Next Article in Journal
Revisiting Cluster Vulnerabilities towards Information and Communication Technologies in the Eastern Island of Indonesia Using Fuzzy C Means
Previous Article in Journal
Holistic Case Study on the Explosion of Ammonium Nitrate in Tianjin Port
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

A Methodology to Qualitatively Select Upcycled Building Materials from Urban and Industrial Waste

1
ISTAR, Instituto Universitário de Lisboa (ISCTE-IUL), 1649-026 Lisboa, Portugal
2
Dinâmia-Cet, Instituto Universitário de Lisboa (ISCTE-IUL), 1649-026 Lisboa, Portugal
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2022, 14(6), 3430; https://doi.org/10.3390/su14063430
Submission received: 30 January 2022 / Revised: 9 March 2022 / Accepted: 10 March 2022 / Published: 15 March 2022

Abstract

:
The rising concern about climate change and other challenges faced by the planet led society to look for different design solutions and approaches towards a more balanced relationship between the built and natural environment. The circular economy is an effective alternative to the linear economic model inspired by natural metabolisms and the circular use of resources. This research explores how innovative strategies can be integrated for evaluating local urban and industrial wastes into sustainable building materials. A literature review is conducted focusing on circular design strategies, re-use, recycle, and waste transformation processes. Then, a methodology for the selection of upcycled and re-used building materials is developed based on Ashby’s method. A total of thirty-five types of partition walls, which include plastic, wood, paper, steel, aluminium, and agricultural wastes, are evaluated using a multi-criteria decision aid (M-MACBETH). Among these solutions, ten types of walls show high-performance thermal and sound isolation, fourteen types are effective for coating, and two exhibit structural reliability. Regardless of their functional limitations, the proposed solutions based on waste materials bear great potential within the construction industry.

1. Introduction

The Circular Economy (CE) has gained political and scientific significance in recent years as an alternative to the current mainstream industrial capitalism economic model [1]. CE is deemed an effective method to address social, economic, and ecological issues of the contemporary age and thus achieve the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) [2].
The relationship between Planet Earth and the Global Economy will be truly sustainable when the supply of resources and the assimilation of waste considers the environmental limits of the planet [3]. World organisations estimate that production and consumption patterns exceed over 75% of the biocapacity [4]. While 92 billion tons of raw materials were extracted, 36 billion tons of waste were produced and collected in 2017, as stated in the Circularity Gap Report. Only 4.2% of these materials were reintroduced into the world economy [1]. These values reflect biodiversity loss, natural resources degradation, and the economic inefficiency of linear systems.
The extraction of virgin resources is predicted to double in the next thirty years [1] due to the growth and consumption patterns of the population. This trend will lead to a rupture in the supply chain and the volatility of trade prices, especially in the EU, where the industry is highly dependent on international markets. On the other hand, the amount of unrecovered waste illustrates lost economic opportunities in the order of USD 1000 billion per year [5]. The construction sector represents 10% of the European Union’s (EU) GDP [6], accounts for the most significant consumption of virgin resources [7] and produces one-third of all generated waste [8]. The scientific community calls for a systemic change addressing the entire life cycle of buildings and the construction value chain based on energy efficiency, bio-efficiency, and material efficiency [9].
In this broader context, new strategies have been developed in the last few years, including bioclimatic architecture, disassembly construction techniques, and sustainable materials evaluation [10]. However, less importance has been given to the cascade recovery or the creative valuation of waste and by-products from other industries in the construction sector. Open-circuit resource management and industrial symbiosis represent effective methods to avoid loss of material and product value towards an overall economic and social stability. The main challenge presents offering construction solutions that are more flexible and cost-effective than traditional construction techniques. This is particularly important within European real estate markets when raw material stocks are falling, and the global materials supply chain is under pressure [11].
Advanced materials and techniques based on re-use/recycling are emerging on the current market, while designers need to identify the most viable solutions for each specific context. Various tools, e.g., building environmental product declaration (EPDs) and product certification schemes, provide standardised information about the environmental performance of products and materials essential to decision-making [12]. Many scholars have developed sustainable assessment criteria for selecting building materials [13,14] and evaluation criteria in line with the Circular Economy principles [15]. However, the literature does not yet support the selection of recycled and re-used materials derived from urban and industrial wastes.
Innovative strategies for converting local urban and industrial wastes into building materials and systems are discussed in this study. Our main purpose is to develop a methodology to guide designers’ decision-making on upcycled and re-used building materials selection. The proposed methodology is based on the Ashby method followed by multi-criteria analysis in the software M-MACBETH (Measuring Attractiveness by a Categorical-Based Evaluation Technique) [16,17]. M-MACBETH can handle multiple results generated from qualitative expert judgments. In our case study, thirty-five construction solutions from post-consumer waste and by-products (plastic, wood, paper, steel, aluminium, and agricultural waste) are analysed and then tested and ranked in a case study in Lisbon (Portugal). This study aims to address the following questions:
How to compare a set of upcycled and re-used materials derived from local urban and industrial wastes?
How efficient are these building systems based on urban and industrial wastes?
The first section of the work presents a literature review on design strategies for the circular management of regional material flows in the construction sector. The second section identifies re-use and recycle typologies and waste transformation processes. The third section introduces a methodology for selecting upcycling materials and construction systems according to CE principles. This methodology is applied to evaluate thirty-five case studies. Finally, the results are discussed based on the sample analysis.

2. Design Strategies for Circular Management of Material Flows

A circular building is designed, constructed, managed, and constructed following the CE principles [9]. It can be adapted to the needs of users and the environment and function as a bank, or reservoir, where materials are identified, temporarily stored and released at the end of their life. As a result, this process leads to an optimisation of the entire value chain with new ownership and business models [18].
This life cycle approach requires a transdisciplinary view and multiple-scale approach, the analysis of the connections between construction products, the built environment, and urban features, as well as the coordination of multiple stakeholders such as product manufacturers, service providers, and demolition/disassembly companies [19]. Due to this complexity, adopting systems thinking (i.e., understanding what the relationship of each part to the whole is and the relationship of the whole to each part in a system) facilitates the collaborative network in the value chain, where the architect assumes a central role [9,20].
Pomponi et al. (2017) propose CE strategies in the built environment through a system perspective that considers three following levels: macro- (national level, cities, general industry structure); meso (regional level/buildings/eco-industrial parks); micro- (product level, building components) [9]. However, this systematisation does not present a complete building analysis and understanding.
Buildings are long-lived entities, often interpreted as large static units but result as sets of various artefacts, each with its specific life cycle, grouped to respond to a series of requirements and constraints [21]. Consequently, buildings are not efficiently managed through their lifecycles as single manufactured products [6]. Indeed, the diachronic analysis of buildings reveals that they encompass a set of dynamic systems that can partially update themselves according to users’ needs without becoming obsolete [22]. This phenomenon occurs because a building includes shearing layers (Site, Structure, Skin, Services, Stuff) responsible for its primary functions. Some of these systems can accommodate faster changes without compromising other systems being initially conceived as functional independent [23].
Designing a building in multi-layers may help approach each system according to specific rules and strategies [24]. Their independence allows a quick dismantling at the end of building life. However, a building transformation capacity depends not only on functional aspects but also on technical and physical ones. A façade may have a longer lifetime than the systems and components, and these may be incorporated in different technical or biological cycles [25]. Thus, their subcomponents and materials also require functional, technical, and physical independence allowing necessary transformations at the component and material levels. Within this perspective, the Hierarchy of Material Levels define the buildings as hierarchical system sets for building primary functions [21]. These systems, in turn, are composed of components, elements, and materials [26].
The compression of the buildings as a small piece of a city’s metabolism, a living system composed of a series of logically and hierarchically assembled elements, helps organise circular design principles in a top-down approach and then achieve better management and a “wholly independent” and “exchangeable” design.
Regarding the Hierarchy of Material Levels, circular strategies are related to specific scales of intervention (Figure 1). Four design strategies that contribute to narrowing and slowing down regional material flows are identified in the literature [24,27,28]: (a) Design with local resources: analyses material flows in the geographic, economic, and social contexts of the city, affecting the choice of elements and materials. (b) Design for adaptability (DfA): evaluates the correlations between the building and their systems and Design for disassembly (DfD): assesses relationships between elements, components, and systems. (c) Design with sustainable materials focuses on materials and elements.

2.1. Design with Local Resources

As stated by Walker et al., the preliminary step in the design of a low environmental impact building is the inventory of locally available materials [29]. The use of local building materials reduces transport cost and impacts, supports regional development, and facilitates sustainable circular business models. The Living Building Challenge program defines as a requirement in the certificates of the building that at least 75% of the budget for building materials should come from within a 5000 km radius of the building site, of which 30% should be sourced within 1000 km and 20% within 500 km [30]. The LEED v4 in Material and Resource credits include the location valuation factor, which states that Products and Materials should be extracted, manufactured, and purchased within 160 km from the site location of the project [31].
SuperRuse Studios has pioneered the online platform Harvest map, an inventory of local used materials and their location, encouraging designers to explore resources and potential-used building products locally available [24]. Similarly, REPAiR project, and the REFLOW project, among others, introduce the Activity-based Spatial Flow Analysis (AS-MFA) [32]. This methodology connects the spatial, material, and social analyses relating to material flows and stocks from waste production. It determines the qualitative and quantitative waste flow specifications in content, space, and time. It also addresses the relations between managers and consumers, allowing the identification of extracted and manufactured resources, possible exchanges of by-products and wastes between industries (industrial symbiosis) and re-used recycling strategies [32].

2.2. Design for Adaptability (DfA)

The Design for Adaptability (DfA) defines the need to conceive the buildings as adaptable living systems. They should be resilient and respond to multiple demands of the environment and the users [33]. The valuable life ends with its inability to accommodate changes [28]. Thus, the obsolescence of the building results from an incompatibility between demands and the capacity for transformation [33]. Considering the functional and social perspectives, there are three types of stakeholders: Society, Owners, and Users. Furthermore, when considering the capacity, influenced by technical and physical characteristics, Location, Building, Systems, and Components should be considered [34]. Schmidt III et al. propose a method for assessing structures according to six types of change, driven by the real estate market, performance, use, location, size, and space [33]. Other academics, e.g., Geraedts, developed key performance indicators for designers to assess the adaptive capacity of buildings [34].

2.3. Design for Disassembly (DfD)

The Design for Disassembly (DfD) regards the undamaged recovery of materials, components, and systems during and after the building lifetime, which is an effective alternative to building demolition [24,35,36]. In DfD, re-used systems have the highest rank and recycle materials the lowest (Figure 2) [36]. Thus, the hierarchical model prioritises the recovery (placing it at the highest levels) to preserve the embodied value of systems and components [28]. Durmisevic’s Transformation Capability scheme introduces the fundamental assumptions for granting dynamic and dismountable structures [21]. It is necessary to consider the set of criteria regarding functional, technical, and physical decomposition. The functional decomposition evaluates the logical organisation of elements in an assembly and the functional autonomy of each element. The technical and physical decomposition evaluates the synchronous assembly of systems, the life cycle of components, the design of interfaces, and the connection types [21]. ISO 20887 standard on design for deconstruction and adaptability is an international tool to assess deconstruction [37]. Furthermore, research projects such as Buildings as Material Banks (BAMB) [38] offer essential support instruments.

