Improving objectivity and validity of waste generation standards in repair and refurbishment field

In the present work, improving the objectivity, reliability and validity of waste generation standards in the repair and refurbishment field is discussed due to their importance in ensuring envi-ronmental safety during construction, reconstruction, capital and running repairs and facility maintenance. The study is based on logical and analytical research methods. Regulatory and procedural guidelines on rationing industrial waste generation were summarised and classified in industries, economic sectors and economic activity. It was shown that the information background on waste generation and disposal limits comprises outdated standards adopted in the 1970s – early 1990s. In the past decades, given the profound changes in the repair and refurbishment technology, equipment and methods due to scientific and technical development, these standards have become an unreliable estimate of waste generation and flow. Here, the measures are proposed to remedy the issues with environmental regulation of waste generation. The obtained results indicate the need for a unified system of developing relative waste generation rates categorized by industry and cross-industry economic activity, as well as adopting nationally recognized organisational, management and legal decisions.

1. Il'ichev VA, Kolchunov VI, Bakaeva NV, Kobeleva SA. Assessment of environmental safety of construction based on a model of a complete resource cycle. Nauchnyj vestnik Voronezhskogo gosudarstvennogo arhitekturno-stroitel'nogo uni-versiteta. Stroitel'stvo i arhitektura. 2016;4(44):169-176. (In Russ.).

2. Chertes KL, Shestakov NI. Modern biopositive technologies of waste processing in the utilities and construction industries. Vestnik MGSU = Monthly Journal on Construction and Architecture. 2020;15(8):1135-1146 (in Russ.). https://doi.org/10.22227/1997-0935.2020.8.1135-1146.

3. Velichko EG, Tshovrebov ES, Mednov AE. Assessment of ecological-economic damage in the course of construction and erection works. Zhilichnoe stroitel'stvo = Housing construction. 2014;8:48-52. (In Russ.).

4. Tshovrebov ES. Resource-saving: main formation stages, theories and methods, tendencies and prospects of development in industry and construction of Russia. Vestnik MGSU = Monthly Journal on Construction and Architecture. 2020;15(1):112-158 (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.22227/1997-0935.2020.1.112-158.

5. Telichenko V, Benuzh A, Eames G, Orenburova E, Shushunova N. Development green standards for constuuction in Russia. Pro-cedia Engineering. 2016;153:726-730. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2016.08.233.

6. Regidor A. Proposals for public investment projects under the principle of sustainable development. Noesis: Revista de Ciencias Sociales & Humanidades. 2016;25(50):23-48.

7. Goldstein B, Rasmussen F. LCA of Buildings and the Built Environment. Life Cycle Assessment. Theory and Practice. Ch. 28. 2018. p. 695720.

8. Chertes K, Tupitsyna O, Pystin V, Savelyev A, Martynenko E. Improvement of the system of inorganic waste recycling to man-made soils. MATEC Web of Conferences. 5th International Scientific Conference “Integration, Partnership and Innovation in Construction Science and Education”. 2016;86:06003. https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/20168606003.

9. Fernando SY, Lange DA, Delvasto S. Effect of incorporation of masonry residue on the properties of self-compacting concretes. Constr. and Build. Mater. 2019;196:277-283. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.11.132.

10. Hertwich E, Lifset R, Pauliuk S, Heeren N. Resource Efficiency and Climate Change: Material Efficiency Strategies for a Low-Carbon Future: a Report of the Int. Resource Panel. Kenya, 2020. Available from: https://www.unep.org/resources/report/resource-efficiency-and-climate-change-material-efficiency-strategies-low-carbon [Accessed 08th September 2021].

11. Hart J, Adams K, Giesekam J, Tingley DD, Pomponi F. Barriers and drivers in a circular economy: the case of the built environment. Procedia CIRP. 2019;80:619-624. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2018.12.015.

12. Domenech T, Bahn-Walkowiak B. Transition towards a resource efficient circular economy in Europe: policy lessons from the EU and the member states. Ecological Economics. 2019;155:7-19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.11.001.

13. Elgizawy S, El-Haggar S, Nassar K. Slum Development Using Zero Waste Concepts: Construction Waste Case Study. Procedia Engineering. 2016;145:1306-1313. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2016.04.168.

14. Ehresman T, Okereke C. Environmental justice and conceptions of the green economy. International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics. 2015;15(1):13-27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-014-9265-2.

15. Kirchherr J, Reike D, Hekkert M. Conceptualizing the circular economy: An analysis of 114 definitions. Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 2017;127:221-232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.09.005.

16. Tskhovrebov E, Velichko E, Niyazgulov U. Planning measures for environmentally safe handling with extremely and highly hazardous wastes in industrial, building and transport complex. Materials Science Forum. 2018;945:988-994. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/MSF.945.988.

17. Velichko E, Tshovrebov E, Niyazgulov U. Organizational, technical and economic fundamentals of waste management and monitoring. E3S Web of Conferences. Topical Problems of Green Architecture, Civil and Environmental Engineering, TPACEE 2019. 2020;164:08031. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202016408031.

18. Shevchenko A, Konon N, Tskhovrebov E, Velichko E. Innovative technologies of liquid media treatment in the system of ecological and sanitary-hygienic control of waste landfills. MATEC Web of Conferences. International Science Conference SPbWOSCE-2016 “SMART City”. 2017;106:07005. https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201710607005

19. Velichko E, Tskhovrebov E. Insights into the state of affairs and possible ways to improve secondary material waste management. MATEC Web of Conferences. XXVII R-S-P Seminar, Theoretical Foundation of Civil Engineering (27RSP) (TFoCE 2018). 2018;196:04066. https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201819604066.

20. Azarov VN, Manzhilevskaya SE, Petrenko LK. Organizational and economic problems of ecological safety in construction. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering. 2019;698:055007. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/698/5/055007.