When people ask me why I became a writer, I like to joke that it is because I really dislike math. But of course when the industry you write about is so tied to the economy, commodities prices and construction activity, numbers cannot be avoided. While math may not be my favorite subject, I frequently make calculations and analyze data. Drawing conclusions from recent unemployment and construction spending data, however, could stump even the most brilliant mathematician.
In July, construction unemployment reached a five-year low of 9.1 percent. I am sure that is welcome news for the demolition contractors who are clearing the way for new construction and for C&D facilities that are recycling the materials these jobs are producing.
While the unemployment rate is a 3 percent improvement over July 2012, Chief Economist for the Associated General Contractors of America (AGC) Ken Simonson offers a bit of caution, “While the industry has added workers in the past year, employment growth has been negligible recently.”
The job growth that has occurred recently only has been on the residential side. Residential building and specialty trade contractors added 6,300 employees in July. For the year, the numbers show further improvement, up by 92,100 workers, or a 4.5 percent increase. Nonresidential building, specialty trade and heavy and civil engineering construction firms, on the other hand, lost 11,500 workers in June. Compared with last year, though, that is an improvement of 2.1 percent, or 74,300 workers. Architectural and engineering services employment rose by 2.3 percent over the year, suggesting further modest gains in construction ahead, the AGC reports.
Meanwhile, U.S. Census Bureau data show a decline in construction spending from nonresidential and public construction in June. During the same month, residential construction, while up 18 percent over last year, was flat. With June being the height of construction season, that is somewhat of a surprising statistic.
“New single-family and multifamily construction both had rare slowdowns in June, while private nonresidential construction remained stuck in neutral as it has all year, and the long slump in public construction worsened,” Simonson remarks. “For the rest of 2013, private construction appears likely to grow again, but public spending is showing no signs of a recovery.”
The ACG is urging lawmakers in Washington to make infrastructure investment a top priority for the fiscal year, which begins Oct. 1.
When you add it all up, even someone who is a math whiz may not have all the answers. As for me, I will conclude that while there are some positive signs in the numbers, we still have a long way to go.
Some Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design (LEED) recycling projects might better be called a game of Truth or Consequences. Knowledgeable people look at the reported recycling figures and just shake their heads. While most players do toe the line, a number of major companies and organizations are taking steps to assure that everyone plays the LEED recycling game correctly and honestly.
That said, there is some concern—by everyone from architects to contractors to recyclers—that U.S. Green Building Council’s (USGBC’s) LEED certification is becoming almost more cumbersome than it is worth. Corporations like to be green. They love to save electricity and brag about recycling C&D materials. They hate the cost and time of documenting it all.
Despite the added paperwork involved, LEED recycling efforts appear to be working. “The fact of the matter is that the technology is there,” says Kevin Herb, president of Industrial Disposal Services Inc. (IDS) and managing partner of Broad Run Recycling LLC, Manassas, Va. “You can take waste and turn it into whatever you want. The markets are there.”
IDS was founded in 2008 and runs a C&D recycling facility and transfer station. “We recycle 95 percent of what comes into the facility,” Herb says.
Herb says he is pleased that interest in LEED-compliant C&D recycling has grown. “It’s long overdue,” he says.
Contractors also want accurate numbers. Michael Deane, vice president and chief sustainability officer for the giant Turner Construction Co. in New York City says his firm requires C&D recyclers report activity at least monthly using Turner’s online waste tracking (OWT) system. “We sometimes have minimum diversion requirements (either set as project goals or set by local regulation) but mostly ask for best efforts and maximum diversion for the locality, as market capabilities and constraints can vary,” he says.
“Accurate documentation in a form acceptable to USGBC is the basis for our system and is essential,” Deane emphasizes. He says that, since 2009, more than 50 percent of Turner’s total project volume has been LEED work. Turner has more than 600 certified and registered projects. Since 2005, it has required all projects—not just LEED projects—to report waste diversion using OWT.
While Deane fully backs recycling of C&D material, Herb says he has concerns about recycling industry outsiders setting the rules. Even Environmental Protection Agency officials, who recently developed rules about C&D wood, rarely get out of their offices in Washington, D.C., and do not understand the business, he says.