2.4. Design with Sustainable Materials

The selection of building materials that comply with sustainability standards reduces construction impacts and ensures that products circulate efficiently on healthy flows [2,39] with low social [40]. The CE distinguishes biological and technical materials. The former consists of natural resources free of toxic substances that can be absorbed by the biosphere, e.g., wood or sand [2]. The CE model proposes that biological materials can be ‘cascaded’ through various uses, e.g., solid timber can be transformed into panel products. The latter are manufactured resources that nature cannot assimilate, such as metals and plastics. Technological materials should be retained within industrial loops to ensure they are not discarded in the environment and lost to the economy but re-used and recycled [2]. The Cradle to Cradle (C2C) Certified TM product has four main categories to assess materials and circular products: the Material Health identifies the chemical ingredients of every material, avoiding chemicals harmful to humans and the environment present on the “Red List”; the Material Re-Use evaluates if the design enables a safe return to nature or industry, and the Renewable Energy and Carbon Management promote renewable energy, and reduced CO2 emissions; Water Stewardship safeguard clean water resources; and Social Fairness from contributing to equitable society [41].

3. Upcycling Waste and By-Products as Construction Materials

Since the European Waste Framework Directive (2008/98/EC) recently replaced by Directive 2018/851/EU-wastes have assumed a prominent role in manufacturing processes [42]. The rational use of natural resources as materials, components, and systems has progressively been prioritised. The Communication on resource efficiency opportunities in the building sector (COM (2014) 445 fin. l) and The Circular Economic Action Plan identify product design and product policies as one of the main enablers to implement CE. Furthermore, these long-term targets reduce landfilling and increase recycling and re-use [43,44].
Until the 20th century, many components were customised and designed by architects using local techniques and materials. The secondary materials market was the primary supplier due to the scarcity of resources available. Thus, many buildings were constructed with locally recovered materials, such as medieval constructions where masonry or bricks were employed from Roman ruins [45]. Even today, communities and informal settlements in developing countries are built with creative and wise solutions leveraging recycled materials. Throughout the 20th and 21st centuries, several architects have explored re-use and recycling through different creative processes. John Harbraken overcame the design limitation and the original function of products on re-use. Harbraken developed a beer bottle that could be re-used after consumption as an affordable house-building brick [46]. Michael Reynolds, back in 1972, built the Thumb House, the first of several homes built on throughout his career. This architect explores a new living concept focused on resource self-sufficiency (e.g., water, and energy) and uses waste from nearby landfills as construction materials [47]. Furthermore, research groups such as Vandkunsten Architects [48], Arup-Global Advisory, Design, Planning & Engineering [49], and from the University of Brighton [50] have been working on full-scale prototypes and new practices of flexible building components and materials.
Re-use refers to the repeated use of a product, component, or material for the same or different purpose from its initial use. It includes minor changes that allow it to perform a function, e.g., a wooden structure is refurbished to be used again as a load-bearing structure or a cladding panel [51,52,53]. Superuse means recapturing the value of products when they have the lowest possible profit by providing new functions and reintroducing them into new cycles with creative design applications [54].
Recycle is the transformation process of a material so that it can be reintegrated into a new production line as raw material, marking the end of the cycle and the beginning of a new one [51]. The main distinction between re-use and recycle is irreversibility: the material does not return to its original form. Recycling can go in two ways: downcycle-the transformation resulting in a material with a lower value; and upcycle transformation into a material with a higher value than the initial one. To name an example, the ferrous blast-furnace slag (Fe-BFS), a by-product generated from siderurgic pyroprocesses to develop active ceramic anodes [55], and the composite material, which has as raw material adhesive and sticker printing waste produced by UPM Biocomposites, Lahti, Finland. The latter was used by Shigeru Ban for the furniture company Arteck Milan in 2007 [56]. Downcycle is the most widely used transformation process despite being the least beneficial loop in the waste management hierarchy. Re-use saves 88% of greenhouse gas emissions and optimises several tested environmental indicators compared to recycling [57,58].
Literature review and case study analysis render it possible to identify patterns and distinguish six variants in re-use and upcycle [56,59,60] (Table 1) as described below:
(a)
Simple Transformation Process: A creative design process that gives new functional value to waste, including little changes such as cutting, polishing, painting, or screwing. It can be executed on the construction site. The Resource Rows Apartments from Compenhaga Lendeger Group project is a remarkable example of creative re-use. The architects have developed an innovative system for re-using brick walls which involve cutting the walls into sections to deliver panels fitted into a steel structure and design different façade compositions [61].
(b)
Design Transformation Process: The products never become waste, i.e., after their useful life, they are continuously re-used while maintaining their shape, properties, and composition over their life cycle, except for their function that can change drastically [52].
(c)
Densification Transformation Process: Regards the compaction process of waste. In some specific cases, e.g., with some agricultural waste, the compression activates a specific potential that releases a natural glue under pressure. It can be an asset to produce straw panels, columns, or beams [56]. This process requires advanced industrial equipment or more rudimentary systems to compress the waste [56].
(d)
Cultivation Transformation Process: The metabolism of cultivated materials enables natural recycle to be carried out locally with basic production techniques. Typically, they absorb carbon dioxide during growth, require controlled humid environments, and feed on other waste or materials. The growth process is halted when the material reaches the required density and strength [59]. The material developed by the University of Cape Town in 2018 is a relevant example of this process. Human urine was used to craft building blocks through microbial carbonate precipitation [62].
(e)
Reconfiguration Transformation Process: Involves grinding, sewing, gluing, and changing the original form of the material. This process combines organic components, inorganic, or mineral adhesives; and can alter the material’s density and aesthetic qualities by changing the size of each piece, the grinding, and the resins. It requires specific production processes and industrial equipment, which consume energy and release carbon dioxide. It cannot be executed in the proximity of the construction sites [56].
(f)
Molecular Transformation Process: Involves the change of the molecular state of the waste. The process requires high-tech procedures involving, e.g., liquefaction or gasification of the original material. A relevant example regards the organic waste into bioethanol [56]. This process is carried out in specialised factories.
Table 1. Overview of practical examples of re-use and upcycle transformation processes.
Table 1. Overview of practical examples of re-use and upcycle transformation processes.
Transformation ProcessesRecycle or Re-UsePractical Examples
Simple Transformation ProcessRe-useThe Beehive project, Luigi Rosselli Architects, 2018, Sydney [63]; Resource Rows Apartaments, Compenhaga Lendeger Group [62,64].
Design Transformation ProcessWaterBrick, Wendell Adams [65]
Densification Transformation ProcessPHZ2, Dratz & Dratz Architects, Oberhausen, Germany [56]
Cultivation Transformation ProcessBio brick made from human urine, the University of Cape Town in South Africa [62]
Molecular Transformation ProcessUpcycleWasteBasedBricks®, StoneCycling [66]

4. A Methodological Framework for Evaluating Re-Used and Upcycled Building Materials

This research proposes a methodology for selecting re-used and upcycled building materials and systems from post-consumer waste and by-products. The methodology is applied to internal partition walls. It is based on the Ashby material selection approach [39]: selecting materials involves seeking the best match between design requirements and the material properties. Ashby’s method is based on four steps and shown in Figure 3.
  • The translation of requirements defines the function of the material, the requirements necessary to achieve it, and identifies the non-negotiable ones.
  • The screening process involves the elimination of materials unable to meet the performance requirements. Each material is sorted considering its ability to meet the established requirements.
  • The rank process involves the evaluation of each material after the 2nd phase, with criteria of excellence.
  • The outcome of the steps is a ranked shortlist of candidates that meet the constraints and exhibit high scores. It is then necessary to collect the information, e.g., from handbooks, supplier datasheets, websites of environmental agencies, and other reliable sources.
In the first phase, to assess the sustainability and functionality of different solutions, it was necessary to synthesise the principles of the circular economy into performance requirements and criteria according to the function in the building.
Given the existence of multiple and heterogeneous criteria, the Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) is used to develop the screening process. The Macbeth (Measuring attractiveness by a Categorical-Based Evaluation Technique) method is adopted in this research for its ability to incorporate many preferences built through pairwise comparison judgments. It is a participative process based on an additive aggregation approach. It allows one to structure the problem and rank the options, considering qualitative indicators, performance levels, and different criteria weights [16,17].
After defining criteria and performance levels, a panel of experts (in this case, architects and civil engineers) judge the performance requirements for each sub-component of the wall. Then, they define the difference of attractiveness between the performance levels of each criterion and between different criteria. This set of criteria-wise is numerically ranked in terms of attractiveness. Then, all options (construction solutions) are classified according to the defined performance levels, and the software, through weighted average, delivers the ranking of all the options on a 0/100 scale.
In the following sections, we adopt these integrated methods (Ashby and Macbeth) to evaluate the performance of internal partition walls, using Lisbon as a case study. According to the concept of “shearing layers”, partition walls are part of the Space Plan, with a life expectancy from 3 to 30 years [23]. Given its short life expectancy, the partition walls can be upgraded or replaced frequently. These systems require lower structural and weather resistance constraints than other building systems.

4.1. Translation of Functional Requirements

The functional performance defines the required level of material efficiency for each building component. Strength, deformability, and durability are fundamental parameters, especially in load-bearing elements [67]. The components of the façade system are waterproofing, hygrothermal properties, and so on. Table 2 shows the performance level of each criterion that are listed below:
  • Mechanical Resistance Capacity defines the material behaviour subjected to mechanical stress. It refers to the ability to withstand an applied force without failing or excessive deformation.
  • Thermal performance measures thermal properties (conductivity, specific heat) that ensure thermal comfort and building energy efficiency.
  • Acoustic performance is the ability of a material to absorb or insulate sound.
  • Water-resistance represents the ability of a material to maintain its properties when exposed to water. If a material absorbs water, it expands, thermal conductivity increases, and strength and durability are compromised.
  • Fire Resistance characterises the behaviour of a material when exposed to fire, such as the release of toxic gases and emission. The classification of the material fire resistance is fundamental to guarantee the safety of the occupants in case of fire.
  • Durability is the ability of a material to resist the combined action of physical, chemical, and biological factors. If the material is durable, it will have a longer service life and low maintenance.
  • Sensory Properties identifies those sensory properties significant in finishing materials: texture, brightness, transparency, and odour.

4.1.1. Partition Walls Functional Requirements

The proposed methodology for selecting upcycled and re-used materials is applied to partition walls. The first step regards the identification of those functional parts that allow the components of a partition wall to work properly (Figure 4); the second step regards the translation of functional needs into requirements and constraints (Table 3).
The requirements and constraints necessary to achieve all functional demands were qualitatively identified according to the need to respond to the functional parameters that were previously defined (Table 3).

4.1.2. Environmental Requirements and Parameters According to CE Principles

Environmental performance requirements are essential for evaluating the potential of re-used and upcycled materials. The following requirements are listed in Table 4:
  • The type of waste identifies the nature of the waste. Post-consumer waste is composed of urban waste, i.e., waste of domestic origin generated during daily activities. Industrial waste or by-products result from advanced production processes or waste from a specific industry, e.g., fly ash from the steel industry or wood scraps.
  • The complexity of the Transformation Process allows sorting by order of complexity of the transformation processes. The more complex the transformation processes are, the more energy, carbon, and labour are required to produce new materials and new building systems. The simplest transformation processes can be executed at a construction site, eliminating the need for production and transport processes, whereas complex processes require a specific production line.
  • The toxic content identifies harmful substances that may compromise human and environmental health. The materials used in the circular building must not contain the substances present in Building Industry Red Lists [68]. No prohibited products or materials (e.g., epoxy resin) can be employed.
  • The Potential for Reintegration into the Biological and Technological Cycle allows the identification of the capacity that materials, at the end of the useful life of the building, to be re-used in cascade, eliminated by nature in biological nutrients, or recycled without losing value in technological nutrients [69]. Each transformation process is evaluated considering the potential contribution of the building material to a global continuous material flow.
  • The Availability and Local Proximity parameters can be defined at various scales according to the city's political and social geographic context. Three radii of geographical proximity with a centre in Lisbon can be defined for this analysis: High proximity: Radius of 10 km; Medium proximity: 25 km radius; Low proximity: Radius of 40 km radius of the centre of the intervention area (Figure 5). Different types of waste were identified and divided into five groups according to their nature: plastic, paper, wood, steel/aluminium, and agricultural waste. The relevant stages in managing this waste, the actors involved, and the potential places to obtain this waste in Lisbon were also identified within the defined radius.

