Construction waste minimisation comparing conventional and precast construction (Mixed System and IBS) methods in high-rise buildings: A Malaysia case study

Abstract The construction industry has always been a major generator of construction waste and is often faced with the issue of its effective management in minimising environmental pollution. This research paper focuses on the construction waste generated from the construction of high rise buildings using 3 construction methods; Conventional Construction (Category I), the Mixed System (Category II) and Industrialised Building System (IBS, Category III). The construction waste for each construction category were characterised into its mineral and non-mineral components. The construction waste usage efficiency (CWUE), waste generation, reuse and recycling rates were also calculated. The IBS (Category III) was found to be the most efficient construction method with a waste generation rate (WGR) of 0.016 tons of construction waste/m 2 floor space compared to the Mixed System (Category II) at 0.030 tons/m 2 and the Conventional Construction (Category I) at 0.048 tons/m 2 . The construction waste usage efficiency (CWUE) was the highest in Category III (IBS) at 94.1% with only 5.9% of the total construction waste in this category being disposed at landfills. The Construction Industry Development Board (CIDB) of Malaysia has recognised its benefits and has actively promoted the use of IBS in Malaysia. The waste characterisation data and its uses (reuse and recycling) obtained from this study could be used as baseline data to promote and encourage the Malaysian construction industry to adopt the use of precast technology, the Industrialised Building System (Category III) and move away from the more traditional resource hungry Conventional Construction (Category I). The inclusion of the Mixed System (Category II) in this study as an intermediate construction method was aimed at providing the link between the Conventional Construction (Category I) and the IBS (Category III). The Mixed System (Category II) incorporates both the IBS and Conventional Construction methods. The Conventional Construction (Category I) with the incorporation of new construction technologies could easily be reclassified as the Mixed System (Category II), allowing Malaysian contractors to easily adopt it. This paves the way for better understanding for the use of precast technology which eventually would result in a positive shift towards the use of the IBS (Category III) by Malaysian contractors in the future. Thus, improving the construction industry's environmental performance and commitment to sustainable development as outlined by the CIDB's Construction Industry Master Plan 2006–2015 for Malaysia.

[1]  Vivian W. Y Tam,et al.  An investigation of construction wastes: an empirical study in Shenzhen , 2008 .

[2]  Murali Sambasivan,et al.  Causes and effects of delays in Malaysian construction industry , 2007 .

[3]  A. Dimoudi,et al.  Energy and environmental indicators related to construction of office buildings , 2008 .

[4]  K Moustakas,et al.  Preliminary study for the management of construction and demolition waste , 2008, Waste management & research : the journal of the International Solid Wastes and Public Cleansing Association, ISWA.

[5]  Vivian W. Y Tam,et al.  Towards adoption of prefabrication in construction , 2007 .

[6]  Yuosre F. Badir,et al.  Industrialized Building Systems Construction in Malaysia , 2002 .

[7]  Ali Touran,et al.  A systems analysis tool for construction and demolition wastes management. , 2004, Waste management.

[8]  Nor Hazreeni Hamzah,et al.  A Study on the Acceptance of IBS in Construction Industry in Kelantan: Application of Logistic Regression Analysis , 2010 .

[9]  Charles J. Kibert,et al.  Strategies for successful construction and demolition waste recycling operations , 1997 .

[10]  C. M. Tam,et al.  Mapping Approach for Examining Waste Management on Construction Sites , 2004 .

[11]  José-Tomás San-José Lombera,et al.  A system approach to the environmental analysis of industrial buildings , 2010 .

[12]  Y. Y. Ling,et al.  Reusing timber formwork: importance of workmen’s efficiency and attitude , 2000 .

[13]  Charles J. Kibert,et al.  The next generation of sustainable construction , 2007 .

[14]  Mark Gaterell,et al.  Estimation of the recycled content of an existing construction project , 2007 .

[15]  Bernadette O’Regan,et al.  A model for assessing the economic viability of construction and demolition waste recycling—the case of Ireland , 2006 .

[16]  Rawshan Ara Begum,et al.  A benefit–cost analysis on the economic feasibility of construction waste minimisation: The case of Malaysia , 2006 .

[17]  Christopher Nigel Preece,et al.  Sustainable construction waste management in Malaysia: A contractor's perspective , 2011 .

[18]  Rawshan Ara Begum,et al.  Waste Generation and Recycling: Comparison of Conventional and Industrialized Building Systems , 2010 .

[19]  Wu Yuping,et al.  Municipal solid waste management in China: using commercial management to solve a growing problem , 2001 .