Jason Haus, chief executive officer of Dem-Con Cos., Shakopee, Minn., also has concerns about recycling activities in the area his company operates in. “I have always regarded our market area as unique,” he says. “In the Twin Cities, we have multiple private C&D processing facilities that were started by private business folks without the rules and regulations that require facilities like these to be built.”
While recyclers like Haus and Herb place importance on reporting legitimate numbers, concerns about false reporting among some recyclers has prompted the C&D recycling industry to take action.
“There are a number of C&D recyclers who are scammers or sham recyclers who report wild numbers,” says Stephen Bantillo, executive director of the Recycling Certification Institute (RCI, formerly the Institute for Certification of Sustainable Recyclers, or ICSR), Sacramento, Calif.
A program like RCI’s gives any company or municipality the ability to audit recycling figures and be assured that a C&D recycling operation does what it says it does, he says. As far back as the 1990s, Bantillo worked with San Jose, Calif., on a C&D certification program.
“From the LEED perspective, they want to be sure the C&D recycling reported actually happened,” Bantillo says.
Currently, RCI offers the only facility certification protocols approved under LEED, though that may change with the expected adoption of LEED V4, the newest version of the certification.
Falsely reporting recycling rates is “a constant concern,” Deane says. “Our reported diversion rates are exemplary (averaging more than 73 percent overall since 2005 and recently approaching 90 percent),” he says.
However, as the saying goes, “If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.” Mixed loads being separated off site are of particular concern with regard to exaggerating results, Deane says, because a visual analysis is at best a “guesstimate” and is accepted on the honor system. According to Deane, there is not a reliable and cost-effective way to accurately measure let alone weigh individual mixed loads.
“I do not like facility averages because I want project-specific data,” Deane continues. “The one thing I know is that, if I use an average, it will be wrong for my project, rendering the data useless for analysis and projections.”
At IDS and Broad Run trucks are weighed as they come into the facility. Mass balance tables are recorded. After compiling a year’s worth of data, Broad Run was certified in 2012 by what was then the ICSR.
About 90 percent of the waste Broad Run handles is from LEED projects. “At the moment, we are the only ones in the country certified to do this,” says Herb.
Because the business is certified, a few questions have been raised about the legitimacy of its figures. Herb offers doubters a site tour to resolve lingering questions.
ICSR changed its name to RCI in May. Bantillo says the name change more accurately reflected the group’s mission: Rather than certify sustainability, it was certifying facilities and recycling rates.
The goal of RCI is to give any group, such as the USGBC or a local government, a third party to rely upon for certification and accurate numbers rather than reinventing the wheel.
Dem-Con offers a monthly worksheet so customers can accurately track their materials as they are hauled and recycled at the recycling facility.
The board of the Construction & Demolition Recycling Association (CDRA) has recognized that renegade recyclers would hurt the image of the C&D recycling industry, taking business away from legitimate recyclers. The board voted to fund the development of Certification of Recycling Rates (CORR) program available through the Recycling Certification Institute (RCI). It is the only ISO-level, third-party certification program available to credibly certify the recycling rates of C&D recycling facilities. It not only provides certification of the numbers, but also a standard reporting methodology.
In a future version of LEED, the U.S. Green Building Council says CORR would be the only program it will recognize as being credible enough for a project to earn one point for using a certified facility. The CORR is designed to provide a standard across the country which provides better information for entities hiring local consultants that may not be versed in the C&D recycling industry.
The Recycling Certification Institute (RCI) operates independently of the CDRA in order to provide arms’ length certification for CDRA members as well as any facility that wishes to become certified.
“I do believe that the USGBC is vulnerable on some projects where the data could not be supported to the level of recycling that was reported,” Haus says. “It is a challenge that our industry faces,” he continues. “The CDRA (Construction & Demolition Recycling Association) is facing that challenge head on by supporting the ICSR.
“Prior to ICSR, there was no process nationwide to help legitimate facilities provide verifiable data by a third party,” Haus explains. “There are a lot of facets to the USGBC, and if the ICSR organization can provide them with some assurances on facility data, it mitigates the risk. The USGBC has yet to require this type of certification, and the CDRA pushed for this in the latest draft; but, to our knowledge it was not incorporated.”
Haus continues, “I believe that the recycling numbers in our market areas by the facilities are not false in the sense that the numbers are fictitious. The challenge we have in our marketplace is that all processing companies compute their numbers in a different manner. This may include producing numbers for each month, which is what Dem-Con does, versus other facilities using annual numbers or 12-month rolling average numbers, etc. The challenge for the users of the information is that everyone uses a different way to calculate a number that the user thinks is the same.”