4.2. Weighting of Environmental and Functional Performance Levels

After defining the environmental and functional performance levels, a panel of experts establish the distances between each performance level to obtain overall cardinal values. The experts define the difference in attractiveness between two performance levels by selecting the most appropriate adjective from seven semantic categories defined in the Macbeth method: no, very weak, weak, moderate, strong, very strong, or extreme (Figure 6). For example, the complexity of the difference in attractiveness between Simple Transformation Process (S) and Design Transformation Process (D) ratings is very weak. In contrast, the difference of attractiveness between the Cultivation Transformation Process (C) and Reconfiguration Transformation Process (R) is strong. A similar process is undertaken to define the weights of each criterion for each partition wall component. Then, three design scenarios are defined when the dominant criterion is thermal and acoustic insulation, cladding, and load-bearing materials (Figure 7).

4.3. Classification Process

A total of 35 materials are collected in this study comprising materials and construction systems upcycled or re-used from post-consumer and industrial waste. These were divided into five groups: plastic, paper, wood, steel/aluminium, and agricultural waste, (Table 5, Table 6, Table 7, Table 8 and Table 9).
To assess Availability and Local Proximity (APL), it is necessary to define the stages of waste flow management, the actors involved, and the potential places to obtain this waste (in Lisbon). Table 10 summarises this process for plastic waste, and Appendix A, Table A1, Table A2, Table A3, Table A4 and Table A5, includes all tables. It should be emphasised that urban post-consumption waste (bottles, cans, objects, and food) is placed in undifferentiated or recycling containers, collected and sorted by municipal collectors, and forwarded to the respective waste treatment and recovery centres. Therefore, these are the most probable places to obtain urban waste in large quantities. Objects that have a longer useful life (e.g., doors, tables, chairs, kitchen utensils) can be found in second-hand shops, online second-hand sales platforms, and specialised repositories such as the Repositório de Materiais in Portugal [100]. Regarding industrial waste, one of the best suppliers is the firm producing waste, thus contractors or building materials companies can establish a beneficial relationship with that industry.
The places where the waste is available near Lisbon are indicated in Supplementary Materials Map1: Harvest map and Figure 8.

4.4. Ranking

The M-Macbeth tool allows one to score each option according to the function of the partition wall component. Figure 9 and Figure 10 show the overall thermometer, which ranks the solutions from the best classification (100) to the worst (0). To screen these results, all combinations characterised by a global weighted score lower than 75 are discarded in the 1st and 2nd scenarios. Given the function of the materials in the 3rd scenario, solutions with score lower than 90 are discarded. The structural support function demands a higher set of requirements, and the analyst considered that only those starting from 90 are adequate to perform it.
Ten solutions exhibit the best scoring in the 1st scenario. Among those, four best-scoring solutions stand out:
(a)
Wood Foam (Score: 89.23/100) was developed by the Fraynhifer Institute for Wood Research in Germany. It is obtained through lignocellulose from the biomass of trees and other woody plants. The strength of this material does not depend on the quality of the wood. The wood can contain sawmill waste, forest trimmings and chips as raw material because the strength of the foam is related to the contact between the cross fibres and not their length or fibre quality. It can be produced with different densities from 40 to 200 kg/m3 and has thermal conductivity levels comparable to expanded polystyrene, around 0.04 w/km. Being a porous and hygroscopic material, it behaves similar to a sponge in the presence of moisture, yet its volume remains intact. In general, wood foam bears high resistance, low thermal conductivity, and good behaviour with fire; in this sense, it can be applied as thermal insulation in product packaging, furniture, and non-structural panels. Besides being a waste-derived product, it is an effective alternative to foams made from petrochemical products [59,85].
(b)
PET wool (Score: 88.58/100) or polyester wool is a thermo-acoustic material constructed from used PET bottle fibres. It is a 100% recyclable material, already marketed by some companies in different thicknesses (300–200 mm). It has a heat transfer coefficient of 0.04 W/mK, is waterproof, and has excellent sound absorption capacity, with no harmful chemicals or binders. It is entirely safe to handle as it is non-combustible [75].
(c)
Hy-Fi and Mycoform (Score: 83.15/100) are similar materials, being composed of agricultural by-products and mushroom mycelium, which serve as natural digestive glue. This type of cultured material uses the natural growth of fungi as a bio-manufacturing method. The manufacturing process is straightforward; agricultural waste is mixed with water and the living organism (mushroom roots/mycelium). After five days, the mixture can be placed in a closed mould, where it rests for another five to ten days (25–27 °C). The roots and organisms grow and fuse into biomass, giving rise to a solid material subjected to heat (70–90 °C), hot pressed, oven-dried or dried in the open air to dehydrate the material, interrupting the growth process, and neutralising the fungus. Due to its thermal conductivity (0.04–0.18 W/mK), Mycelium composites are optimised using straw and hemp fibres (low density), and thus with a reduction of the values to 0.04–0.08 W/mK. Mycelium alone can absorb low-frequency sounds (<1500 Hz), outperforming cork [93,94].
In the 2nd scenario, there are fourteen high scoring solutions. Among those, four best-scoring solutions stand out:
(a)
Polli-Brick (93.99/100) from the Winimiz company are 100% recycled polyethylene terephthalate polymer bottles, designed to be re-used, as a translucent, lightweight after consumption and recyclable material. The design of the bottles is modified in 3D into a modular honeycomb-like shape, resulting in a very sturdy container that is suitable for the construction industry, and was used in the iconic EcoARK building at the 2010 International Flora Expo in Taipei (Taiwan) [71].
(b)
Vegan house atelier Block Architects and Collage House Facade (91.00). The architects designed the facades of these houses using blinds and doors collected in the proximity of the construction site [82,83].
(c)
3D Abwab Pavilion (91.00/100) designed the Lot-el studio in the Maboneng district in South Africa. The building consists of 140 stacked containers connected with a twist lock and welded together. Each residence consists of two (or three) containers [86,87].
In the 3rd scenario, the best-ranking solutions are:
(a)
3D Abwab Pavilion 8 (93.88/100).
(b)
Dubai Design Week 2015 Pavilion (91.10/100). A temporary pavilion for Dubai Design District was designed with materials from a local waste management company (Bea’ah). The pavilion was composed of 1100 springs from used mattresses, and the architects chose this residue for its strength, lightness, and silhouette. The springs exhibited the function of an organic (cloud-like) structural mesh that controlled natural light and recreated patterned shadows on the floor. At the end of the exhibition, the pavilion was dismantled, and materials were re-used by the company [88].

5. Discussion

The overall thermometers allow one to compare the performance of each construction solution under multiple criteria within each design scenario. Solutions derived from paper waste display great limitations, due to poor durability, low mechanical resistance and low water and weather resistance. However, some designers have explored its potential in construction, e.g., The Architect Shigeru Ban, well-known for his innovative approach using unorthodox materials. Ban designs emergency shelters, and other structures that are made from paper tubes. A composite material for the structure and cladding is employed at Arteck Milan in 2007, which contains raw material waste from printing adhesives and stickers produced by the Finnish company UPM. On the other hand, wastepaper sludge, a by-product of recycled paper products, can be incorporated into construction materials [101,102].
The construction solutions with plastic waste can be re-used and recycled. However, several reused options did not fulfil minimal functional requirements. On the other hand, recycling plastic waste to produce new materials such as mortar or concrete has been proven to be effective [101,102]. Wood, steel, and aluminium bear huge potential in re-using or recycling processes due to their intrinsic physical and chemical properties, as shown in their scores.
Virgin materials such as potentially harmful glues or resins need to be added during the transformation process to achieve an adequate functional performance, which compromises the circularity and health of the material.
Bio-based materials like Hy-fi, and Mycoform also tend to be less durable than technical materials as they are generally hydrophilic materials and are prone to the action of fungi. They should be kept in dry places or be coated with suitable and healthy materials as a solution. The material is coated with a sunflower varnish in the Sunflower Enterprise. The same phenomenon occurs with fire resistance requirements. Building materials and systems can be optimised through passive fire protection solutions such as healthy paints and coatings, e.g., black acacia tannin resin and modified lignin resin (epoxy–lignin) [68].
Although the use of local secondary materials can substantially reduce the life cycle impact, impact from primary materials (e.g., painting, resin) that need to be added during production can outweigh the benefits from using secondary materials [102].
The harvest map revealed that all waste flows analysed in this work were generated near the intervention area. Society produces waste streams regardless of regional and cultural influences, aside from sunflower and cereal cultivation.
The lack of accurate technical and environmental information regarding waste-derived products and experimental materials precludes a Lifecycle Assessment (LCA) of the selected solutions. This analysis addresses a comprehensive assessment to overcome this limitation. In this study, the environmental and functional performances are taken into account in three design scenarios, distinguished for the criteria weights and the thresholds.
However, the use of a multi-criteria analysis tool presents a limitation. First, the performance of the options is evaluated without considering the interactions between components. Second, a cost-benefit analysis should be addressed in further analyses to validate the effectiveness of each selected solution considering contextual constraints.
The principal drivers for enabling material circularity are cost-effectiveness, technical feasibility, and institutional public support [103]. According to [12], some obstacles encountered by companies for producing and re-using secondary materials include a difficult sales process, limited quantities and access, and lack of adequate infrastructure for sorting and collection [104]. European and national building codes can promote the use of secondary materials. Additionally, the use of environmental product declarations (EPDs), and inclusion in building certification schemes (e.g., BREEAM, Levels, LEED) can lead to making informed decisions [104].
Re-used and upcycled materials may require substantial transformation processes or require the input of primary materials during the transformation into a condition suitable for being used in the construction sector. To this end, meeting the legislative requirements such as energy efficiency and construction reliability is demanding.
The European Commission has recently updated Building Codes (Eurocodes) to incorporate climate impact requirements (e.g., mandate M/515). Specifications and guidelines for material selection should be improved to reduce uncertainties of the construction contractors, designers, financial investors, and to promote the use of secondary materials rather than primary materials. Taxes on primary materials (e.g., aggregates) applied in most EU Member States and reduced Value Added Tax (VAT) for recycled materials in the Czech Republic [103] are effective measures towards a more sustainable building economy.

6. Conclusions

A sustainable and circular urban metabolism can continuously produce the materials it needs to evolve, without exploiting natural resources. Manufacturers and designers are challenged to create efficient systems where materials exist in various states without ever becoming waste. Design strategies that enable decelerated and narrowed material flows will become a common practice in this industry, as new production processes, new techniques, construction processes, and new architectural languages incorporate upcycling remanufacture and re-use.
Designers play a lead role in innovation and must adopt a systematic approach, understanding building composition, assembly, and disassembly routines and their behaviour over time within different social and environmental contexts. Furthermore, designers and construction companies should perceive how the industry manages building material flows, selects new upcycled and re-used materials, and analyses their transformation processes. Despite rarely being put into practice, cascade recovery and upcycling represent competitive strategies for an effective waste management, since they contribute to the resilience in local value chains, and decreases in import dependence, and close material flows.
In this broad context, thirty-five re-used and upcycled materials (post-consumer waste and by-products from various industrial sectors) were evaluated in this study using a Multi-Criteria Analysis considering indicators related to environmental performance, i.e., (i) complexity of transformation processes; (ii) potential of reintroduction in the biological or technological cycle, (iii) toxic content, and (iv) local availability- and indicators related to functional performance, i.e., (v) mechanical resistance capacity, (vi) thermal performance, (vii) acoustic performance, (viii) water and moisture resistance, fire resistance, and durability. A total of ten study solutions were recognised as suitable for thermal and acoustic isolation, fourteen for coating, and two for structural functions. The analysed materials exhibit good environmental performance. Wood, steel, and aluminium waste materials bear great potential, regardless of their functional limitations, the proposed solutions based on waste materials have great potential within the construction industry.
The territory and cities in particular are digitized, not only in their “static” infrastructure–new and existing buildings through BIM models that contain material and component information—but also the material flows of industries, agriculture and domestic waste. This will open multiple opportunities for the exploration of overlooked resources, allowing more matches between demand and supply.
This study provides a methodology that fits within this scheme, by qualitatively evaluating building materials derived from domestic and industrial wastes through technical and sustainability criteria. Its scope can be extended in future research and adapted to other building components and to infrastructure projects.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/su14063430/s1, Map1: Harvest map.

