Shingles recycling experiences in other states
Download
1 / 77

Shingles Recycling : Experiences in Other States - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 120 Views
  • Uploaded on

Shingles Recycling : Experiences in Other States. Western Central Wisconsin Recyclers’ Special Shingle Recycling Workshop September 12, 2006 By Dan Krivit. Definitions. Manufacturers’ Asphalt Shingle Scrap Tear-Off Asphalt Shingle Scrap Recycled Asphalt Shingles (RAS) (Crushed & screened).

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Shingles Recycling : Experiences in Other States' - benjamin


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Shingles recycling experiences in other states
Shingles Recycling:Experiences in Other States

Western Central Wisconsin Recyclers’

Special Shingle Recycling Workshop

September 12, 2006

By Dan Krivit


Definitions
Definitions

  • Manufacturers’ Asphalt Shingle Scrap

  • Tear-Off Asphalt Shingle Scrap

  • Recycled Asphalt Shingles (RAS)(Crushed & screened)


History
History

  • 15 years +

  • Multiple research studies in lab and field

  • Manufacturer shingle scrap in hot-mix asphalt best known, most accepted practice

  • Still relatively new application




Recent Composition Weight Ranges of Typical Asphalt Shingles

  • 32 to 42% Coating filler (limestone or fly ash)

  • 28 to 42% Granules (painted rocks & coal slag)

  • 16 to 25% Asphalt

  • 3 to 6% Back dust (limestone or silica sand)

  • 2 to 15% Mat (fiberglass, paper, cotton rags)

  • 0.2 to 2% Adhesives (modified asphalt based)


Multiple applications
Multiple Applications

[Most Proven]

  • HMA

• Aggregate (gravel)

• Dust control

• Cold patch

• Ground cover

• Fuel

• New shingles


Factors affecting hma performance
Factors Affecting HMA Performance

  • Aggregate gradation of RAS

  • Properties of final blended binder content within the HMA as affected by:

    • RAS asphalt binder

    • Virgin binder


Factors affecting hma performance continued
Factors AffectingHMA Performance(continued)

  • Location RAS is incorporated into HMA

  • Temperature

  • Moisture content of RAS and other aggregates

  • Retention time in HMA drum


Engineering performance advantages
Engineering Performance Advantages

  • Reduce need for virgin binder

  • Add fibrous reinforcement

  • Modify PG grade binder

    High temp performance

  • Reduce landfill needs

3-11


Potential benefits manufacturers ras
Potential Benefits *(* Manufacturers’ RAS)

  • Cracking resistance

  • Rutting resistance

  • Conservation of landfill space

Source: Paul Lum, Lafarge Construction Materials Ltd., April 13, 2003.


Challenges
Challenges

  • Need for improved grinding and handling

  • Blending and storage

  • Continued research into engineering effects of RAP and RAS on AC binder content

  • Quality control and quality assurance


Engineering performance disadvantages
Engineering Performance Disadvantages

  • Hotter mix requirements

  • Stiffer mix

  • Possible contamination

(Justus, September 2004)

3-12


Asphalt shingles in hma missouri dot experience

Asphalt Shingles in HMAMissouri DOT Experience

Joe Schroer, PE

Construction and Materials Division

March 30, 2005


In the beginning
In The Beginning

  • Approached by Pace Construction and Peerless Landfill

    • MoDOT Not Using RAP in Mixtures

    • Deleterious Material

    • Stiffness of Asphalt in Shingles


Why should we pursue shingles
Why Should We Pursue Shingles?

  • High Asphalt Content

  • Granules Are Hard and Durable

  • Recycling

CO$T


Concerns
Concerns

  • How Will Deleterious Material Affect the Mixture

  • Can the Low Temperature Grading be Maintained at Various Blending Ratios


Asphalt after blending with shingle asphalt
Asphalt After Blending with Shingle Asphalt

  • Resist Rutting

  • Resist Fatigue Cracking

  • Resist Cold-Weather Cracking


Asphalt grades
Asphalt Grades

  • High Temperature for Rut Resistance

  • Low Temperature for Fatigue and Cold Weather Performance

    Performance Graded = PG

    PG 64-22 (PG Sixty-four Minus Twenty-two)

    High Temp 64°C (147°F)

    Low Temp –22°C (-8°F)


Asphalt modifications require pg 64 22
Asphalt Modifications Require PG 64-22

  • Stiffer at High Temperature – OK

  • Stiffer at Low Temperature

    • Use Lower Percentage of Shingles

    • Use Softer Roadway Asphalt


Deleterious evaluation
Deleterious Evaluation

  • Specification for Aggregate

    • 0.5% “Other Foreign Material”

      • Sticks, mud balls, deer fur, etc.