In other parts of the country, however, the situation may be more suspect. “It has come to our attention from the CDRA perspective, that some recyclers around the U.S. are providing recycling rates that are just not attainable with the equipment that they employ at their facilities, and some produce very high recycling rates without the use of equipment or source separation,” Haus says.
For those types of companies, the rates may well be fictitious, and concern about legitimacy is valid.
RCI offers two levels of participation in its program. One establishes that a C&D recycling operation is “for real” and does engage in legitimate business practices. The other fully certifies C&D recycling plants. The certification process includes site visits by auditors who are being recruited and trained from processors, haulers, government agencies and others in the recycling field.
“I hope to see more than 100 companies on the list with a 50-50 split between registered and certified operations,” Bantillo says. An online registration process available on RCI’s website, www.recyclingcertification.org, makes it easier for C&D recycling facility operators to get started and to complete most of the paperwork in the virtual world, he adds. At the same time, the software will alert RCI if there are any sudden jumps in reported numbers by a certified operation. This will not disqualify a C&D recycling operation but may attract further scrutiny.
In any case, C&D recyclers must recertify yearly, with the initial certification valid for five years. After five years, the C&D recycling firm must go through the full certification process again.
“Our website will serve as a kind of Yellow Pages, as well,” Bantillo says.
Worth the Effort?
Dem-Con has had a reduced number of LEED jobs in light of the requirements and cost of LEED, Haus says.
“It is felt by many that the cost of going LEED is at the tipping point of the value proposition,” Haus continues. With that said, he still has many more projects for which the owners want to know that their materials are recovered to the best of the market’s ability. “That volume has continued to rise over the past few years,” he says.
In some areas of the country, local governments also require certain items to be recovered. However, within that framework, those government agencies do not have the resources to enforce those requirements, according to Haus. He says he believes industry and government would be better served by a certification program.
“I think one thing that LEED has missed the boat on is looking at the end of life of materials,” Haus says. “They put a lot of time and energy into efficient products, environmentally safe manufacturing, not as much dedication into the end of life.
One example Haus gives is with concrete. It is a highly recyclable product, yet the USGBC promotes the use of Styrofoam-style concrete forms, he says. These forms have plastic fasteners that penetrate the concrete. When the foundations are removed at a future demolition, it becomes a less-than-desirable recycled concrete in light of plastic contamination. “That is only one example, but it is an issue that needs to be addressed,” Haus says.
Recycling rates and materials recycled can vary greatly depending on cost and availability of land, tipping fees (inversely related), maturity of the local recycling industry and end-use markets. Turner says he even finds a wide disparity of results from the same company in different markets.
Deane says, “Our ability to recycle depends far more on the capabilities of the local markets (and local regulations) than anything we do on site. In large urban areas,” he continues, “we can achieve very good results. Rural areas, not so much.”
“When are we going to stop measuring the percentage of material recycled (which rewards recycling a large percentage of a lot of waste) and start encouraging elimination of waste by design (which would incentive reducing the total volume of waste in the first place)?” Deane asks. The goal, he concludes, is closing the loop, eliminating the idea of “waste” and instead thinking of waste as a resource.
The author is a freelance writer living in the Cleveland area. He can be contacted at firstname.lastname@example.org.
For decades asphalt has been one of the most commonly recycled materials, with reclamation rates as high as 95 percent. The Hoover Inc. paving division of LaVergne, Tenn., likes to keep plenty of reclaimed asphalt pavement (RAP) on hand and will stockpile several years’ worth in advance to keep it readily available.
A paving company’s investment cost in processing RAP from waste to a salable commodity assures regulators that it is destined for reuse. Therefore, Tennessee regulations will allow an asphalt company to stockpile 10 to 20 percent more RAP material, depending on the plant’s mix ratio, when the asphalt is first consistently crushed and screened to a maximum acceptable reduction, which in this case was three-eighths-inch minus.