Author Contributions

Conceptualisation and methodology, S.P., V.R. and S.S.; validation, S.P.; formal analysis, S.P.; investigation, S.P.; writing—original draft preparation, S.P.; writing—review and editing, R.R., P.P., S.S. and V.R.; visualisation, S.P.; supervision, V.R., P.P., R.R., S.S., P.P.; project administration and funding acquisition, R.R. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research is supported by the SECClasS–Sustainability Enhanced Construction Classification System, funded by EEA Grants. It is also partially supported by Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia, IP (FCT) [ISTAR Projects: UIDB/04466/2020 and UIDP/04466/2020].

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Appendix A

Table A1. Relevant stages of the production chain, authors involved, and places to obtain plastic waste in Lisbon.
Table A1. Relevant stages of the production chain, authors involved, and places to obtain plastic waste in Lisbon.
Typology of Waste
and Symbology
Relevant Stages in the Production ChainActors InvolvedPlaces Potential Places Where Waste Can Be Obtained in Lisbon
PlasticUrban WastePET BottlesConsumption
Collection
Sorting
Waste treatment
Municipal Collectors
Waste Treatment Companies
Public waste treatment companies.
  • Europac. Recicla Lisboa; Pero Pinheiro
  • Centro de Triagem e Ecocentro do Lumiar
  • Judite Maria Jesus Dias-Operações de Gestão de Resíduos; Camarate
  • Amarsu–Ecocentros e Ecoparques (Almada, Moita Lavradio, Montijo, Setúbal, Palmela, Alcochete e Seixal.)
  • Valorsul-Valorização Trat. Resid. Sólidos Regiões Lisboa, São João da Talha
  • Stericycle Torres Vedras (resíduos industriais equiparados a urbanos)
  • Urbereciclar-Reciclagem de Resíduos Sólidos Urbanos Lda, Milharado
  • Tratolixo-Tratamento Resíduos Sólidos Eim-Emp. Intermunicipal, S.A; São Domingos de Rana
  • Resotrans-recolha e Transporte de Resíduos Sólidos, Lda; Frielas
  • Arte-entulhos-recolha E Transporte De Resíduos Sólidos Lda
  • CIRVA, A.C.E., Porto salvo
  • Recipolymers, Reciclagem de Polímeros, S.A.; Arranhó
Various types of plastic wasteConsumption
Collection
Sorting
Waste treatment
Households, Construction and Demolition Companies, Waste Treatment CompaniesPublic waste treatment companies.
Plastic bagsConsumption
Collection
Sorting
Waste treatment
Municipal Collectors
Waste Treatment Companies
Public waste treatment companies.
Containers to preserve foodConsumption
Collection
Sorting
Waste treatment
Municipal Collectors,
Waste Treatment Companies
Public waste treatment companies.
Industrial WasteSticker Printer WasteAdhesive Paper Production
Final Adhesive Printing and Cutting
Waste
Collection
Waste Treatment
Graphics,
Sticker Shops
Silk Screen Printing;
Municipal Collectors
Waste Treatment
Public waste treatment companies.
  • Cópia Igual- Centro de Informática, cópias e Papelaria, Lda, Benfica
  • LET'S COPY - Printshops; Saldanha
  • Azul e Amarelo, Centro de Cópias e Impressão, Chelas
  • Copy Campus; Alta de Lisboa
  • Mar de Cópias, Algés
  • Diolicopia-Centro De Copias, Lda; Benfica
  • Zoomcópia, Saldanha
  • Centro de Cópias Arco Íris de Pedro Proença, Lda, Campo P.
  • CopyCenter Centro de Cópias; Cid.Un.
  • Reprografia Comercial Planeta Colorido, Campo Grande
Table A2. Relevant stages of the production chain, authors involved, and places to obtain paper waste in Lisbon.
Table A2. Relevant stages of the production chain, authors involved, and places to obtain paper waste in Lisbon.
Typology of Waste
and Symbology
Relevant Stages in the Production ChainActors InvolvedPlacesPotential Places Where Waste Can Be Obtained in Lisbon
PaperUrban WasteMiscellaneous Paper WasteConsumption
Collection
Sorting
Waste treatment
Municipal Collectors
Waste Treatment Companies
Public waste treatment companies.
  • Europac. Recicla Lisboa; Pero Pinheiro
  • Centro de Triagem e Ecocentro do Lumiar
  • Judite Maria Jesus Dias-Operações de Gestão de Resíduos; Camarate
  • Amarsul–Ecocentros e Ecoparques (Almada, Moita Lavradio, Montijo, Setúbal, Palmela, Alcochete e Seixal.)
  • Valorsul-Valorização Trat. Resid. Sólidos Regiões Lisboa, São João da Talha
  • Stericycle Torres Vedras (resíduos industriais equiparados a urbanos)
  • Urbereciclar-Reciclagem de Resíduos Sólidos Urbanos Lda, Milharado
  • Tratolixo-Tratamento Resíduos Sólidos Eim-Emp. Intermunicipal, S.A; São Domingos de Rana
  • Resotrans-recolha e Transporte de Resíduos Sólidos, Lda; Frielas
  • Arte-entulhos-recolha E Transporte De Resíduos Sólidos Lda
  • CIRVA, A.C.E., Porto salvo
  • Gráficas (ver Adesivos Resíduos de Impressoras de Autocolantes)
TetraPack PackagingConsumption
Collection
Sorting
Waste treatment
Households, Construction and Demolition Companies, Waste Treatment CompaniesPublic waste treatment companies.
Industrial WasteCardboard Cutting WasteCardboard production
Cardboard derivatives industry
Graphics,
Sticker Shops
Silk Screen Printing.
Municipal Collectors
Waste Treatment
Public waste treatment companies.
  • Sacopor-Sociedade de Embalagens e Sacos de Papel S.A, Pior Velho
  • Cartembal-Cartonagens e Artigos de Papelaria Lda, Benfica
  • Antunes & Piorla Lda, Charneca
  • Lamina-Indústria Transformadora de Materiais de Embalagem Lda., Bobadela
  • Multicaixa-Equipamentos e Consumíveis de
  • Embalagem, Lda, São Domingos de Rana
  • Embacar-Embalagens De Cartão Para A Agricultura, Lda., Unhos
  • Globespan-Indústria De Cartão, S.A., Linda a Pastora
  • Carbion Portuguesa-Cartão Bi-Ondulado, Lda., Campo P.
  • Cart-Cartonagens E Transformados De Papel E Cartão, Lda, Odivelas
Badly printed newspapersNewspaper PrintingGraphic Printing CompaniesGraphic Printing Companies
  • Jornal I, Beato
  • O Jornal Económico
  • O Emigrante-MUNDO PORTUGUÊS Observador, Campo Grande
  • Olagarroa Publishing, Lda, Campolide
  • Diário de Notícias, Benfica
  • Sábado, Jornal Record e Jornal de Negócios, Benfica Empresa Gráfica Funchalense, Sintra
Table A3. Relevant stages of the production chain, authors involved, and places to obtain wood waste in Lisbon.
Table A3. Relevant stages of the production chain, authors involved, and places to obtain wood waste in Lisbon.
Typology of Waste
and Symbology
Relevant Stages in the Production ChainActors InvolvedPlacesPotential Places Where Waste Can Be Obtained in Lisbon
WoodUrban WasteDoors, furniture, and partitionsConsumption
Collection
Sorting
Second-hand Shops
Waste treatment
Resellers,
Demolition Companies
Second-hand shops
Construction and Demolition Companies
Online Platforms
Second-hand shops
Móveis Usados E Restaurados, Arrentela
  • Antiguidades E Velharias, Almada
  • Top Usados, Comercio De Artigos
  • Usados, Olival Basto
  • Tchiule-Antiguidades e Móveis
  • Usados, Campolide
  • Móveis Usados ASO, Vila Cândida
  • Móveis Da Casa Zuzarte Lda, Santa Cruz
Demolition Companies
  • Montagil Demolições, Unipessoal, Lda, Olival Basto
  • DOMIPLANA-Terraplanagens E Materiais de Construção, LDAAMGC, UNIPESSOAL, LDA, Beato
  • LiftUp DEMOLIÇÕES, S.A., Alverca do Ribatejo
  • AMBIGROUP DEMOLIÇÕES, S.A., Arranhó
  • MAQUIGAVINHA-Aterros e Desaterros,
  • LDAABIMAPE-Sociedade de Construções, E Terraplanagens, LDA, Alvalade
  • Miguel Duarte Pimentel, Demolições, Lda.
  • Demotri, Demolições, Reciclagem e Construção S.A, Odivelas
  • Luzipereira-Demolições E Terraplanagens, Lda., Bararena
