Colorcoat Technical Paper - ilgbcatalog.orgilgbcatalog.org/.../Colorcoat-Technical-Paper...pre-finished-steel.pdf · to make steel a fully traceable product. ... Life Cycle Analysis

Corus Colors

End of life options for pre-finished steel buildings

Colorcoat® Technical Paper

2 Colorcoat Connection® helpline +44 (0)1244 892434

Corus andsustainabilitySince 1970 Corus have reduced the amount ofenergy used in steelmaking by 40% and workedto make steel a fully traceable product. Our sitein North Wales which manufactures Colorcoat®

products, contains two areas of Special ScientificInterest within its boundaries. Breeding sites for Common Tern co-exist in close proximity to ongoing operations, demonstrating an ability to manage our operations and their environmentalimpact without compromising biodiversity.

Life Cycle Analysis and Life Cycle Costing studiesare available for Colorcoat® pre-finished steelproducts and Corus continuously look for waysto improve product performance both functionallyand environmentally. We also evaluate how ourproducts are used during their lifetime as part ofthe cladding system and assess the environmentalimpact from cradle to grave.

Formed in 1986, the SCI is anindependent, member-based organisationand provides one of the world’s largestresearch and technical organisationsupporting the use of steel in construction.

The SCI recognised the importance of sustainability as early as 1993, when they set up the first Europeanproject to study embodied andoperational energy in buildings of

different materials. They work closely with Corus to reduce theimpact of steel based constructiontechniques and provide advice to the market.

Working together with the Steel Construction Institute (SCI)

Contents

3www.colorcoat-online.com

Overview 3

Introduction 4

End of life options 5

Refurbishment 6

Re-use 7

Recycling 9

Summary of end of life options 20

Further information 22

The Colorcoat® brand 23

Overview

The problem of disposing of constructionmaterials at the end of a building’s useful life is an ever-increasing concern. One of the key benefits of pre-finished steel-based cladding systems is the inherentrecyclability of steel, but there are alwaysother components in a cladding system to consider too. This report gives adviceon the disposal of various steel-basedcladding systems used in the buildingenvelope, including a snapshot overviewof legislation, together with typical disposalrates and costs. Options for the differentsystems are reviewed in order to assistwith the problems faced by demolition

contractors and building owners. This will also help to guide designerstowards providing best value solutions for new buildings where end of life needsto be considered at the outset. For thisreason a forward view on likely changesto legislation and practice is also given.

This Corus Colorcoat® technical papercombines knowledge gained by the Steel Construction Institute (SCI) onlegislative issues with Corus research inthe market-place to provide a definitiveguide to the end of life options for pre-finished steel based cladding systems.


Introduction

The sustainability of a building in terms of its material usage, construction, occupationand end of life is becoming an ever moreimportant consideration. This is driven by the need to provide a better quality of life for people and protect the needs of future generations.

Many construction companies use the term ‘environmentally friendly’ to describe their offering without providing any quantitative information or credible research to substantiate such claims. Whilst someinformation might be available to explain how the products are manufacturedsustainably, few companies address what happens to the products at the end of their life.


End of life options

• Refurbishment – can extend the life ofthe pre-finished steel building envelopeby many years. Options availableinclude overpainting, overcladding or recladding if the original claddinghas been damaged or is beyond repair.

• Re-use – careful removal of thecladding could enable it to be re-used elsewhere, most typically for agricultural applications.

• Recycling – wherever possible if refurbishment or re-use are not options, the cladding should be recycled so that it can re-enter the supply chain at the manufacturing stage. Any elements which cannot be recycled should be disposed of as safely as possible and withminimal environmental impact.

Left: Re-use of pre-finished steel cladding

in agricultural application.

Right: Overpainting pre-finished steel cladding.

When a building envelope comes to the end of its current life there are a number of optionsavailable to the building owner, designed toeither extend its life further or ensure it isdisposed of safely and with minimum impactboth economically and environmentally.


Refurbishment

Refurbishing buildings offers asustainable approach to achieving new facilities without the full cost of newbuild, effectively extending the useful life of the building and so minimising the impact of the resources used.Refurbishment may be undertaken forpurely aesthetic reasons, in which caseit results in an improvement in theworking and social environment, or forfunctional reasons, such as to upgradeinsulation. In all cases, effective use ismade of still-functioning aspects of the

building, only replacing those whichhave gone beyond their useful life, andthereby minimising both the workcarried out and the use of resources.

