A Circular Economyfor Gypsum Products

Steve HemmingsEtex Building Performance LtdJanuary 2017

The Gypsum Sector

ProductsPlasterboard and associated products for interior drylining: Partitions Wall linings Ceilings

Players

Brand Company

The Gypsum Sector

Markets

ResidentialCommercial

including health & education

Repair, Maintenance & Improvement

Plasterboard(gypsum)

HydrateHeat

Plaster

Addpaper

About Gypsum

The perfect circular material• Finished product is same chemical

substance as the starting raw material• Material can therefore be recycled many

times without loss of quality

Raw material(gypsum) Remove Paper

Plasterboard Recycling : 2000-2016

Closed-loop recycling of plasterboard waste (new construction)

EU LandfillDirective

AshdownAgreement

Weak financial incentive increasing financial incentive+ regulatory driver

Plasterboard Recycling : 2000-2016

Importance of Supply Chain collaboration

• Manufacturers• Merchants/ Distributors• Installers• Main Contractors• Demolition contractors• Recyclers• Government

New Challenges for the Sector

Challenge: FGD Gypsum availability set to decline steeply Opportunity: only ca 11% of gypsum C&D waste is recycled

in the EU Solution: harvest gypsum already existing in the built

environment and preserve its economic life

Synthetic (FGD)70%

Recycled5%

Natural25%

Gypsum sourcesUK manufacturers (2015)

FGD Gypsum production EU27Forecast 2010 – 2050 (millions of tonnes)

Best caseWorst case

Gypsum to Gypsum (“G2G”) Project

EU LIFE-funded R&D towards a Circular Economy for Gypsum

2013-2015 16 partners 7 countries €3.5 million

Project Objectives1. From demolition to deconstruction2. Optimising materials for recovery3. Boosting recyclate levels to 30% in new products

G2G Results: Manufacturing

– 5 pilot deconstruction recycling trials in 4 countries– Recyclate inclusion rates of 18-30% were achieved– Effect on unit variable costs of product manufacturing:

-9,5%

8,0%

0,3% -0,2%2,9%

-0,6%

5,4%

19,2%

4,2% 4,0% 5,5%2,0%

-18,5%

0,0%-2,9%

-4,8%-1,1%

-2,9%

-20%

-15%

-10%

-5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

Raw Materials

Additives Water Fuel Electrical Energy

TOTAL

Cost

Var

iatio

n [%

]

Average

Highest

Lowest

Conclude: Variable costs not a driver for producers

G2G Results: Deconstruction & Carbon

Cost saving of deconstruction with gypsum recycling versus mixed disposal in the pilot trials

Conclude: 10% saving to contractors insufficient driver due to other constraints

France Germany Belgium Average

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

Cost

Sav

ing

%Cradle to cradle carbon emissions (pilot trial data)

Increasingrecycling

Conclude: All life cycle carbon savings (9%) are at disposal phase (not currently monetised)

G2G Project Outcomes

Conclude insufficient financial incentives to drive behaviour towards circular economy

Final project report therefore calls for a regulatory nudge: “Mandatory pre-deconstruction audit for all projects of GFA> 1000m2”

EU Circular Economy Package: C&D Waste Management Protocol (November 2016) promotes

deconstruction audits (section 2.2); not mandatory BUT Regulatory support for gypsum recovery in a proposed revision

of the Waste Framework Directive:

Member States shall take measures to promote sorting systems for construction and demolition waste and for at least the following: wood, aggregates, metal, glass and plaster (Article 11.1)

Prospects

24 January 2017: EP ENVI Committee Vote on WFD Article 11 update, including tabled proposals on mandatory deconstruction audits

UK application uncertain due to Treaty Article 50 timetable

Outlook : From Disposal to Recovery

Gypsum sector adapted to the EU Landfill Directive requiring segregated disposal in 2005; well prepared for any new regulation promoting sorting for material recovery in the circular economy.

References

For further information

www.gpda.com

www.plasterboardpartnership.org

www.gypsumtogypsum.org