  • Manobras De Génio-Demolições E Terraplanagens, Lda, Camarate
Fruit boxesIndustry use (fruit transport)
Disposal of Boxes,
Waste treatment
Fruit producers, fruit distribution companies, super, hyper and mini markets,
Collectors, Waste Treatment Companies
Fruit Distribution Companies, Supermarkets and Mini markets
  • Antalves-Paletes E Embalagens De Madeira, Lda, Pêro Pinheiro
  • Recopal-Recuperação e Comercialização de Paletas, Lda.
PalletsConsumption
Collection
Sorting
Waste treatment
Goods distribution companies (retail);
Collectors;
Waste treatment companies
Public waste treatment companies.
  • Renasxer, Frielas
  • Manjos Rec. Recuperação e Fabrico de Estruturas de Madeira, Lda, Alverca do Ribatejo e Loures
  • Antalves-Paletes E Embalagens De Madeira, Lda, Pêro Pinheiro
  • Recopal-Recuperação e Comercialização de Paletas, Lda.
  • Marquesapal-comércio De Paletes E Produtos Reciclados Lda
Industrial WasteWaste and shavings from the wood products industryProduction of wood-based products, Waste treatmentWood-based materials industry;
Waste Treatment Companies Waste Treatment
Carpentries
Wood waste treatment companies
  • MDB Gestão de Resíduos Lda Av. Infante Dom Henrique
  • AMBIGROUP DEMOLIÇÕES, S.A., Arranhó
Carpintarias:
  • Carpintel-carpintaria E Construções Lda
  • Vítor Luís Santos-Carpintarias e Marcenarias
  • Carpintaria E Marcenaria Grilo Lisbonense, Lda, Beato
  • Carpintaria Lino & Filhos, Lda., Campo Grande
  • Carpintaria Vasco Oliveira, Amoreiras Renasxer, Frielas
Table A4. Relevant stages of the production chain, authors involved, and places to obtain wood waste in Lisbon.
Table A4. Relevant stages of the production chain, authors involved, and places to obtain wood waste in Lisbon.
Typology of Waste
and Symbology
Relevant Stages in the Production ChainActors InvolvedPlaces Potential Places Where Waste Can Be Obtained in Lisbon
Steel and aluminiumUrban WasteMattress SpringsConsumption
Collection
Sorting
Waste treatment
Waste Treatment Companies (Scrap)Waste Treatment Companies (Scrap)
  • Europac. Recicla Lisboa; Pero Pinheiro
  • Centro de Triagem e Ecocentro do Lumiar
  • Judite Maria Jesus Dias-Operações de Gestão de Resíduos; Camarate
  • Amarsul–Ecocentros e Ecoparques (Almada, Moita Lavradio, Montijo, Setúbal, Palmela, Alcochete e Seixal.)
  • Valorsul-Valorização Trat. Resid. Sólidos Regiões Lisboa, São João da Talha
  • Stericycle Torres Vedras (resíduos industriais equiparados a urbanos)
  • Urbereciclar-Reciclagem de Resíduos Sólidos Urbanos Lda, Milharado
  • Tratolixo-Tratamento Resíduos Sólidos Eim-Emp. Intermunicipal, S.A; São Domingos de Rana
  • Resotrans-recolha e Transporte de Resíduos Sólidos, Lda; Frielas
  • Arte-entulhos-recolha E Transporte De Resíduos Sólidos Lda
  • CIRVA, A.C.E., Porto salvo
Soft Drink CansConsumption
Collection
Sorting
Waste treatment
Households, Construction and Demolition Companies, Waste Treatment CompaniesPublic waste treatment companies.
  • Europac. Recicla Lisboa; Pero Pinheiro
  • Centro de Triagem e Ecocentro do Lumiar
  • Judite Maria Jesus Dias-Operações de Gestão de Resíduos; Camarate
  • Amarsul–Ecocentros e Ecoparques (Almada, Moita Lavradio, Montijo, Setúbal, Palmela, Alcochete e Seixal.)
  • Valorsul-Valorização Trat. Resid. Sólidos Regiões Lisboa, São João da Talha
  • Stericycle Torres Vedras (resíduos industriais equiparados a urbanos)
  • Urbereciclar-Reciclagem de Resíduos Sólidos Urbanos Lda, Milharado
  • Tratolixo-Tratamento Resíduos Sólidos Eim-Emp. Intermunicipal, S.A; São Domingos de Rana
  • Resotrans-recolha e Transporte de Resíduos Sólidos, Lda; Frielas
  • Arte-entulhos-recolha E Transporte De Resíduos Sólidos Lda
  • CIRVA, A.C.E., Porto salvo
Industrial WasteCutting and sawing wasteCardboard production
Cardboard derivatives industry
Graphics,
Sticker Shops
Silk Screen Printing;
Municipal Collectors
Waste Treatment
Public waste treatment companies.A Agricultura, Lda., Unhos
  • Globespan-Indústria De Cartão, S.A., Linda a Pastora
  • Carbion Portuguesa-Cartão Bi-Ondulado, Lda., Campo P.
  • Cart-Cartonagens E Transformados De Papel E Cartão, Lda, Odivelas
Industrial containersIndustry (transportation), Collectors, Waste Treatment (Scrap)Waste Treatment Companies (Scrap)Waste Treatment Companies (Scrap)
  • Europac. Recicla Lisboa; Pero Pinheiro
  • Centro de Triagem e Ecocentro do Lumiar
  • Judite Maria Jesus Dias-Operações de Gestão de Resíduos; Camarate
  • Amarsul–Ecocentros e Ecoparques (Almada, Moita Lavradio, Montijo, Setúbal, Palmela, Alcochete e Seixal.)
  • Valorsul-Valorização Trat. Resid. Sólidos Regiões Lisboa, São João da Talha
  • Stericycle Torres Vedras (resíduos industriais equiparados a urbanos)
  • Urbereciclar-Reciclagem de Resíduos Sólidos Urbanos Lda, Milharado
  • Tratolixo-Tratamento Resíduos Sólidos Eim-Emp. Intermunicipal, S.A; São Domingos de Rana
  • Resotrans-recolha e Transporte de Resíduos Sólidos, Lda; Frielas
  • Arte-entulhos-recolha E Transporte De Resíduos Sólidos Lda
  • CIRVA, A.C.E., Porto salvo
Table A5. Relevant stages of the production chain, authors involved, and places to obtain agricultural waste in Lisbon.
Table A5. Relevant stages of the production chain, authors involved, and places to obtain agricultural waste in Lisbon.
Typology of Waste
and Symbology
Relevant Stages in the Production ChainActors InvolvedPlaces Potential Places Where Waste Can Be Obtained in Lisbon
Agricultural wasteUrban WasteWine CorksConsumption
Collection
Waste treatment
Households, Construction and Demolition Companies, Waste Treatment CompaniesPublic waste treatment companiesSignificant quantities of this waste are generated (not mapped)-Availability ≤ 10 km
  • Restaurants
  • Coffee Shops
  • Potato Derived Products Production:
  • F. B. F. Fábrica de Batatas Fritas Lda
Coffee BoringConsumption
Collection
Waste treatment
Households,
Restaurants;
Municipal Collectors;
Waste Treatment Companies
Families, Restaurants, Coffee Shops
Potato PeelConsumption
Collection
Waste treatment
Households,
Restaurants;
Municipal Collectors;
Waste Treatment Companies
Families, Restaurants, Coffee Shops
Industrial WasteMiscellaneous agricultural residues Producers (agriculture), Disposal in fields or incineration, Derivatives industry yProducers (agriculture), Derivatives industry)Derived products companies and cultivation fieldsUrban Gardens (some urban gardens were mapped, but there are 40 urban gardens in the Lisbon metropolitan area and most of them are located less than 10 km from the intervention area):
  • Parque Hortícola Telheiras
  • Parque Hortícola Quinta da Granja
  • Parque Hortícola Bensaúde
  • Parque Hortícola de Campolide:
  • Parque Hortícola do Casal Vistoso
Cerealicultura:
  • Farinhas Firmos, Moagem de Cereais, Lda, Colares
  • Belsuino-Agro-Pecuária da Serra de Cambra, Lda
  • GRANEL-MOAGEM DE CEREAIS, S.A. VILA FRANCA XIRA
Residues from sunflower cultivationProducers (agriculture), Disposal in fields or incineration, Derivatives industry yProducers (agriculture), Derivatives industry)Derived products companies and cultivation fieldsCultivation:
  • Parque Hortícola Telheiras
  • Horticultural Park Quinta da Granja
  • Horticultural Park Bensaúde
  • Parque Hortícola de Campolide
  • Parque Hortícola do Casal Vistoso
  • Derived products companies:
  • Sovena Group, Industrial Facilities, Barreiro

