with manufacturing, recycling, policymaking, benchmarking purposes, and implementation considering environmental and economic benefits.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".