Buildings using pre-finished steelcladding systems are ideally suited to refurbishment – whether it be foraesthetic or functional reasons. There are a number of refurbishmentoptions available including overpainting,overcladding and recladding ofdamaged areas.

A full guide to refurbishment using pre-finished steel cladding systems canbe found on www.colorcoat-online.com

1973 2004

This building reinforces the long-termperformance claims made for Corus Colorcoat® pre-finished steelproducts, whilst also demonstrating

the ease of refurbishment. Constructed in 1973, it has been in constant use for the storage and distribution of Guinness.

As part of a broader maintenanceschedule, it was repainted in 2003 to restore the original appearance. The cladding was generally in excellentcondition on three elevations out of four. The fourth elevation had been more exposed to weathering and had suffered physical damage fromloading, but was still suitable forrefurbishment by recladding.

Case study

Left: 1973.

Right: 2004.


Re-use

Where building materials are to bedisposed of, re-use is generally thelowest impact option, both financiallyand environmentally. With carefuldismantling and removal it is possible to re-use some of the materials used inthe original construction. The EuropeanCommission Life Cycle assessment forsteel construction1 states that while around10% of total construction steel is re-used,15% of the cladding sheets removedfrom buildings during the demolitionprocess enter the market for re-use.

For a number of years, the agriculturalsector has provided a market for the re-use of pre-finished steel clad buildings,particularly for portal frame sheds. By contrast, the re-use of roof and wallcladding systems within the commercialand industrial sector is less common.This is mainly because of aestheticproblems with second hand cladding,the impact of different panel lengths andpurlin spacing and the limited likelihoodof achieving full regulatory approval wherere-used materials are used extensively.

Portal frame buildings are considered bythe industry to be relatively simple andinexpensive to demolish. The speed andease inherent in the construction of ametal clad building is reflected in thedemolition process. Machinery is generallyused to remove the roof and wall sheetsand materials are then segregated.

The pre-finished steel cladding and framehave a scrap or re-use value unlike manyother materials which makes them morepopular with demolition contractors.However, the main challenges faced by thedemolition industry today revolve aroundtightening time constraints imposed byclients, ensuring safety on-site and evermore complicated legislation regardingthe disposal of demolition waste.

Demolition practices

Photography: Interface Marketing on behalf of Liebherr.


Re-use

Re-use of built-up systems

Built-up systems are by their very nature relatively easy to disassembleand separate out the different elements.The reclaimed pre-finished steel sheetscould be re-used in agricultural buildings and the mineral wool andglass fibre insulation quilts could be re-used for applications such asdomestic lofts. However, the carefulremoval and separation of materialsrequired for re-use are not alwayscompatible with demolition practice so in reality, re-use may be limited.

Re-use of factoryinsulated foamfilled composite panel systemsThe re-use of factory insulated foamfilled composite panels is very small and few are currently entering the wastestream. Specific fixing requirements for re-use are not popular with theagriculture industry and the panels move more slowly from reclamationyards than pre-finished steel sheetsrecovered from built-up systems. Unless current demolition practice orequipment changes significantly, the re-use of factory insulated foam filledcomposite panels is unlikely to improve.

Future for re-useThe short timescales for buildingdemolition and the impact of the Work at Height Regulations 2005, mean that re-use rates are likely to drop rather than increase without theintervention of specific measures orlegislation to encourage re-use.Demolition contractors do not have the time to ‘disassemble’ the building in a way that would yield a significantpercentage of re-useable sheets withthe buildings often being pulled apart by large machines that can damage the sheets.

The implications of the Work at HeightRegulations 2005 preclude mostcontractors from using manual labour to remove sheets individually andpreserve them, and again demolition is more safely deployed with a machine.Easily accessible sheets at ground level that could be removed relativelysafely are invariably damaged during the demolition phase so of little use.

Together with the Colorcoat® Centre for the Building Envelope, based at Oxford Brookes University, Corus is researching building envelope designs thatwill encourage future disassembly and re-use. These include interchangeablecladding, novel fixing methods that remove the need to put holes in the envelope,flexible mounting structures and innovative detailing.


Recycling

Wherever possible, if construction waste cannot be re-used, as much as possible of it should be recycled to re-enter the supply chain at the manufacture stage.Research suggests that overall 84% of construction steel is recycled while only 6% of steel cladding enters landfill2.