References

  1. de Wit, M.; Hoogzaad, J.; von Daniels, C. The Circularity Gap Report 2020. 2020. Available online: https://www.circularity-gap.world/2020 (accessed on 22 November 2021).
  2. Ellen Macarthur Foundation. Towards the Circular Economy Economic and Business Rationale for an Accelerated Transition. 2013. Available online: https://emf.thirdlight.com/link/x8ay372a3r11-k6775n/@/preview/1?o (accessed on 22 November 2021).
  3. Boulding, K.E. The Economics of the Coming Spaceship Earth; Resources for the Future/John Hopkins University Press: Baltimore, MD, USA, 1966; Available online: https://books.google.pt/books?hl=pt-PT&lr=&id=n0g4DwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA27&dq=The+economics+of+the+coming+spaceship+Earth&ots=R0ghn_Rr54&sig=O2Fir4TOWbMYSIGgVq11SU30NaY&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=The%20economics%20of%20the%20coming%20spaceship%20Earth&f=false (accessed on 22 November 2021).
  4. How to Sustain a World Population of 10 Billion People? Available online: https://www.theworldcounts.com/ (accessed on 26 January 2022).
  5. EY-AM&A; 3Drivers, Relevância e Impacto do Setor dos Resíduos em Portugal na Perspetiva de uma Economia Circular (Versão Executiva Atualizada). 2018. Available online: http://m.smartwasteportugal.com/fotos/editor2/sumario_pt_versao_finas.pdf (accessed on 22 November 2021).
  6. European Commision. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council Strategy for the Sustainable Competitiveness of the Construction Sector and Its Enterprises. Brussels, Belgium, July 2012. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52012DC0433&from=EN (accessed on 28 January 2022).
  7. Herczeg, M.; McKinnon, D.; Milios, L.; Klaassens, E.; Svatikova, K.; Widerberg, O. Resource Efficiency in the Building Sector. Rotterdam, The Netherlands. 2014. Available online: www.ecorys.nl (accessed on 28 January 2022).
  8. Waste Statistics—Statistics Explained. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Waste_statistics#Total_waste_generation (accessed on 28 January 2022).
  9. Pomponi, F.; Moncaster, A. Circular economy for the built environment: A research framework. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 143, 710–718. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  10. Luebkeman, C.; Fellow, A. The Circular Economy in the Built Environment. 2016. Available online: https://www.arup.com/perspectives/publications/research/section/circular-economy-in-the-built-environment (accessed on 28 January 2022).
  11. Why Supply-Chain Problems Aren’t Going Away. The Economist. Available online: https://www.economist.com/business/2022/01/29/why-supply-chain-problems-arent-going-away (accessed on 28 January 2022).
  12. Nußholz, J.L.K.; Rasmussen, F.N.; Milios, L. Circular building materials: Carbon saving potential and the role of business model innovation and public policy. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2019, 141, 308–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Yang, J.; Ogunkah, I.C.B. A Multi-Criteria Decision Support System for the Selection of Low-Cost Green Building Materials and Components. J. Build. Constr. Plan. Res. 2013, 1, 89–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  14. Akadiri, P.O.; Olomolaiye, P.O. Development of sustainable assessment criteria for building materials selection. Eng. Constr. Archit. Manag. 2012, 19, 666–687. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Rahla, K.M.; Mateus, R.; Bragança, L. Selection Criteria for Building Materials and Components in Line with the Circular Economy Principles in the Built Environment—A Review of Current Trends. Infrastructures 2021, 6, 49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Stellacci, S.; Rato, V.; Poletti, E.; Vasconcelos, G.; Borsoi, G. Multi-criteria analysis of rehabilitation techniques for traditional timber frame walls in Pombalino buildings (Lisbon). J. Build. Eng. 2018, 16, 184–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  17. Bana, C.A.; Costa, E.; Carvalho Oliveira, R. Assigning Priorities for Maintenance, Repair and Refurbishment in Managing a Municipal Housing Stock. Available online: www.elsevier.com/locate/dsw (accessed on 24 February 2022).
  18. Leising, E.; Quist, J.; Bocken, N. Circular economy in the building sector: Three cases and a collaboration tool. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 176, 976–989. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Thelen, D.; Acoleyen, M.; Thomaes, T.; Brunschot, C.; Edgerton, B.; Kubbinga, B. Scaling the Circular Built Environment Pathways for Business and Government; WBCSD: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  20. Kanters, J. Circular Building Design: An Analysis of Barriers and Drivers for a Circular Building Sector. Buildings 2020, 10, 77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Durmisevic, E. Transformable Building Structures: Design for Dissassembly as a Way to Introduce Sustainable Engineering to Building Design & Construction. 2006. Available online: https://repository.tudelft.nl/islandora/object/uuid%3A9d2406e5-0cce-4788-8ee0-c19cbf38ea9a (accessed on 27 November 2021).
  22. Habraken, N.J. De Dragers en de Mensen: Het Einde van de Massawoningbouw; Stichting Architecten Research, Eindhoven 1961. Available online: https://books.google.pt/books/about/De_dragers_en_de_mensen.html?id=dbY1AQAAIAAJ&redir_esc=y (accessed on 28 January 2022).
  23. Brand, S. How Buildings Learn-What Happens after They’re Built; Penguin EBOOK: New York, NY, USA, 1994. [Google Scholar]
  24. Cheshire, D. Building Revolutions: Applying the Circular Economy to the Built Environment; Routledge: London, UK, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  25. Bakx, I.; Beurskens, P.; Ritzen, M.; Durmisevic, E.; Lichtenberg, J. A Morphological Design and Evaluation Model for the Development of Circular Facades. In Sustainable Built Environment: Transition Zero 2016, Proceedings of the Utrecht SBE16 Conference, Utrecht, The Netherlands, 7–8 April 2016; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands; pp. 252–268. 2016. [Google Scholar]
  26. Durmisevic, E. Circular Ecomony in Construction-Design Strategies for Reversible Buildings. 2019. Available online: https://www.bamb2020.eu/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Reversible-Building-Design-Strateges.pdf (accessed on 27 November 2021).
  27. Hillebrandt, A.; Riegler-Floors, P.; Rosen, A.; Seggewies, J.K. Manual of Recycling: Gebäude als Materialressource/Buildings as Sources of Materials; DETAIL: München, Germany, 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Beurskens, P.; Bakx, M. Built-to-Rebuild, the Development of a Framework for Buildings According to the Circular Economy Concept, Which Will Be Specified for the Design of Circular Facades. Master’s Thesis, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, The Netherlands, 2015. Available online: http://repository.tue.nl/801836 (accessed on 1 January 2022).
  29. Morel, J.C.; Mesbah, A.; Oggero, M.; Walker, P. Building houses with local materials means to drastically reduce the environmental impact of construction. Build. Environ. 2001, 36, 1119–1126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. International Living Future Institute. “LIVING BUILDING CHALLENG 4.0 A Visionary Path to a Regenerative Future.” Cascadia Green Building Council. 2019. Available online: https://living-future.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Living-Building-Challenge-4.0.pdf (accessed on 28 January 2022).
  31. U.S. Green Building Council. LEED v4: Building Design + Construction Guide. Available online: https://www.usgbc.org/guide/bdc (accessed on 26 January 2022).
  32. Geldermans, B.; Bellstedt, C.; Formato, E.; Varju, V.; Grünhut, Z.; Cerreta, M.; Amenta, L.; Inglese, P.; van der Leer, J.; Wandl, A. REPAiR: REsource Management in Peri-Urban AReas: Going beyond Urban Metabolism; Delft University of Technology: Delft, The Netherlands, 2017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Geraedts, R.; Remøy, H.; Hermans, M.; Rijn, E.V. Adaptive Capacity of Buildings: A Determination Method to Promote Flexible and Sustainable Construction. Delft University of Technology: Delft, The Netherlands, 2014; Available online: http://resolver.tudelft.nl/uuid:3c57e976-5af4-4e05-a66d-723604ded852 (accessed on 27 November 2021).
  34. Geraedts, R. FLEX 4.0, A Practical Instrument to Assess the Adaptive Capacity of Buildings. Energy Procedia 2016, 96, 568–579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  35. Brennan, L.; Gupta, S.; Taleb, K. Operations planning issues in an assembly/disassembly environment. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 1994, 14, 57–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  36. Crowther, P. Design for disassembly-Themes and principles. Langenbeck’s Arch. Surg. 2005, 390, 361–367. [Google Scholar]
  37. ISO 20887:2020; ISO/TC 59/SC 17 Sustainability in Buildings and Civil Engineering Works. Sustainability in Buildings and Civil Engineering Works—Design for Disassembly and Adaptability—Principles, Requirements and Guidance. 2020. Available online: https://www.iso.org/standard/69370.html (accessed on 26 January 2022).
  38. BAMB. Buildings as Material Banks (BAMB 2020). Available online: https://www.bamb2020.eu/ (accessed on 26 January 2022).
  39. Michael, F. Ashby, Materials and the Environment, 2nd ed.; Butterworth-Heinemann: Oxford, UK, 2013; ISBN 9780123859716. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Tsalis, T.; Stefanakis, A.I.; Nikolaou, I. A Framework to Evaluate the Social Life Cycle Impact of Products under the Circular Economy Thinking. Sustainability 2022, 14, 2196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. European Parliament. Directive (EU) 2018/851 of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2008/98/EC on Waste. 2018. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32018L0851 (accessed on 23 February 2022).
  42. European Commission. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on Resource Efficiency Opportunities in the Building Sector. 2014. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52014DC0445 (accessed on 23 February 2022).
  43. European Commission. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions a New Circular Economy Action Plan for a cleaner and more competitive Europe COM/2020/98 Final. 2020. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1583933814386&uri=COM:2020:98:FIN (accessed on 23 February 2022).
  44. Gorgolewski, M. Resourse of Salvation The Architecture of Reuse; John Wiley & Sons Ltd.: Toronto, ON, Canada, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  45. Rosa, T.; Firrone, L.; Bustinto, C.; Firrone, T.; Montalbano, E. Waste Is More Waste Reuse in Architecture. 2016. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/308850823 (accessed on 23 February 2022).
  46. Freney, M. Earthships: Sustainable housing alternative. Int. J. Sustain. Des. 2009, 1, 223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Tegnestuen Vandkunsten A/S; Nielsen, S; København, K. Rebeauty Nordic Built Component Reuse. 2017. Available online: https://vandkunsten.com/content//2019/03/NBCR-20170201-sml.pdf (accessed on 23 February 2022).
  48. Rethinking Systems Research Review-Arup. Available online: https://www.arup.com/perspectives/publications/research/section/rethinking-systems-research-review (accessed on 23 February 2022).
  49. Brighton Waste House. Available online: https://www.brighton.ac.uk/research/feature/brighton-waste-house.aspx (accessed on 23 February 2022).
  50. Tura, N.; Hanski, J.; Ahola, T.; Ståhle, M.; Piiparinen, S.; Valkokari, P. Unlocking circular business: A framework of barriers and drivers. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 212, 90–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Berge, B. The Ecology of Building Materials; Architectural Press: Oxford, UK, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  52. Calkins, M. Materials for Sustainable Sites A Complete Guide to the Evaluation, Selection, and Use; John Wiley & Sons, Inc.: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  53. van Hinte, E.; Peeren, C.; Jongert, J. Superuse: Constructing New Architecture by Shortcutting Material Flows; 010 Publishers: Rotterdam, The Nederlands, 2007; Available online: https://books.google.com/books/about/Superuse.html?hl=pt-PT&id=QnI1m8-Mku4C (accessed on 26 January 2022).