  • Shingle “OFM”

    • Approximately 3% Total


Deleterious material

Nails

Wood

Plastic

Cellophane

Paper

Fiber Board

Deleterious Material


No difference
No Difference

  • Visually

  • Standard Mixture Tests

  • Placement


Can tear off shingles be used
Can Tear-Off Shingles be Used?

  • Allowance in OFM Due to Small Percentage of Shingles and Trial Mixture

  • Start with Softer Roadway Asphalt


Where are we the ex factor 2
Where Are We?The “Ex” Factor 2

  • Extrinsic Material Allowance Raised

    • 3.0% Total

    • 1.5% Wood

  • Expect PG 64-22 met w/ PG 58-28

    • Extra grades optional w/ testing

    • Examining various proportions and asphalts

  • Exuberant Contractors


U of m lab data missouri samples
U of M Lab Data:Missouri Samples

  • Prof. Mihai Marasteanu,U of M Dept. of Civil Engineering

  • Preliminary results as of 4-6-2006

  • Report with Mn/DOT lab data to be released soon


Mn dot lab data
Mn/DOT lab data

  • Jim McGraw, Director of Mn/DOT’s Chemical Lab, Maplewood, MN

  • Lab data as presentedJuly 12, 2006

  • Report with U of M lab data, including Mo/DOT samples, to be released soon


New minnesota lab study
New Minnesota Lab Study

  • Funded by OEA

  • Co-sponsored by Mn/DOT

  • Comparing manufacturer RAS to Tear-Off RAS

  • Mn/DOT to conduct PG extractions

  • U of M Civil Engineering to conductindirect tensile strength tests



U of m lab data minnesota samples
U of M Lab Data:Minnesota Samples

  • Prof. Mihai Marasteanu,U of M Dept. of Civil Engineering

  • Preliminary results as of Thursday, April 6, 2006

  • Report with Mn/DOT lab data to be released soon


Mn mix stiffness gpa @ 100 sec
MN: Mix Stiffness [GPa] @ 100 sec.

16

13.5

20% RAP

15% RAP + 5% Tear-off

12

15% RAP + 5% Manufactured

10.0

8.2

8

Stiffness [GPa]

5.5

5.0

4

2.7

0.5

0.2

0.2

0

0

-10

-20

o

Temperature [

C]





  • Georgia

  • - Manufacturing and Post Consumer Shingle

  • - Mixing Permitted

  • -100% passing the ½ inch Sieve

  • - Maximum 5.0% RAS permitted

  • - Gradation - meet requirements of Mix Design

  • - No foreign material ( paper, roofing nails, wood, and metal flashing)

  • - Free of Asbestos when tested with Polarized

  • Light Microscopy. Test every 1000 Tons

(Justus, September 2004)


  • Manufacturing Shingle Waste Only

  • 100% passing the ½ inch Sieve

  • Maximum of 5.0% RAS permitted

  • Gradation meet the requirements of the mix design

  • Performance grade of virgin asphalt binder based on the properties of the shingle asphalt binder

  • No limits on deleterious materials or asbestos

(Justus, September 2004)


  • New Jersey

    • Manufacturing Shingle Waste Only

    • 100% passing the ¾ inch Sieve

    • Maximum of 5.0% RAS permitted

    • Gradation meet the requirements of the mix design

    • No limitations on deleterious materials or asbestos

(Justus, September 2004)


  • North Carolina

    • Manufacturing Shingle Waste Only

    • 100% Passing the ½ inch Sieve

    • Maximum of 6.0% RAS permitted

    • Gradation meet the requirements of the mix design

    • No Limitations on the presence of deleterious materials or asbestos

(Justus, September 2004)


Texas dot
Texas DOT

  • Texas DOT- State Highway 31 Corsicana,

    Navarro County – 1997

    - 2 x 1,000 foot sections post consumer RAS

    - 2 x 1,000 foot sections manufacturing RAS

    - 2 x 4,000 foot sections Control Mixture

    • The Mix Design required 5% Post Consumer RAS and 5% Manufacturing RAS

    • All three Mixes required 5% Stripping Agent

(Justus, September 2004)

7-2


Texas dot conclusions
Texas DOT- Conclusions

  • Shingle binder content does not relate to reduced quantity of virgin binder

  • Felt appeared to migrate to the surface

  • Processed shingles (RAS) did not clump

  • Post consumer shingle more difficult to handle

(Justus, September 2004)


Texas dot conclusions1
Texas DOT - Conclusions

  • Smoothness, stability, moisture susceptibility, creep indicated similar characteristics among the three mixes.