The means and costs of recycling and disposal for built-up and composite cladding systems vary significantly and so these are dealt with separatelywithin this report. However, in each case,the main aim is to recycle as much as possible, which requires effectiveseparation of the steel components from the remainder of the system.

Source: J Ley, M Sansom and A Kwan (2002) Material flow analysis of the UK steel construction Sector 3.

Fig.1. Re-use and recycling of constructional steel


Recycling of built-up systems

Recycling

InsulationMineral wool manufacturers will takeback ‘clean’ insulation material fromdemolition so long as no building rubbleor steel is mixed in with it. The same isalso true of a small number of glass fibremanufacturers. However, despite this,very little insulation is returned to themanufacturers for recycling. This is inpart due to the inherent low density ofthe material, which makes it uneconomic

to transport over long distances andundesirable from a life cycle impactperspective. Currently, most mineral wooland glass fibre insulants from built-upsystems generally go to landfill aftersegregation from the other demolitionwaste. Corus research with landfill sitessuggests both mineral wool and glassfibre are classified as ‘difficult waste’and must be bagged before landfill.

The recycling of built-up systems is relativelystraight forward. The two key elements toconsider are the pre-finished steel outer andinner sheets and the mineral wool or glassfibre insulation. These two elements are readilyseparated during the demolition process sothat the steel can be recycled without furtherprocessing. The positive value of the steelscrap more than offsets the costs of disposalof insulation, giving a marginally positiveoverall value to the operation.

More information, supplied by the SCI, on the regulatory infrastructure and its effect on end of life requirements for built-up systems is included on www.colorcoat-online.com


Steel scrap recyclingThe steel industry has been operatingsteel scrap recycling on a large scale for more than 150 years. Recycling ofsteel scrap has always had economic as well as environmental advantages for the steel industry, saving resourcesand energy.

The steel recycling infrastructure is veryefficient and all the steel in collectedend of life products is recycled.Products that are easy to disassemble,with easy to separate steel parts, suchas pre-finished steel from built-upsystems, have a greater potential to be recycled. The steel can be recycledindefinitely without any downgrading.

Source: Eurofer 20064

Fig.2. Multiple recycling reduces the average energyrequirement per kg of steel

In the steelmaking process, the pre-finished steel coatings are normallydestroyed, and the substrate steel recovered regardless of the coating type.Corus has shown through research that pre-finished steel can be readilyrecycled without further burden to the environment. Corus will take back anyConfidex® guaranteed pre-finished steel used in a built-up cladding systemmanufactured by CA Group, Corus Panels and Profiles, Euroclad and Tegral.

Recycling


Recycling of factory insulated foam filled composite panels

Increasing pressure to developenvironmentally robust and cost effectiverecycling routes is expected over thenext five years as significant amounts of buildings constructed using factoryinsulated foam filled composite panelsreach the end of their life.

By their very nature, composite panelspresent a greater challenge at end of life than built-up systems, since thecomponents are adhesively bondedtogether. To achieve the optimum solutionfor disposal, the foam core and steelsheets need separation, but the presence

of gases known as blowing agents inthe core can complicate this, dependingon the blowing agents used.

Due to their relative bulk in comparisonwith their weight, whole factory insulated foam filled composite panelsare not suitable for charging directly to the steelmaking processes. Manually separating the outer sheetsfrom the foam core and recycling thesteel and foam separately is not generallya viable option due to the level ofmanual labour involved and the potentialrelease of blowing agent gases.

Fig.3. Predicted annual arisings of composite panels entering the waste stream, showing both existing panels and the total number, assuming 2% year-on-year growth

Source: M Sansom, ‘Recycling of organically coated composite steel cladding panels – phase 1 report’ 20035.


Legislation on the disposal of ODS-containing foams states that wherepracticable, the ODS gases should becollected and disposed of safely. This legislation has had a significant effecton the disposal of fridges, but is equallyapplicable to foam filled composite panelsproduced before 2004, since these blowingagents have been banned. It should benoted that if the blowing agents used inthe panels are unknown then the panelsmust be treated as if they contain ODS.For this reason it is important that goodquality records are kept in all cases.

As a result, factory insulated foam filled composite panels in buildingsreaching the end of their lives require a different approach to recycling and disposal than built-up systems. This also needs to take into account the type of blowing agents used in the manufacture of the foam. The options for consideration are:

• Landfill.• Fragmentation /shredding.• Fridge recycling.• High temperature incineration.