Ephraim Hoover Jr., a freight transportation provider, established Hoover Inc. in 1955, when President Dwight D. Eisenhower’s vision of an interstate highway system was just getting started. The company had all the orders it could fill. In the beginning, these were crushed stone orders for concrete, asphalt paving and grading. The crushed stone operations continue today but are joined by a paving division. The paving division and its 300 employees provide municipal, state and federal construction services, such as grading, drainage, asphalt paving, base and surface construction, pavement marking and striping, from five locations in three states. Hoover also serves its commercial and industrial customer needs with building, mechanical, electrical, demolition, sewer and water line installation services.
Three of Hoover’s hot-mix asphalt plants are located in Tennessee and have their own quarries. Two more plants are located in Mississippi and Alabama.
Hoover has its own crushers at its Lebanon, Tenn., plant and quarry, but it wanted to expand its capabilities with a portable crusher to help tackle a scheduled 14-month surge in RAP production for its stockpiles. Salesman Stacy Lynn of the Atlas Copco Nashville store hooked Hoover up with a portable Atlas Copco Powercrusher PC 3 impact crusher and Atlas Copco HCS 5515 screen in late 2012. In the first four months, the setup had already contributed 120,000 tons to the company’s RAP reserves without a hitch, according to Hoover.
A Big Appetite
Hoover Maintenance Technician Jessie Carney was impressed that the crusher could handle so much material. “I’m surprised it could go through all that we’ve fed it. That’s a pretty good machine,” he says.
Eric Amberson, Atlas Copco product line manager for Powercrushers in the U.S., says the reason the PC 3 does so well with such an abrasive material as RAP is that it was designed as a primary crusher.
However, its high throughput rate begins before the box, at the vibratory hopper and conveyor feed. Fines are sifted down to the bottom and through its grizzly onto the main conveyor, significantly decreasing the volume of abrasive material entering the chamber, which bypasses the crusher box altogether, according to Amberson.
The geometry of the box itself, Amberson explains, is that of a primary crusher. The PC 3 crushing chamber’s capacity is created by its swing beams’ relationship to its rotor, which allows for larger feed sizes, he adds. The feed inlet is 4 feet by 2 feet, 4 inches.
These factors combine to make the PC 3 an effective crusher of highly abrasive RAP, says Amberson. “It has a 250 [metric ton] per hour throughput rating, even at the reduction ratio an asphalt plant needs, for instance, three-eighth-inch minus.” The rating is based on actual 100-percent-reduction throughput, not just an input rate or free-flow output rate, according to Atlas Copco.
A Varied Input
At the Lebanon site, Hoover is keeping RAP to less than three-fourths of an inch by running the PC 3 with a five-eighths-inch top screen and nine-sixteenths-inch bottom screen. Thomas Hoover Jr., grandson of the Ephraim Hoover Jr. and paving division operations manager, says the company was seeing a production average of 200 tons an hour, though he adds, “At times we’ve seen 350 tons an hour. That’s the difference between wet and dry. Moisture slows it down.”
Asphalt also has an inherent tendency to cake or blind on the screens, which worsens with heat and moisture. The HCS 5515 screen is adjustable to accommodate these material characteristics, however, and it was during its dialing-in period that Thomas Lovvorn, Hoover’s paving superintendent, noted a secondary benefit to renting the PC 3.
He had, at times, run a batch of rock from the quarry through it. “[The crusher] cleans it right up,” he says. He spread his hands about 2 feet apart to indicate the size of stone that was dropped in the hopper. “It will take big rocks. Whatever you put in it is going to get ground,” he says, which incidentally gave Hoover its desired versatility to produce aggregate as well as RAP.
The PC 3 is powered by a 385-horsepower engine. Though diesel fuel had been in the $4 range at the time the project began, Hoover and Lovvorn say they believe the cost of operating the crusher is reasonable. The PC 3 consumed about 12 gallons per hour, totaling 75 gallons per 10-hour shift. The screener ran on 20 to 30 gallons of fuel per shift.
Hoover plans to have the Powercrusher PC 3 for about 14 months total, during which time Atlas Copco will provide preventive maintenance and be on call if a problem should arise. Hoover says the stockpile at that point is expected to last the company up to five years, depending on future project demands.
This article was submitted on behalf of Atlas Copco, based in Commerce City, Colo. More information is available at www.atlascopco.us.
The story of scrap wood’s desirability as a fuel product has been full of twists and turns in the past 15 years, with a number of federal and state agencies enacting rules that either harm or boost the market.
Claiming to identify a trend is a risky endeavor, as one stroke of government intervention can change the market’s momentum instantly.
