Evaluation of construction and demolition waste management practices using environmental and economic impact assessment

Purpose Effective management of a substantial quantity of construction and demolition (C&D) waste is vital to achieving the objectives of sustainable construction. The most common practices for managing such waste are landfilling, recycling and reusing waste. However, the effectiveness of these practices depends on the environmental and economic benefits. Therefore, this study aims to evaluate the environmental and economic impacts of construction and demolition waste management (CDWM) practices. Design/methodology/approach The waste management practice scenarios adopted for the city of Hyderabad, India, are reducing the generation of C&D waste, disposal of C&D waste and use of recycled aggregates (RA) by replacing natural aggregates. The environmental impact assessment is performed using SimaPro 9.4.0.3 life cycle analysis software with the Ecoinvent 3.8 database. The economic analysis considers the associated costs and revenue for each scenario. Findings Among the three scenarios assessed in this study, waste reduction offers the highest environmental and economic benefits, followed by the use of RA as a substitute for natural aggregates, whereas the disposal of C&D waste is identified as the least desirable option. The emissions and non-renewable energy consumption associated with recycling C&D waste are approximately one-third of those linked to the production of natural aggregates. The sensitivity analysis indicates variations in the range of environmental and economic impacts. Practical implications These results emphasize the importance of reducing waste generation and recycling C&D waste to serve as a basis for decision-makers while framing C&D waste management practices. Originality/value The study investigates existing CDWM practices and applies life cycle assessment and life cycle costing to assess the environmental and economic benefits of various CDWM scenarios. According to the findings, for every tonne of C&D waste, 0.43 t CO2eq can be saved by reducing the generation of C&D waste compared to savings of 0.01 t CO2eq during recycling and reusing of C&D waste. Similarly, the economic benefit per tonne of C&D waste is $42.91 by reducing the generation of C&D waste compared to $0.58 towards recycling and reusing of C&D waste. The above results indicate the change in the approach and the need to emphasize C&D waste reduction followed by reusing the waste generation rather than disposal at dedicated landfills. Researchers and practitioners worldwide can implement the approach adopted in this study to evaluate and choose the sustainable C&D waste management approach, considering both environmental and economic benefits in their region.