Note that the use of ozone depletingsubstances (ODS) is banned under theMontreal Protocol.

• Chlorofluorcarbons (CFC-11) pre-1990. Considered Ozone Depleting Substance (ODS).

• Reduced Chlorofluorcarbons (CFC-11) 1991-1994. ConsideredOzone Depleting Substance (ODS).

• Hydrochlorofluorcarbons (HCFC-141b)1994-2003. Considered OzoneDepleting Substance (ODS).

• Hydrocarbons (mainly Pentane based)and Hydrofluorocarbons (HFC) recentlyintroduced are not Ozone DepletingSubstance (ODS).

Ozone Depleting Substances have beenbanned from the manufacture of foamssince January 2004. Hydrocarbons andHFCs are not considered to be ozonedepleting and are now the most commonsubstances used during foam manufacture.

Most factory insulated composite panels used for the building envelopecurrently contain HFC because of the fire resistance requirements. Although HFC’s used do not contain ODS they do have a high global warming potential. Future legislation may restrict emissions of these gases to the atmosphere during recycling and a requirement for collection of these gases may be included.

Pentane-based factory insulatedcomposite panels are more prevalent in cold storage applications due to thedifferences in fire testing and legislation,and are less common in current building envelope applications.

Global warming potential:HFC 365 890Kg CO2 eq/KgHFC 245 950Kg CO2 eq/KgPentane 11Kg CO2 eq/Kg

Blowing agent categories for factory insulated foam filled composite panels


LandfillPanels containing CFC and HCFC (ODS)are classified as hazardous waste. Most landfill operators will not acceptpanels with these blowing agentsmaking landfill a very difficult option to pursue at end of life.

Panels containing pentane and HFCsare non-ozone depleting and currentlyhave a non-hazardous classification. As such they can be considered forlandfilling, however, many landfill sitesare still reluctant to accept them. The bulk and organic nature of the

panels may make them a target in futureUK and EU legislation to limit landfill.There is also speculation that futurelegislation may treat global warminggases in the same way as ODS whichwould lead to a change in classification.This route for the disposal of factoryinsulated foam filled composite panelscannot be considered as reliableparticularly given the large increase inpanels coming to the end of their lifeover the next 10 to 15 years. There isalso a likelihood of future legislationaimed at reducing landfill usage.



Fragmentation /shredding Fragmentation through existing recyclingfacilities used for automotive shreddingis technically a viable route only for pentane and HFC blown panels.

However, there are two reasons why this route is unlikely to be used to anygreat degree:

• Inherent in this process is the releaseof gases used as blowing agents to the atmosphere. While there iscurrently no legislation regarding

the release of HFCs, their high globalwarming potential (up to 1,000 timesworse than CO2) may be a target for future legislation in this direction. Even in the absence of suchlegislation, releasing HFCs cannot be recommended on the grounds of the global warming caused.

• A large volume of panels, for examplethose removed from a large industrialunit, would need to be carefullyintegrated into the automotive waste

stream and would increase the level of gases and dust released in thefragmentation process. Some recyclersstated that there could be anincreased risk of explosion in thefragmentation process if the panelsare not managed appropriately.



Fridge recyclingFridge recycling plants are nowcommonplace in the UK, with over 30 currently operating. Technically theyappear to provide the best option forrecycling and disposing of factoryinsulated foam filled composite panels atthe end of their life where blowing agentgases are to be captured. Currently, thismeans all panels incorporating ODS orthose of unknown provenance, although

potential future legislation may broadenthis net. Air cyclones, magnets and eddy-current technology would separatethe various materials with the steelavailable for recycling as scrap and thepolyurethane dust liberated from the foamgoing for landfill. The gases would be captured and contained and sent to specialist waste companies for high temperature incineration.

1 Reception of fridges

2 Shredding and Collection of CFC gasses

3 Drying

4 PUR Foam separation

5 Collection point of PUR foam

6 Ferrous metal separation

7 Collection point of ferrous metal

8 Non ferrous metal and plastic separation

9 Collection point of non ferrous metals

10 Collection point of plastic

There are restrictions on the panel size that could be handled, requiringfactory insulated foam filled compositepanels to be cut down before beingprocessed. To deliver an efficientoperation, using the current set up, the panels would also have to be mixedwith fridge feedstock. However, as the number of factory insulated foamfilled composite panels entering thewaste stream increases in the comingyears, it can be expected that

installations will be modified to takeaccount of this.