In 2013 as in preceding years, energy end markets are competing with the other traditional scrap wood markets of mulch and pressed wood products to consume the green waste and wood scrap that flows into recycling facilities across North America.
America’s increased attention to alternative fuels, however, has helped energy markets attract investment dollars that may ultimately mean increased demand for scrap wood and green waste.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimates that more than 500 recycling facilities are sorting and processing scrap wood. Many of those facilities are managed by people continually searching for additional end markets for their material.
Wood it be Possible?
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has updated its RE-Powering Mapping and Screening Tool to provide preliminary screening results for renewable energy potential at 66,000 contaminated lands, landfills and mine sites in the U.S. Formerly, the tool reported on just 24,000 sites.
The RE-Powering America’s Land Initiative, started by EPA in 2008, encourages development of renewable energy at these contaminated sites when it is aligned with the community’s vision for reusing the land.
Pulling from EPA databases of potentially and formerly contaminated lands, as well as partnering with state agencies from California, Hawaii, Oregon, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, New York, West Virginia and Virginia, the RE-Powering Initiative recently expanded the universe of sites to the 66,000 figure. Working in collaboration with the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), RE-Powering developed screening criteria for solar, wind, biomass and geothermal potential at various levels of development. EPA and selected state agencies track the sites.
“We see responsible renewable energy development on contaminated lands and landfills as a win-win-win for the nation, local communities and the environment,” says Mathy Stanislaus, assistant administrator for the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response.
Several of the case studies listed on the RE-Powering America website, www.epa.gov/renewableenergyland, have had feasibility studies conducted as a first step toward hosting bioenergy plants that will consume agricultural or forestry waste. Bioenergy plants on these sites could potentially serve as homes for green waste and scrap wood.
More information on the RE-Powering Mapper is at www.epa.gov/renewableenergyland/rd_mapping_tool.htm.
End markets for scrap wood can vary greatly for recyclers in different parts of the country, with variables including:
- Seasonal demand for mulch and whether the quality of inbound wood waste is suitable for mulch;
- The proximity of industrial boilers that can accept scrap wood;
- The proximity of particleboard or composite material manufacturing plants;
- State-specific regulations that may prohibit the use of some types of scrap wood in boiler applications; and
- The proximity of potential animal bedding markets and whether the quality of inbound wood waste is suitable for this application.
These and other factors help recyclers determine which types of inbound scrap wood they should accept, how they should sort and process the material and whether they can rely on one major end market or whether they should adopt a more diversified strategy.
An inescapable message in the past 10 years has been that venture capital is pouring into alternative energy as America tries to reduce its dependence on fossil fuels and imported energy.
Unfortunately, this investment has not always led to a series of wide open doors for wood recyclers to walk through, as a combination of regional differences and emissions concerns also can divert scrap wood from entering boilers or other energy production plants.
The current wood-to-energy landscape has some bright spots to offer wood recyclers; but, as they have in the past, geography and infeed material type may limit the opportunities available to some of the country’s wood recyclers.
One of the highest profile emerging energy-related destinations for scrap wood is Vero Beach, Fla., where Ineos Bio announced in late July that it had started production of commercial-scale bioethanol at its facility there.
Switzerland-based Ineos says its Indian River BioEnergy Center is producing commercial quantities of transportation fuel from vegetative and wood waste as well as producing electrical power for the local community. The company says it expects its first ethanol shipments to be released in August.
“We remain convinced that the ability to divert waste materials from communities by converting them into competitively priced renewable fuel and power offers an excellent value proposition,” says Ineos Bio CEO Dr. Peter Williams.
Williams says the Ineos crew in Vero Beach will continue to ramp up production at the plant in the second half of 2013. “All that we have seen so far validates the technical and economic viability of the technology. It helps solve waste disposal issues, contributes to the supply of affordable and renewable fuel and energy, creates attractive jobs and provides a sustainable source of value for the community. We look forward to taking the next steps in building a global business based on the broad deployment of this advanced technology.”
The Ineos Bio Vero Beach plant will be the focus of a presentation and the site of a hosted tour for a limited number of attendees at the Renewable Energy from Waste Conference to be held in West Palm Beach, Fla., in mid-November. (See the sidebar “An Energetic Gathering” on the right)
Seeking Clean Skies
The Ineos Bio project has appealed to its backers in part because its use of low-emissions gasification technology rather than combustion.