  • 1999 Falling Weight Deflectometer testing showed performance agreement among the three mixes.

  • Visual evaluation shows no apparent distress in any of the mixes.

(Justus, September 2004)


  • Texas (old proposed specification):

    • Both Manufacturing and Tear-Off Shingle Waste permitted

    • 100% passing the ½ inch Sieve

    • Gradation meet the requirements of the mix design

    • No Contamination - dirt or other objectionable materials

    • No harmful quantities of asbestos when tested according to EPA guidelines


New tceq memo
New TCEQ Memo

  • March 20, 2006

  • Manufacturers’ RAS in HMA approved *

  • Tear-offs not approved depending on stack testing results and subsequent review of impacts

  • * Must follow same procedures as RAP into HMA


American association of state and highway transportation officials aasht0
American Association of State and Highway Transportation Officials (AASHT0)

Recycled asphalt shingles specification and practice was approved by the Subcommittee on Materials (SOM) August 2005


Review of aashto specification subcommittee on materials som
Review of AASHTO Specification Subcommittee on Materials (SOM)

  • Both manufacturers and tear-offs allowed

  • 100% passing the ½ inch Sieve

  • Maximum addition rate contractor option

  • Gradation and volumetrics must meet the requirements of the mix design


Aashto specification continued
AASHTO Specification (SOM)(continued)

  • Addition rates (Section 7):

    “If RAS binder if greater than 0.75 percent, the virgin asphalt binder and RAS binder combination shall be further evaluated to ensure PG requirements”


Aashto specification continued1
AASHTO Specification (SOM)(continued)

  • Tear-off material composition (Section 5.2):

    May only include: asphalt roll roofing, cap sheets, and shingles (including underlayment).

    May not include other roofing debris such as: coal tar epoxy, rubber, or other undesirables [metal, plastic, wood, glass]


List of roofing waste items included for recycling yes include these items
List of Roofing Waste Items Included for Recycling (SOM)“YES” (Include these items):

  • Asphalt shingles

  • Felt attached to shingles


List of roofing waste items excluded for recycling no do not include
List of Roofing Waste Items Excluded for Recycling (SOM) “NO” (Do NOT include):

  • Wood

  • Metal flashings, gutters, etc

  • Nails (best effort)

  • Plastic wrap, buckets

  • Paper waste

  • No other garbage or trash



Aashto specification continued2
AASHTO Specification reciclar:(continued)

  • Asbestos levels:

    “…shall be certified to be asbestos free.” (Section 5.2)

    “(Tear-off shingles are) construction debris and various state and local regulations may be applicable to its use. The user of this specification is advised to contact state and local transportation departments and environmental agencies to determine what additional requirements may be necessary.” (Note 2)


Aashto specification continued3
AASHTO Specification reciclar:(continued)

  • Deleterious material maximum limits (Section 8):(material retained on the No. 4 sieve)

    • Heavy fraction = 0.50%

    • Lightweight fraction = 0.05%


Missouri shingle spec
Missouri Shingle Spec reciclar:

  • Extrinsic Material Allowance Raised

    • 3.0% Total

    • 1.5% Wood


Comprehensive quality control plan
Comprehensive reciclar:Quality Control Plan

·Quality control of supply

· Worker safety and health protection

· Final product quality, storage and handling

· Shingle recycling system design

· Final product sampling and lab testing


Mn dot spec
Mn/DOT Spec reciclar:

  • Maximum 5% manufacturers’ shingle scrap in HMA

  • Considered a type of RAPExample:

    5% shingles + 25% RAP = 30% max RAP

  • QA/QC standards apply(blending charts)


Asbestos risk
Asbestos Risk reciclar:

  • Incidence of asbestos is extremely low

  • Average content was only:

    • 0.02% in 1963

    • 0.00016% in 1973

      Source: NAHB, 1999


Asras data
ASRAS Data reciclar:

  • Iowa (1,791 samples), no hits

  • Maine (118 samples), no hits

  • Mass:

    • (2,288 composite samples) 11 hits < 1%

    • (69 tarpaper samples) 2 < 5%

    • (109 ground RAS samples) 2 < 1%

  • Florida (287 samples), 2 hits > 1%

Source: Paul Ruesch, April 13, 2003.