The costs associated with recyclingfactory insulated foam filled compositepanels through a fridge plant arebetween £7-9 per m2. This is made up of a recycling cost of between £5 and£7 per m2 and an assumed transportcost of up to £2 per m2 from thedemolition site to the recycling facility,based on a distance up to 100 miles.

1

2

3

45

6

7

89

10

Fig.4. Schematic of fridge recycling plant


High temperature incinerationHigh temperature incineration is oftenquoted as an appropriate technique for dealing with polyurethane foams.However, separating the foam core from the outer and inner steel sheets is not practical and would result in OzoneDepleting Substances or hydrocarbonsentering the atmosphere.

Incinerators are limited by similardimensional constraints as fridge recyclingplants (1m3 feedstock) but should be ableto handle factory insulated foam filledcomposite panels, although this is not

commonplace. The high temperatureincineration would effectively processthe foam core but the steel inner andouter sheet would fall through as slag to the bottom of the furnace mixed in with any other metal or glass waste. The resulting steel scrap would have a limited value as scrap due to the cross contamination withother materials. The cost of hightemperature incineration is also relatively expensive at around £15 per m2 and so would not beconsidered a sensible option.

More information, supplied by the SCI, on the regulatory infrastructure and its effect on end of life requirements for factory insulated foam filled compositepanels is included on www.colorcoat-online.com

Recycling


Recycling of factory insulated mineral wool composite panels

Steel scrap recycling This would involve manually separatingthe outer and inner sheets and recoveringthe steel scrap for recycling. The mineralcore would be landfilled or returned to themineral wool manufacturer for recycling.The practicalities of this manual processfor end of life disposal would only lenditself to the treatment of relatively smallfactory insulated mineral wool compositepanel volumes.

FragmentationUsing the shredder route is moreappropriate for larger volumes of mineral wool panels. As the mineral

wool panels contain no blowing agents, they can safely be handledthrough the fragmentation route. The steel could be recycled effectivelyand the mineral wool landfilled alongwith the other automotive shredderwaste. Any future requirement forrecycling of the mineral wool core could potentially be accommodated by dedicated shredding facilities ifvolumes of the panels for recycling were sufficient. Additionally, mineralfibres recovered from fibre-coredcomposite panels are generally clean and so suitable for recycling themselves.

The amount of mineral wool composite panelsused for cladding, predominantly on walls, has risen in recent years. Two methods ofrecycling these panels are currently available.

More information, supplied by the SCI, on the regulatory infrastructure and its effect on end of life requirements for factory insulated mineral woolcomposite panels is available on www.colorcoat-online.com


Corus have worked with Excel Industries,CA Group, the Building ResearchEstablishment (BRE) and the SteelConstruction Institute on a number of Waste and Resources ActionProgramme (WRAP) projects.

Excel Industries manufacture celluloseinsulation from recycled newspaper,which has become established over thepast 20 years as a mainstream insulationproduct for domestic applications.

An initial study examined the compatibilityof cellulose with metal cladding andother system components and indicativefire performance when used as part of a built up twin skin system. A furtherstudy examined the technical issues of

site construction and fire performance as well as commercial viability.

When tested to EN1187 test method 4, a built-up roof system achieved a BROOF classification. When tested toBS476 part 22, a built-up wall systemachieved 30 minutes insulation.

A demonstration building has beenconstructed at Excel Industries in Rhymney,South Wales. The building, whichmeasures 8m wide x 10m long x 4mhigh is being monitored for moisturebuild up, thermal performance andcompatibility with system components.

A full report on this work is available on www.wrap.org.uk

Development of alternative insulation materials

Cross section througha built-up systemprototype using cellulose insulation.


Summary of end of life options

RefurbishmentRefurbishment offers a well proven methodfor extending the life of the pre-finishedsteel building envelope either throughoverpainting, overcladding or recladding.

Re-useBuilt-up systems which are easy todisassemble are more frequently re-used,mainly in agricultural applications.

There is very little re-use of factoryinsulated composite panels (foam filledor mineral wool) mainly because ofspecific fixing requirements and theneed for careful removal of panels which can take extra time.

Reduced timescales for buildingdemolition and the impact of Work at Height Regulations 2005, mean that re-use rates are likely to reduce further.