Greenhouse gas and particulate emissions are among the concerns limiting some scrap wood-to-fuel markets.
In Oregon, that state’s Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) held a public hearing in mid-July to discuss an air quality permit modification requested by Lakeview Cogeneration LLC for its facility in Lakeview, Ore. The company wants to use biomass-fired turbines to produce electricity.
The facility was first issued a permit in 2010, but now the company is seeking a modification to allow the plant to increase its emissions limit from 14 tons per year to 32 tons per year.
An Energetic Gathering
Energy produced from discarded materials, including scrap wood, will be the topic of the Renewable Energy from Waste Conference, taking place Nov. 18-20 in West Palm Beach, Fla.
Recycling Today Media Group, the publisher of Renewable Energy from Waste and Construction & Demolition Recycling magazines, has joined forces with consulting firm Gershman Brickner & Bratton Inc. (GBB) and conference organizer Smithers Apex to host the event.
More than 35 speakers will cover topics including the economics of waste conversion, lessons learned from prior projects and the legislative outlook for conversion technology support.
Anticipated highlights at the conference include presentations by Craig Cookson of the American Chemistry Council; Nathiel Egosi of RRT Design & Construction; Paul Greene of the American Biogas Council; John May of Stern Brothers & Co.; Ted Michaels from the Energy Recovery Council; and Mark J. Riedy of Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP.
Those seeking more information on the event or wishing to register can visit www.REWConference.com.
Lakeview Cogeneration is proposing to install and operate a biomass-fired cogeneration plant in which the steam generated will be converted to electricity.
The new permit would require the facility to monitor pollutants using federally approved monitoring practices and standards, including a continuous opacity (visible) emissions monitor and continuous emissions monitors for nitrogen oxides and carbon monoxide. Lakeview Cogeneration also will be required to conduct an initial performance test for demonstrating compliance with particulate matter standards.
According to the DEQ, Lakeview Cogeneration also will have the following obligations:
- Accepting the city of Lakeview’s chipped, clean land-clearing debris that meets the permittee’s fuel specifications and can be combusted in accordance with the permit terms;
- Contributing $7,500 per calendar year for five years to the city of Lakeview for implementation of community emission reduction strategies related to residential wood-fired heating devices; and
- Implementing one of three mitigation packages listed in the permit condition of the draft permit.
Emerging from the southeastern U.S. is a research effort that could lead to a clean-burning outlet for scrap wood.
EnviraCarbon Inc. (ECI), an energy technology provider with locations in Tennessee, Florida and South Carolina, says it has commercialized a patented technology that molecularly alters renewable biomass feedstock into what it calls EnvirAnized Biofuel™ (EBF).
ECI describes EBF as a product that looks, transports, stores, pulverizes and burns like coal but does not pollute like coal. The process changes woody biomass into carbonized EBF, condensing a timeline that occurs in nature over the course of 100 million years into a matter of minutes, according to the company.
Because EBF allows biomass to take on the physical characteristics of coal, it can be directly used by coal-burning or biomass fired power plants and industrial facilities without any modification or retrofitting to their existing boiler systems, says ECI. The EBF product has the same heat value as bituminous coal from the eastern United States (12,000-plus Btu); it exhibits a much greater heat value than wood pellets; and unlike wood pellets, it is hydrophobic, according to the company.
The EBF product contains negligible amounts of sulfur and nondetectable levels of mercury, arsenic and lead, according to ECI, which also says that by most standards it is at or near carbon neutral.
ECI facilities can accept “certified sustainable biomass and/or waste wood as feedstock” and require a relatively small footprint while producing large quantities of EBF, according to the company.
ECI says it has a commercial facility under construction and anticipates entering the export market for EBF in the first quarter of 2014.
Should any of these energy outlets pan out in long run after having overcome emissions concerns, they may quickly grow as end markets for the wood recycling sector.
The author is editor Construction & Demolition Recycling and can be contacted at email@example.com.
|// Scrap Iron RMDAS
No. 1 Heavy Melt Steel Pricing
(Per Gross Ton for No. 1 HMS scrap)
// Stone and Aggregate Pricing
Increased investments in the housing sector resulted in record log and lumber imports to China in the second quarter of 2013 with the import value increasing by more than 30 percent year over year. (Source: Wood Resource Quarterly)