Asras data continued
ASRAS Data reciclar:(continued)

  • Missouri (6 samples), no hits

  • Hawaii (100 samples), 1 hit > 1%

  • Minnesota (156 samples), no hits

  • Minnesota (50 tarpaper), 1 hit @ 2% - 5%

    We still want more data!

    (for EPA / CMRA project.)

Original source: Paul Ruesch, April 13, 2003.


Dka aes fiber tests
DKA / AES reciclar:Fiber Tests

As part of the RMRC Project:

Environmental Testing of Airborne Particles atThe Shingle Processing Plant

April 2003



Construction materials recycling association cmra
Construction Materials reciclar:Recycling Association (CMRA)


Epa project
EPA Project reciclar:


Equipment vendors
Equipment Vendors reciclar:

www.GreenGuardian.com/pdf/shingle_vendors.pdf


Summary
Summary reciclar:


Current trends and future growth
Current reciclar:Trendsand Future Growth

  • Virgin asphalt is expensive, tipping fees are rising, improved economics

  • Applications other than HMA are being developed

  • Use of post consumer shingle waste is promising


National asphalt price trend
National Asphalt Price Trend reciclar:

Source: U.S. Dept. of Labor: Bureau of Labor Statistics


Shingles recycling into hma is a proven technology
Shingles Recycling into HMA reciclar: is a Proven Technology

  • History of experience:

    • Private operators

    • State engineers

    • Environmental regulators

  • Substantial body of literature

  • High quality HMA can be maintained


Quality control savings
Quality Control = Savings reciclar:

  • QA/QC critical

  • Use in HMA can be very cost effective:

    • Cheaper alternative to landfilling

    • $0.50 to $3.30 per ton of HMA


Quality specs scrap feedstock and final products
Quality Specs: reciclar: Scrap Feedstock and Final Products

  • Free of debris / trash / foreign matter

  • Tear-off scrap must be asphalt shingles only

  • No nails!


Certification and inspection of shingle supply
Certification and Inspection of Shingle Supply reciclar:

  • Clear written spec for acceptable material

  • Certify suppliers

  • State licensed asbestos inspectors

  • Visual screening of all shingle scrap

    • Types of shingles

    • I.d. non-shingle waste

    • I.d., layers, composites, thickness, etc.

Source: Paul Ruesch, April 13, 2003.


Model sampling protocol if required
Model Sampling Protocol reciclar:(if required)

  • Specified sampling frequency of incoming loads

  • Sampling of recycled asphalt shingles (ground / screened product)

  • Willingness to certify quality of finished products

Source: Paul Ruesch, April 13, 2003.


Proposed tear off supplier certification form
Proposed Tear-Off Supplier Certification Form reciclar:

“….. We …. certify that:

  • All tear-off shingle scrap came from residential buildings having four or fewer dwelling units; and”

  • These residential buildings are not “regulated facilities” according to state and federal rules; and”

  • The material delivered consists of asphalt shingles only and contains no known hazardous material.”


Proposed tear off processor certification form
Proposed Tear-Off Processor Certification Form reciclar:

“….. We …. certify that:

  • All tear-off shingle scrap came from certified suppliers only (see “Supplier Certification forms); and”

  • The final product contains no known hazardous material.”


Recommendations
Recommendations reciclar:

1. CONTINUE MARKET DEVELOPMENT:

  • Cities, counties and states should use alternate bid language allowing shingles

  • EPA / CMRA project in progress:

    • Asbestos statistics

    • Best practices guideline documents

    • Implementation / Outreach


Recommendations continued
Recommendations reciclar:(Continued)

2. MANAGE the asbestos issue:

  • Restrict supply to private, residential homes only (per NESHAP)

  • Tight supply specification

  • Certify suppliers (e.g., roofing companies)

  • Inspect each load (suggest becoming a licensed inspector)


Recommendations continued1
Recommendations reciclar:(Continued)

3. PROTECT employee health and safety:

  • Develop dust management program

  • Develop employee hazard prevention

  • Shroud grinder

  • Water scrap shingles

  • Provide accurate information as part of a full employee education program


Recommendations continued2
Recommendations reciclar:(Continued)

4. GUARANTEE YOUR PRODUCT QUALITY:

  • Asbestos free

  • No nails (use multiple magnets)

  • ½ - inch minus

  • Controlled mix ratios

  • Exceed State QA/QC procedures


ad