Recycling/disposalBuilt-up systems A well established process is in place for handling built-up systems at end of life which is easy and cost effective.

• The pre-finished steel can beseparated and is 100% recyclable.

• Glass-fibre and mineral woolinsulation can be processed for re-use at lower grade and mineralwool could be recycled effectivelythrough the manufacturing process. At present the majority of mineralwool and glass-fibre insulationliberated at disposal goes to landfill.

Demolition contractors are happy to recover built-up systems and use the scrap value of the steel to offset their costs.

Factory insulated foam filled composite panelsDifferent recycling /disposal optionsneed to be considered because of thepotential risk of ozone depleting orglobal warming potential gases beingreleased if not handled appropriately.

• Landfill is not an option for the disposalof factory insulated foam filledcomposite panels containing CFC and HCFC blowing agents and thismay also extend to Pentane and HFCsin the future. Practically very few landfillsites will now accept any factoryinsulated foam filled composite panels.

• Fragmentation / shredding would releasethe blowing agents from factory insulatedfoam filled composite panels, so is notan option for those which contain, ormay contain, CFCs or HCFCs. While thisis technically a feasible route for smallamounts of panels blown with HFCs,the high global warming potential of the gas liberated means that thisprocess would cause significantenvironmental damage and so cannotbe recommended. If legislation in theUK and EU changes to ban the releaseof such gases, as is anticipated, then this route would in any event no longer be available.

• Fridge recycling is likely to offer themost practical option for disposaland recycling of factory insulatedfoam filled composite panels whenblowing agents need to be collected(as is currently the case for CFC/HCFC and in the future likely for HFC/Pentane). However, panels wouldneed to be cut down to fit the currentdimensions of the machines and thisroute is relatively costly.

• Incineration could be used to processthe foam core with the steel innerand outer sheet falling through asslag, mixed in with other materials.This reduces the scrap value of the steel as it will be contaminatedwith other materials and has similarconstraints to fridge recycling interms of panel size. This route isalso the most expensive.

Panels need to be treated carefullyduring demolition to ensure no releaseof gases.

There is little industry experience inhandling factory insulated foam filledcomposite panels at end of life.However, there will be a significantincrease in the amounts coming through in the next 10 years.

Demolition contractors perceive factory insulated composite panels as more difficult and expensive to deal with than built-up systems.

One difficulty for the demolitioncontractors is the inability to distinguishbetween CFC /HCFC and hydrocarbonblown panels, prompting the question‘how do we know which is which?’ For this reason, it is essential that accuraterecords are kept of products used in theconstruction process. Current optionsfor landfilling are disappearing asenvironmental controls become stricterand fragmentation /shredding is only anoption for certain panels (dependent onblowing agents used) and in small volumes.Incineration is very expensive anddestroys much of the steel scrap value.


Fig.5. Best practice route for disposal and recycling of pre-finished steel-based cladding systems

* Most factory insulated composite panels usedfor building envelope currently contain HFCbecause of the fire resistance requirements.Although HFC’s used do not contain ODS they do have a high global warming potential.Future legislation may restrict emissions ofthese gases to the atmosphere during recyclingand a requirement for collection of these gases may be included. Fridge recycling/gas

capture is therefore recommended as theseparation process.

Pentane-based factory insulated compositepanels are more prevalent in cold storageapplications due to the differences in fire testingand legislation, and are less common in buildingenvelope applications currently. Fragmentation isacceptable as the separation process.

System Current route Cost Possible future routeBuilt-up system pre-finished steel Steel scrap recycling Up to £1.00/m2 scrap benefit Steel scrap recycling

Built-up system insulation Landfill £0.60/m2 Recycling into manufacturing process

(available now but not prevalent)

Factory insulated foam filled composite panel Fridge recycling £7.00 – £9.00/m2 Fridge recycling

Factory insulated foam filled composite panel Incineration £15.00/m2 Fridge recycling

Factory insulated mineral wool composite panel Separated on-site £2.00/m2 Fragmentation /shredding

Table 1: Summary of anticipated costs for recycling and /or disposal of pre-finished steel cladding systems

Note: Includes transport up to 100miles.

Summary of end of life options


1 The European Commission, 2002, Life cycle assessment for steel construction, Report EUR 20570 EN.

2 J Ley, “An environmental and material flow analysis of the UK steel construction sector”,Engineering Doctorate Thesis, University of Wales, 2003.

3 J Ley, M Samson and A S Kwan, ‘Material flow analysis of the UK steel construction sector’,Processing of Steel in Sustainable Construction, International Iron and Steel Institute World Conference, May 2002, Luxembourg.

4 EUROFER (European Confederation of Iron and Steel Industries), “Steel Recycling – One aspect of the steel industry’s contribution to the sustainable use of natural resources within an integrated product policy”, 2006.

5 M Samson, “Recycling of Organically Coated Composite Steel Cladding Panels – Phase 1 report”, commissioned by the DTI and Biffaward, 2003.

Further information

The Colorcoat® brand

The Colorcoat® brand is the recognisedmark of quality and metal envelopeexpertise from Corus. With over 40 years experience, we activelydevelop Colorcoat® products andprocesses to reduce their environmentalimpact to a level beyond merecompliance. All Colorcoat® productsare manufactured in factory controlled conditions, providing clear advantages onsite in terms of speed of construction andminimising social disruption.

Colorcoat® products manufactured inany UK Corus site are certified to theindependently verified internationalmanagement system, ISO14001 and100% recyclable, unlike most otherconstruction products.

Colorcoat® products offer the ultimate in durability and guaranteed performancereducing building life cycle costs andenvironmental impact.

Corus has detailed Life Cycle Costing andLife Cycle Assessment information thatdemonstrates the positive performanceof Colorcoat® products when comparedwith other alternatives. This is availablefrom www.colorcoat-online.com

Colorcoat HPS200®

Corus has demonstrated that ColorcoatHPS200® can be recycled withoutadditional burden to the environment. It has been eco-designed to exceedfuture legislative requirements andreduce its environmental impact,providing a long-term sustainablebuilding envelope solution.

• All traces of heavy metals and fire retardants have been removedfrom the topcoat.

• Undesirable organotin stabilizers and phthalate plasticisers replacedwith higher performing alternatives.

More information about the environmentalperformance of Colorcoat HPS200® isprovided in an Environmental ProductDeclaration. This is available fromwww.colorcoat-online.com

Environmentally stable in-use, Colorcoat HPS200® has passed

stringent testing to BS6920 ‘Suitability of non-metallic products for use in contact with water intended for human consumption’supporting its use for rain watercollection systems.

Confidex® GuaranteeBoth Colorcoat HPS200® and Colorcoat Prisma® are covered by the market-leading Confidex®

Guarantee. This does not require annual inspections to maintain the validity of the guarantee, reducing building life-cycle costs and unnecessary roof visits. With cover of up to 30 years, the Confidex® Guarantee is simple to register and offered directly to the building owner.

Colorcoat® Building manualDeveloped in consultation with architectsand other construction professionals,the Colorcoat® Building manualincorporates over 40 years of Colorcoat®

expertise. It contains information aboutsustainable development and thecreation of a sustainable specification.

If you require any further informationplease contact the Colorcoat Connection®

helpline on +44 (0) 1244 892434.Alternatively further information can befound in the Colorcoat® Building manualor at www.colorcoat-online.com


Colorcoat® Products and Services

www.colorcoat-online.com

Trademarks of CorusColorcoat, Colorcoat Connection, Confidex,Galvalloy, HPS200, Prisma and Repertoire are registered trademarks of Corus.

Care has been taken to ensure that the contents of this publication are accurate, but Corus Group plc and its subsidiarycompanies do not accept responsibility for errors or for information that is found to be misleading. Suggestions for, ordescriptions of, the end use or application of products or methods of working are for information only and Corus Group plc and its subsidiaries accept no liability in respect thereof.

Before using products supplied or manufactured by Corus Group plc and its subsidiaries the customer should satisfy themselves of their suitability.

Copyright 2006Corus

Sales contact detailsCorus ColorsShotton WorksDeesideFlintshire CH5 2NHUnited KingdomT: +44 (0)1244 812345F: +44 (0)1244 831132www.colorcoat-online.com

Colorcoat Connection® helplineT: +44 (0)1244 892434F: +44 (0)1244 836134e-mail: [email protected]

Documents

Colorcoat Technical Paper - ilgbcatalog.orgilgbcatalog.org/.../Colorcoat-Technical-Paper...pre-finished-steel.pdf · to make steel a fully traceable product. ... Life Cycle Analysis