Meeting the current demand for concrete requires not only mining tons of gravel and sand, but also burning large amounts of fossil fuel resources in cement kilning. Consequently, concrete recycling is crucial to achieving a material-efficient society, especially with the application of various categories of concrete and the goal of phasing out fossil fuels. A comparative life cycle assessment (LCA) is used to assess the engineering material footprint (EMF) and the fossil fuel material footprint (FMF) in closed-loop recycling of three types of concrete: siliceous concrete, limestone concrete, and lightweight aggregate concrete. This study aims to investigate the impact of (i) concrete categories, (ii) methods to model recycling, and (iii) using renewable energy sources on the material footprint in concrete recycling. The results highlight that the concrete recycling system can reduce 99% of the EMF and 66–93% of the FMF compared with the baseline system, in which concrete waste is landfilled. All three recycling modeling approaches indicate that concrete recycling can considerably reduce EMF and FMF compared with the baseline system, primarily resulting from the displacement of virgin raw materials. Using alternative diesels is more sensitive than adopting renewable electricity in reduction of the FMF in concrete recycling. Replacing diesel with electrolysis- and coal-based synthetic diesel for concrete recycling could even increase the FMF, while using biodiesel made from rapeseed and wood-based synthetic diesel can reduce 47–51% and 84–89% of the FMF, respectively, compared to the virgin diesel-based recycling system. Finally, we discussed the multifunctionality and rebound effects of recycling, and double-counting risk in material and energy accounting.

The construction sector is the biggest driver of resource consumption and waste generation in Europe. The European Union (EU) is making efforts to move from its traditional linear resource and waste management system in the construction sector to a level of high circularity. Based on the theory of circular economy, a new paradigm called waste hierarchy was introduced in the EU Waste Framework Directive. This work uses the framework of the waste hierarchy to analyze the practice of construction and demolition waste (CDW) management in Europe. We explore the evolution of the waste hierarchy in Europe and how it compares with the circular economy. Then, based on the framework, we analyze the performance of CDW management in each EU member state. Innovative treatment methods of CDW, focusing on waste concrete, is investigated. This brings insight into optimizing and upgrading the CDW management in light of advanced technologies and steering the pathway for transitioning the EU towards a circular society.

Urban mining from construction and demolition waste (CDW) is highly relevant for the circular economy ambitions of the European Union (EU). Given the large volumes involved, end-of-life (EoL) concrete is identified as one of the priority streams for CDW recycling in most EU countries, but it is currently largely downcycled or even landfilled. The European projects C2CA and VEEP have proposed several cost-effective technologies to recover EoL concrete for new concrete manufacturing. To understand the potential effects of large-scale implementation of those recycling technologies on the circular construction, this study deployed static material flow analysis (MFA) for a set of EoL concrete management scenarios in the Netherlands constructed by considering the development factors in two, technological and temporal dimensions. On the technological dimension, three treatment systems for EoL concrete management, namely: business-as-usual treatment, C2CA technological system and VEEP technological system were investigated. On the temporal dimension, 2015 was selected as the reference year, representing the current situation, and 2025 as the future year for the prospective analysis. The results show that the development of cost-effective technologies has the potential to improve the share of recycling (as opposed to downcycling) in the Netherlands from around 5% in 2015 up to 22%–32% in 2025. From the academic aspect, the presented work illustrates how the temporal dimension can be included in the static MFA study to explore the potential effects in the future.