  54. Silva, D.B.; Junior, L.C.C.A.; Souza, A.A.G.; Silva, F.D.C.; Abrantes-Coutinho, V.E.; Santos, A.O.; Oliveira, T.M.B.F. Upcycling ferrous blast-furnace slag to design an effective ceramic anode for tartrazine yellow electrodegradation. Sustain. Mater. Technol. 2022, 31, e00373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Hebel, D.E.; Wisniewska, M.H.; Heisel, F. Building from Waste: Recovered Materials in Architecture and Construction; Birkhauser Verlag: Basel, Switzerland, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  56. Haas, W.; Krausmann, F.; Wiedenhofer, D.; Heinz, M. How Circular is the Global Economy? An Assessment of Material Flows, Waste Production, and Recycling in the European Union and the World in 2005. J. Ind. Ecol. 2015, 19, 765–777. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Kirchherr, J.; Reike, D.; Hekkert, M. Conceptualizing the circular economy: An analysis of 114 definitions. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2017, 127, 221–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Hebel, D.E.; Heisel, F. Construction, Cultivated Building Materials: Industrialized Natural Resources for Architecture and Construction; Birkhäuser: Basel, Switzerland, 2017; p. 184. [Google Scholar]
  59. Peters, S. Material Revolution. Sustainable and Multi-Purpose Materials for Design and Architecture. In Material Revolution. Sustainable and Multi-Purpose Materials for Design and Architecture; Birkhauser: Basel, Switzerland, 2011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Peters, S. Material Revolution 2; Birkhauser: Basel, Switzerland, 2014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Circular Economy at Work with Lendager Group’s Upcycled Brick Cladding Panels RIBAJ. Available online: https://www.ribaj.com/products/recycled-brick-cladding-panels-lendager-group-resource-rows-apartment-copenhagen-denmark (accessed on 29 January 2022).
  62. Swingler, H. World-First: Bio-Bricks from Urine. Available online: https://www.news.uct.ac.za/article/-2018-10-24-world-first-bio-bricks-from-urine (accessed on 23 February 2022).
  63. Rossell, L. The Beehive. Obtido de Luigi Rossell Architects. Available online: https://luigirosselli.com/public-commercial/workspaces/beehive (accessed on 23 February 2022).
  64. Kozminska, U. Circular Economy in Nordic Architecture. Thoughts on the process, practices, and case studies. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science; IOP Publishing: Bristol, UK, 2020; p. 042042. Available online: https://www.waterbrick.org/ (accessed on 29 January 2022).
  65. “WasteBasedBricks®; Building Materials from Waste—StoneCycling®. Available online: https://www.stonecycling.com/wastebasedbricks (accessed on 29 January 2022).
  66. Zhang, H. Woodhead Publishing Series in Civil and Structural Engineering, Building Materials in Civil Engineering; Woodhead Publishing: Sawston, UK, 2011; ISBN 9781845699550. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. The Red List | Living-Future.org. Available online: https://living-future.org/declare/declare-about/red-list/ (accessed on 26 January 2022).
  68. Braungart, M.; McDonough, W. Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the Way We Make Things; Rodale Press: Emmaus, PA, USA, 2002. [Google Scholar]
  69. ByFusion Global, I. ByBlock® Product Data Sheet; ByFusion Global, Inc.: Los Angeles, CA, USA, 2020; Available online: https://www.byfusion.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/ByBlock%C2%AE-Product-Data-Sheet_2020.1-1.pdf (accessed on 29 January 2022).
  70. Miniwiz. Obtido de Polly. Brick. Available online: https://www.miniwiz.com/solution_detail.php?id=5 (accessed on 29 January 2022).
  71. SHAU Projects. Available online: https://www.shau.nl/en/project/53 (accessed on 26 January 2022).
  72. Recycled Ice Cream Tubs Cover Walls of Microlibrary by Shau. Available online: https://www.dezeen.com/2016/07/16/microlibrary-shau-facade-recycle-ice-cream-tubs-bandung-indonesia-architecture/ (accessed on 26 January 2022).
  73. LoosFM. Tijdelijk Monument in Een Pauzelandschap. Obtido de Loos.fm. 2018. Available online: http://loos.fm/project-pet-paviljoen.php (accessed on 29 January 2022).
  74. Rising Moon Pavilion. Available online: https://competition.adesignaward.com/design.php?ID=30919 (accessed on 26 January 2022).
  75. About Newspaper Wood. Available online: https://newspaperwood.com/about/ (accessed on 26 January 2022).
  76. ECOR® Info Package 2020—Healthy Materials for Interior, Furniture & Exhibition Solutions. 2020. Available online: https://ecorbenelux.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/V3-ECOR-INFO-PACKAGE-FEB-2020-UPDATE_compressed.pdf (accessed on 26 January 2022).
  77. Pavillon Circulaire | Encore Heureux. Available online: http://encoreheureux.org/projets/pavillon-circulaire/?lang=en (accessed on 26 January 2022).
  78. Pawilon Polski EXPO 2015 / 2pm-architektura. Available online: http://2pm.com.pl/pl/pawilon-polski (accessed on 26 January 2022).
  79. Stephane Malka: Ame-Lot-Domus. Available online: https://www.domusweb.it/en/news/2012/02/29/stephane-malka-ame-lot.html (accessed on 26 January 2022).
  80. Ame-Lot I On The Blind Walls I Paris 2011–Studio Malka Architecture. Available online: https://www.stephanemalka.com/portfolio/ame-lot-i-on-the-blind-walls-i-paris-2011/ (accessed on 26 January 2022).
  81. Block Architects-Nhà Vegan. Available online: http://blockarchitects.com.vn/du-an/nha-chay.aspx (accessed on 26 January 2022).
  82. S + PS Architects | Facebook. Available online: https://www.facebook.com/spsarchitects18/photos?tab=album&album_id=615329261958036&ref=page_internal (accessed on 26 January 2022).
  83. Songwood | Engineered Timber Resources. Available online: https://www.etimberr.com/products/songwood/ (accessed on 26 January 2022).
  84. Wood Foam–from Tree to Foam-Fraunhofer WKI. Available online: https://www.wki.fraunhofer.de/en/departments/hnt/profile/research-projects/wood-foam.html (accessed on 26 January 2022).
  85. ABOUT/UpcycleTechnology-LOT-EK ARCHITECTURE & DESIGN. Available online: https://lot-ek.com/ABOUT-UpcycleTechnology (accessed on 26 January 2022).
  86. Drivelines by LOT-EK | 2018-10-01 | Architectural Record. Available online: https://www.architecturalrecord.com/articles/13661-drivelines-by-lot-ek (accessed on 26 January 2022).
  87. PAVILION | Fahedarchitects. Available online: https://www.fahedarchitects.com/exhibition-installation (accessed on 26 January 2022).
  88. Can Cube/Archi-Union Architects | ArchDaily. Available online: https://www.archdaily.com/85278/can-cube-archi-union-architects-inc?ad_medium=gallery (accessed on 26 January 2022).
  89. Projects—Renewed Materials. Available online: http://www.renewedmaterials.com/alkemi-client-projects (accessed on 26 January 2022).
  90. Alusion | Stabilized Aluminum Foam (SAF) | Composite Panels. Available online: https://www.alusion.com/index.php/products/composite-panels (accessed on 26 January 2022).
  91. Dahy, H. Biocomposite materials based on annual natural fibres and biopolymers–Design, fabrication and customized applications in architecture. Constr. Build. Mater. 2017, 147, 212–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Jones, M.; Mautner, A.; Luenco, S.; Bismarck, A.; John, S. Engineered mycelium composite construction materials from fungal biorefineries: A critical review. Mater. Des. 2020, 187, 108397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Organic Tower Grown from Agricultural Waste Wins MoMA PS1 Competition. Available online: https://www.dezeen.com/2014/02/06/hy-fi-by-the-living-at-moma-ps1/ (accessed on 26 January 2022).
  94. Mycoform—Terreform ONE. Available online: https://www.terreform.org/mycoform (accessed on 26 January 2022).
  95. The Growing Pavilion Documentary-YouTube. Available online: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbsj9fzykNs (accessed on 26 January 2022).
  96. The Growing Pavilion Is a Mycelium Pop-up Performance Space. Available online: https://www.dezeen.com/2019/10/29/growing-pavilion-mycelium-dutch-design-week/ (accessed on 26 January 2022).
  97. Thomas Vailly Uses Sunflowers to Make Bio-Based Materials. Available online: https://www.dezeen.com/2019/04/05/thomas-vailly-sunflower-material/ (accessed on 26 January 2022).
  98. Recycled Potato Peelings Are Turned into MDF Substitute, Chip[s] Board. Available online: https://www.dezeen.com/2018/12/12/rowan-minkley-robert-nicoll-recycle-potato-peelings-mdf-substitute/ (accessed on 26 January 2022).
  99. Repositório de Materiais–Projeto Pioneiro na Economia Circular. Available online: https://repositoriodemateriais.pt/ (accessed on 24 February 2022).
  100. Yan, S.; Sagoe-Crentsil, K. Properties of wastepaper sludge in geopolymer mortars for masonry applications. J. Environ. Manag. 2012, 112, 27–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  101. Adesanya, E.; Ohenoja, K.; Luukkonen, T.; Kinnunen, P.; Illikainen, M. One-part geopolymer cement from slag and pretreated paper sludge. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 185, 168–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. da Silveira, M.R.; Peres, R.S.; Moritz, V.F.; Ferreira, C.A. Intumescent Coatings Based on Tannins for Fire Protection. Mater. Res. 2019, 22, 20180433. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Mhatre, P.; Gedam, V.V.; Unnikrishnan, S. Material circularity potential for construction materials—The case of transportation infrastructure in India. Resour. Policy 2021, 74, 102446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Nußholz, J.L.K.; Rasmussen, F.N.; Whalen, K.; Plepys, A. Material reuse in buildings: Implications of a circular business model for sustainable value creation. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 245, 118546. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Relationship between Circular design strategies and the Hierarchy of Material Levels.
Figure 1. Relationship between Circular design strategies and the Hierarchy of Material Levels.
Sustainability 14 03430 g001
Figure 2. Building recycling hierarchy [36].
Figure 2. Building recycling hierarchy [36].
Sustainability 14 03430 g002
Figure 3. Methodology for evaluating building materials based on post-consumer waste and by-products, as proposed in this research.
Figure 3. Methodology for evaluating building materials based on post-consumer waste and by-products, as proposed in this research.
Sustainability 14 03430 g003
Figure 4. Identification of Partition Wall’s main functions.
Figure 4. Identification of Partition Wall’s main functions.
Sustainability 14 03430 g004
Figure 5. Lisbon map.
Figure 5. Lisbon map.
Sustainability 14 03430 g005
Figure 6. Macbeth judgment matrices related to the attractiveness difference between the performance levels.
Figure 6. Macbeth judgment matrices related to the attractiveness difference between the performance levels.
Sustainability 14 03430 g006
Figure 7. Macbeth judgment matrices related to the attractiveness difference between each criterion (three scenario models were developed according to the different components of partition walls).
Figure 7. Macbeth judgment matrices related to the attractiveness difference between each criterion (three scenario models were developed according to the different components of partition walls).
Sustainability 14 03430 g007
Figure 8. Location of available sources of material near Lisbon.
Figure 8. Location of available sources of material near Lisbon.
Sustainability 14 03430 g008
Figure 9. Visual scoring in 1st and 2nd scenario.
Figure 9. Visual scoring in 1st and 2nd scenario.
Sustainability 14 03430 g009
Figure 10. Visual scoring in 3rd scenario.
Figure 10. Visual scoring in 3rd scenario.
Sustainability 14 03430 g010
Table 2. Performance levels for each functional criterion.
Table 2. Performance levels for each functional criterion.
Mechanical Resistance CapacityThermal PerformanceAcoustic PerformanceSensory Properties
HighHighHigh
MediumMediumMediumTexture; Brightness; Colour; Transparency; Odour
LowLowLow
Water and moisture resistanceFire ResistanceDurability
Impermeable
Hydrophilic water-resistant
Hydrophilic non-water-resistant
Non-flammable materials
Fire Retardant Materials
Flammable materials
Durable
Non-Durable
Table 3. Constraints and functions of partition walls.
Table 3. Constraints and functions of partition walls.
Functional ParametersCoatingThermal Acoustic InsulationSupport
Mechanical Resistance CapacityNot relevantNot relevantHigh
Thermal performanceNot relevanthighNot relevant
Acoustic performanceHighHighHigh
Water and moisture resistancenot relevantHydrophilic water-resistant or impermeable
Fire ResistanceNon-flammable or fire retardantNon-flammable or fire retardantNon-flammable or fire retardant
DurabilityHigh
SensoryPropertiesRelevant *Not relevantVarying *
* It should achieve aesthetic and functional consistency.
Table 4. Performance levels for each criterion based on experts’ judgments.
Table 4. Performance levels for each criterion based on experts’ judgments.
Type of Waste (Tw)Potential for Reintegration into the Biological and Technological Cycle (CTR)Availability and Local Proximity (PRC)
Urban Waste
Industrial Waste
Null10 km radius
Low25 km radius
High40 km radius
Complexity of the Transformation Process (ALP)Toxic Content (TC)
Simple Transformation (Reuse)
Design Transformation
Densification Transformation
Reconfiguration Transformation
Cultivation Transformation
Molecular Transformation
High
Low
Null
Table 5. Performance levels of the materials and construction solutions from plastic waste.
Table 5. Performance levels of the materials and construction solutions from plastic waste.
SampleRef.Environmental ParametersFunctional Parameters
TwCTRPRCTCALPMCRTPAPWMRFRDSP
ARTEK PAVILION, Shigeru Ban Architects, Paris, France[56]Tw1
Sticker Printer Waste
ReconfigurationHigh Technological Cycle Null10 kmMediumLowLowImpermeableB1 Fire RetardantDurableSmooth, Spleen, Colour Gray, Transparent,
BYFUSION BYBLOCK, UPM
Bio composites, Lahti, Finland
[70]Tw1
plastic waste
ReconfigurationHigh Technological CycleNull10 kmMediumMediumMediumImpermeableFlammableDurableIrregular Texture, Spleen, Opaque, Odourless
POLLI-BRICK
MINIWIZ, Taipei, Taiwan
[71]Tw1 PET BottlesDesignHigh Technological Cycle Null10 kmMediumMediumMediumImpermeableNon-FlammableDurableGeometric Pattern, Glossy Translucid, Colour Gray,
Odourless
RECY BLOCKS,
Gert de Mulder
[56]Tw1
Plastic Bags
ReconfigurationHigh Technological Cycle Null10 kmLowLowLowImpermeableFlammableDurableSmooth, Spleen, Colour Gray, Transparent,
Odourless
Bima’s Microlibrary, Indonesia, SHAU Bandung[72,73]Tw1
Ice Cream Boxes
SimpleHigh Technological CycleNull10 kmMediumMediumLowImpermeableFlammableDurableTexture with Geometric Pattern, Glossy, Translucid, White, Odourless
Pet Pavilion, Project.DWG e LOOS.FM, The Netherlands[74]Tw1
PET Bottles
SimpleHigh Technological CycleNull10 kmMediumMediumMediumImpermeableFlammableDurableTexture Smooth, Glossy, Translucid, Blue and White, Odourless
PET WOOL, SupaSoft Insulation UK[75]Tw1
PET Bottles
ReconfigurationHigh Technological CycleNull10 kmLowHighHighHydrophilic water-resistantNon-FlammableDurableIrregular Texture, Glossy, Opaque, White, Odourless
Sustainability 14 03430 i001
Table 6. Performance levels of the materials and construction solutions from paper wastes.
Table 6. Performance levels of the materials and construction solutions from paper wastes.
SampleRef.Environmental ParametersFunctional Parameters
TwCTRPRCTCALPMCRTPAPWMRFRDSP
Corrugated Cardboard Pod, Rural Studio, Auburn University, Newbern, AL, USA[56]Tw1
Cardboard waste
DensificationHigh Technological CycleNull10 kmLowHighHighImpermeable with treatmentFire RetardantNot DurableIrregular Texture, Dull, Opaque, Brown, Odourless
PHZ2, Paper recycling facilities, Oberhausen, Germany[56]Tw1
Cardboard waste
DensificationHigh Technological CycleNull10 kmLowHighHighImpermeable with treatmentFire RetardantNot DurableIrregular Texture, Dull, Opaque, Coloured, Odourless
PAPER TILE VAULT, BLOCK Research Group, ETH Zurich, Switzerland [56]Tw1
Cardboard waste
ReconfigurationHigh Technological CycleNull10 kmMediumMediumHighImpermeableNon-FlammableNot DurableTexture Irregular, Dull, Opaque, Beige, Odourless
Newspaper Wood, Mieke Meijer with Vij5, Eindhoven, The Netherlands [76]Tw1
Newspapers
ReconfigurationHigh Technological CycleNull10 kmMediumMediumMediumImpermeableNon-FlammableDurableIrregular Texture, Spleen, Opaque, Coloured, Odourless
TUFF ROOF, Daman Ganga Paper Mill, Gujarat, India[56]T1
TetraPack Packaging
ReconfigurationHigh Technological CycleNull10 kmMediumMediumMediumImpermeableFire-retardantDurableIrregular Texture, Glossy, Opaque, Coloured, Odourless
REMATERIALS ROOF PANELS, Hasit Ganatra and Swad Komanduri, [56]T2
Paper Packaging and Agricultural Waste
ReconfigurationHigh Technological CycleNull10 kmMediumMediumLowImpermeableFlammableDurableIrregular Texture, Dull, Opaque, Brown, Odourless
ECOR, Robert Noble of Noble Environmental Technologies, San Diego, CA, USA[77]T1
Cardboard Waste
ReconfigurationHigh
Biological Cycle
Null10 kmMediumMediumMediumImpermeable with treatmentNon-Flammable
with treatment
DurableIrregular Texture, Dull, Opaque, Brown, Odourless
Sustainability 14 03430 i001
Table 7. Performance levels of the materials and construction solutions from wood wastes.
Table 7. Performance levels of the materials and construction solutions from wood wastes.
SampleRef.Environmental ParametersFunctional Parameters
TCTRPRCTCALPMCRTPAPWMRFRDSP
PAVILLON CIRCULAIR, Encore Heureux, France[78]T1
Doors and furniture
SimpleHigh
Biological Cycle
Null10 kmMediumLowMediumImpermeable with treatmentNon-Flammable
with treatment
DurableGeometric Pattern, Dull, Opaque, Brown, Odourless
POLISH PAVILION AT MILAN EXPO 2015, 2PM Architekci[79]T1
Fruit Boxes
SimpleHigh
Biological Cycle
Null10 kmMediumLowMediumImpermeable with treatmentNon-FlammableDurableGeometric Pattern, Dull, Opaque, Brown, Odourless
Ami-Lot, Malka Architeture[80,81]T1
Palettes
SimpleHigh
Biological Cycle
Null10 kmMediumLowMediumImpermeable with treatmentNon-FlammableDurableGeometric Pattern, Dull, Opaque, Brown, Odourless
Vegan
House
Fachade, Block Architecs, Vietname
[82]T1
Blind
SimpleHigh
Biological Cycle
Null10 kmMediumLowMediumImpermeableNon-FlammableDurableGeometric Pattern, Dull, Opaque, Brown, Odourless
Collage house
Fachade, S+PS Architects, India
[83]T1
Doors
SimpleHigh
Biological Cycle
Null10 kmMediumLowMediumImpermeableNon-FlammableDurableGeometric Pattern, Dull, Opaque, Brown, Odourless
SongWood Engineered Timber Resources,
Boulder, CO, USA
[84]T2
Carpentry waste
ReconfigurationLow
Biological Cycle
Low10 kmMediumLowMediumImpermeableNon-FlammableDurableSmooth, Dull, Opaque, Brown, Odourless
Wood Foam, Fraynhifer Instituit for Wood Research [55,85]T2
Carpentry waste
ReconfigurationHigh
Biological Cycle
Null10 kmLowHighHighHydrophilic water-resistantNon-Flammable with treatmentDurableIrregular Texture, Dull, Opaque, Brown, Odourless
Sustainability 14 03430 i001
Table 8. Performance levels of the materials and construction solutions from steel/aluminium wastes.
Table 8. Performance levels of the materials and construction solutions from steel/aluminium wastes.
SampleRef.Environmental ParametersFunctional Parameters
TCTRPRCTCALPMCRTPAPWMRFRDSP
D3 Abwab Pavilion, Lot-el, South Africa[86,87]T1
Industrial containers
SimpleHigh
Biological Cycle
Null10 kmHighLowLowImpermeableNon-FlammableDurableSmooth, Dull, Opaque, Odourless
Dubai Design Week 2015 Pavilion, Fahed Architects[88]T1
Springs for collisions
SimpleHigh
Biological Cycle
Null10 kmHighLowLowImpermeable with treatmentNon-FlammableDurableIrregular, Glossy, Translucent, Copper Odourless
Can Cube, Archi-Union Architects,
Xangai
[89]T1
Aluminium Cans
SimpleLow
Biological Cycle
Null10 kmHighLowLowImpermeableNon-FlammableDurableGeometric Pattern, Dull, Opaque, Brown, Odourless
ALKIMI, Renewed Materials, LLC, USA[90]T2
Aluminium and acrylic waste
ReconfigurationHigh
Technological Cycle
Null10 kmMediumLowMediumImpermeableNon-FlammableDurableSmooth, Dull, Opaque, Colored, Odourless
Alusion– Stabilized Aluminium Foam Panels, Cymat Technologies Ltd., Mississauga, ON, Canada[91]T2
Scrap
MolecularHigh
Technological Cycle
Null10 kmHighLowMediumImpermeable Non-FlammableDurableSmooth, Dull, Opaque, Gray, Odourless
Sustainability 14 03430 i001
Table 9. Performance levels of the materials and construction solutions from agriculture waste.
Table 9. Performance levels of the materials and construction solutions from agriculture waste.
SampleRef.Environmental ParametersFunctional Parameters
TCTRPRCTCALPMCRTPAPWMRFRDSP
TRAshell e Bio-flexi|Plant Cultur[92]T1
Cardboard waste
ReconfigurationLow
Biological Cycle
Low10 kmMediumMediumMediumImpermeable with treatmentNon-FlammableN.DurableIrregular Texture, Dull, Opaque, Brown, Odourless
AGRICULTURAL WASTE PANELS [59]T1
Agriculture Waste
ReconfigurationHigh
Biological Cycle
Null10 kmMediumLowMediumImpermeable with treatmentFlammableN.DurableGeometric Pattern, Dull, Opaque, Brown, Odourless
HY-FI, Ecovative, Green Island,
NY, USA
[93,94]T1
Agriculture Waste
CultivationHigh
Biological Cycle
Null10 kmMediumHighHighImpermeable with treatmentNon-Flammable with treatmentN.DurableIrregular Texture, Dull, Opaque, Brown, Odourless
Mycoform, Terreform ONE, New York City, NY, USA[93,95]T1
Agriculture Waste
CultivationLow
Biological Cycle
Null10 kmMediumHighHighImpermeable with treatmentNon-Flammable with treatmentN.DurableIrregular Texture, Dull, Opaque, Brown, Odourless
THE GROWING PAVILION, The Living, New York City,
NY, USA
[96,97]T1
Agriculture Waste
CultivationHigh
Biological Cycle
Null10 kmLowHighHighImpermeable with treatmentNon-Flammable with treatment tN.DurableIrregular Texture, Dull, Opaque, Brown, Odourless
DECAFE TILES, Raul Lauri Design Lab[56]T1
Coffee dregs
ReconfigurationHigh
Biological Cycle
Null10 kmLowLowMediumImpermeable with treatmentNon-Flammable with treatmentN.DurableIrregular Texture, Dull, Opaque, Brown, Coffee
WINE CORK TILES, Yemm & Hart Green Materials, Marquand, MO, USA[56]T2
Wine corks
ReconfigurationHigh
Biological Cycle
Null10 kmLowHighHighImpermeable(with treatmentNon-Flammable with treatmentN.DurableIrregular Texture, Dull, Opaque, Brown, Odourless
SUNFLOWER ENTREPRISE, Thomas Vailly,
Holand
[98]T2
Sunflower production waste
ReconfigurationHigh
Biological Cycle
Null10 kmLowHighHighImpermeable with treatmentNon-Flammable with treatmentN.DurableIrregular Texture, Dull, Opaque, Green, Odourless
CHIP [S] BOARD, Rowan Minkley Robert Nicoll, The Netherlands[99]T1
Potato Waste
ReconfigurationHigh
Biological Cycle
Null10 kmLowMediumMediumImpermeable with treatmentNon-Flammable with treatmentN.DurableIrregular Texture, Dull, Opaque, Brown, Odourless
Sustainability 14 03430 i001
Table 10. Stages of the production chain, authors, and places to obtain the plastic waste in Lisbon.
Table 10. Stages of the production chain, authors, and places to obtain the plastic waste in Lisbon.
Type of WasteStages in the Production ChainActorsPlacesPotential Places Where Waste Can be Obtained in Lisbon
PlasticUrban WastePET BottlesConsumption
Collection
Sorting
Waste treatment
Municipal Collectors
Waste Treatment Companies
Public waste treatment companies
  • Europac. Recicla Lisboa; Pero Pinheiro
  • Centro de Triagem e Ecocentro do Lumiar
  • Judite Maria Jesus Dias-Operações de Gestão de Resíduos; Camarate
  • Amarsul–Ecocentros e Ecoparques (Almada, Moita Lavradio, Montijo, Setúbal, Palmela, Alcochete e Seixal.)
  • Valorsul-Valorização Trat. Resid. Sólidos Regiões Lisboa, São João da Talha
  • Stericycle Torres Vedras (resíduos industriais equiparados a urbanos)
  • Urbereciclar-Reciclagem de Resíduos Sólidos Urbanos Lda, Milharado
  • Tratolixo - Tratamento Resíduos Sólidos Eim-Emp. Intermunicipal, S.A; São Domingos de Rana
  • Resotrans-recolha e Transporte de Resíduos Sólidos, Lda; Frielas
  • Arte-entulhos-recolha E Transporte De Resíduos Sólidos Lda
  • CIRVA, A.C.E., Porto salvo
  • Recipolymers, Reciclagem de Polímeros, S.A.; Arranhó
Various types of plastic wasteConsumption
Collection
Sorting
Waste treatment
Households, Construction and Demolition Companies, Waste Treatment CompaniesPublic waste treatment companies
Plastic bagsConsumption
Collection
Sorting
Waste treatment
Municipal Collectors
Waste Treatment Companies
Public waste treatment companies
Containers to preserve foodConsumption
Collection
Sorting
Waste treatment
Municipal Collectors,
Waste Treatment Companies
Public waste treatment companies
Industrial WasteSticker Printer WasteAdhesive Paper Production
Final Adhesive Printing and Cutting
Waste
Collection
Waste Treatment
Graphics,
Sticker Shops
Silk Screen Printing.
Municipal Collectors
Waste Treatment
Printing Companies Printing and Reprographics Markets or Consumers
Public waste treatment companies
  • Cópia Igual-Centro de Informática, cópias e Papelaria, Lda, Benfica
  • LET’S COPY-Printshops; Saldanha
  • Azul e Amarelo, Centro de Cópias e Impressão, Chelas
  • Copy Campus; Alta de Lisboa
  • Mar de Cópias, Algés
  • Diolicopia-Centro De Copias, Lda; Benfica
  • Zoomcópia, Saldanha
  • Centro de Cópias Arco Íris de Pedro Proença, Lda, Campo P.
  • CopyCenter Centro de Cópias; Cid.Un.
  • Reprografia Comercial Planeta Colorido, Campo Grande
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Parece, S.; Rato, V.; Resende, R.; Pinto, P.; Stellacci, S. A Methodology to Qualitatively Select Upcycled Building Materials from Urban and Industrial Waste. Sustainability 2022, 14, 3430. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14063430

AMA Style

Parece S, Rato V, Resende R, Pinto P, Stellacci S. A Methodology to Qualitatively Select Upcycled Building Materials from Urban and Industrial Waste. Sustainability. 2022; 14(6):3430. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14063430

Chicago/Turabian Style

Parece, Sara, Vasco Rato, Ricardo Resende, Pedro Pinto, and Stefania Stellacci. 2022. "A Methodology to Qualitatively Select Upcycled Building Materials from Urban and Industrial Waste" Sustainability 14, no. 6: 3430. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14063430

APA Style

Parece, S., Rato, V., Resende, R., Pinto, P., & Stellacci, S. (2022). A Methodology to Qualitatively Select Upcycled Building Materials from Urban and Industrial Waste. Sustainability, 14(6), 3430. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14063430

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop