Resources, Conservation and Recycling 52 (2007) 5873

A review of the use of recycled solid waste materials in asphalt pavements

Yue Huang , Roger N. Bird 1 , Oliver Heidrich 2
School of Civil Engineering and Geosciences, Newcastle University, UK Cassie Building, Claremont Road, Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 7RU, UK Received 16 December 2006; accepted 20 February 2007 Available online 6 April 2007

Abstract The construction and maintenance of UK roads consume large amounts of quarried aggregates. The use of secondary (recycled), instead of primary (virgin), materials helps easing landll pressures and reducing demand of extraction. However, concerns over inferior road performance and additional costs have hindered the widespread use of secondary aggregates in such applications. This is especially the case in surface layers of asphalt pavements that may represent a value application for recycled solid waste materials (SWM). Waste glass, steel slag, tyres and plastics are selected for this study, which reviews standards and literature for technical requirements, as well as the performance of asphalt pavements constructed using such recycled materials. Waste arising and management indicates that although there is a large potential for supplying secondary materials, a few factors have effectively depressed such recycling activities. Such barriers are described here and may also apply to the secondary use of other SWM. After identifying and quantifying such barriers a brief discussion suggests ways of their removal. 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Asphalt pavements; Recycling; Solid waste materials (SWM); Glass; Steel slag; Scrap tyres; Plastics

Corresponding author. Tel.: +44 191 2226424. E-mail addresses: Yue.Huang@ncl.ac.uk (Y. Huang), R.N.Bird@ncl.ac.uk (R.N. Bird), Oliver.Heidrich@ncl.ac.uk (O. Heidrich). 1 Tel.: +44 191 2227681. 2 Tel.: +44 191 2226854. 0921-3449/$ see front matter 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2007.02.002

Y. Huang et al. / Resources, Conservation and Recycling 52 (2007) 5873

59

Fig. 1. Structural layers of exible and rigid pavements (*indicates optional).

1. Introduction Around 95% of roads in the UK are paved with asphalt mixtures (IAT, 2000). The construction and maintenance of these roads require large amounts of aggregates, which typically account for more than 90% by weight of the asphalt mixtures. It is estimated that in 1999 the UK produced some 26 million tonnes (Mt) of hot mix asphalt (HMA) (EAPA, 2004), which can lead to the assumption that some 20 Mt of aggregates were consumed. The Highways Agency alone uses about 15 Mt of aggregates annually on its managed trunk roads and motorways in England (Highway Agency, 2003). Meanwhile across England and Wales, some 48 Mt of industrial, 30 Mt of commercial, and 28 Mt of municipal waste were generated, a considerable percentage (industrial: 47%; commercial: 66%; municipal: 83%) was sent to landlls (DETR, 2000b). Such resource management does not seem to be in line with the countrys strategy for sustainable construction that requires for protecting the environment and minimising the consumption of natural resources (DETR, 2000a). There is concern that high specication aggregates from UK permitted extractions could be exhausted as early as 2020 (Parker, 2004). The situation seems even more urgent for approved landll sites, as they are expected to run out of space in the next 510 years (Environmental Agency, 2006).1 Based on such pressures, the UK government introduced the Landll Tax in 1996 and the Aggregates Levy in 2002. The use of secondary (recycled), instead of primary (virgin), materials helps easing landll pressures and reducing demand of extraction. This is one way of getting the road construction industry on track towards sustainable construction practices. Current research and practice tends to concentrate on the use of waste materials in the lower courses (base, sub-base, etc.) of the road as these absorb materials in larger quantities than the upper courses. However, highway authorities in the UK are dealing more with the maintenance and repair works rather than new construction of roads. Such works are affecting mainly the upper pavement layers (see Fig. 1). In addition, it can be argued that the cost of transporting and processing waste materials into desired properties can only be justied by using the recycled materials in value added applications such as asphalt surface layers. Thus, the property
1 Environmental Agency: http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/yourenv/eff/1190084/resources waste/ 213982/207743/?version=1&lang= e accessed on 16 August 2006.

60

Y. Huang et al. / Resources, Conservation and Recycling 52 (2007) 5873

requirements for these applications need to be understood to ensure that materials intended for recycling are able to meet relevant specications, by using available technologies and facilities, at a reasonable cost.

2. Waste arising and management of solid waste materials Secondary aggregates can be dened as by-products from industrial processes or other human activities. In 1999, industrial, commercial and municipal solid waste accounted for approximately 13%, 6% and 8%, respectively, of total solid waste materials (SWM) produced in the UK (DETR, 2000b). Of those waste materials a large fraction might have the potential to be used in road or building construction projects. Waste glass, steel slag, tyres and plastics are selected for this study; and surface layers (surface and binder course) of asphalt pavements are considered here as value application which are described in further detail below. 2.1. Waste glass It is estimated by Waste Resources Action Program (WRAP, 2004) that in 2003, some 3.4 Mt of glass entered the UKs waste stream of which some 2.4 Mt (71%) was container glass, 0.76 Mt (23%) was at (or window) glass and the remaining 0.24 Mt was other glass. The recycling rate for container and at glass was 36% and 30%, respectively. In total, some 1.1 Mt (33%) of waste glass was recycled, among which 0.73 Mt (66%) was fed to glass container manufacturers and 0.14 Mt (13%) used as secondary aggregates. The majority of 2.3 Mt (67%) of waste glass was disposed to landlls. The EU Directive on packaging waste (EU, 1994) however, has set a UK recycling target of 60% by 2008 for waste glass (British Glass, 2004). The lack of sufcient infrastructure for waste glass collection is thought to be the main reason for sending the majority to landlls and recycling only a third in the UK (British Glass, 2005).2 The recycling infrastructure serves not only as a passive container of recyclable wastes, but as a visual motivation that inuences peoples recycling habit (Gonzalez-Torre et al., 2003). Currently in the UK, packaging recovery notes (PRNs) are issued as an incentive to glass recycling, and the value of PRNs is suggested to be raised to cover the recycling cost (WRAP, 2004). Glass can be recycled indenitely without loss of product quality (British Glass, 2004). Returning recycled cullet to a glassmaking plant saves energy and mineral resources in great quantity (Edwards and Schelling, 1999; Krivtsov et al., 2004). Using waste glass as an aggregate might not save as much energy or mineral resources as it does with glass making (Grantthornton and Oakdenehollins, 2006), but the colour imbalance between glass production and waste arising may encourage seeking alternative markets for waste glass in aggregates applications (WRAP, 2004). Attempts to use recycled glass in concrete, another value application, have to deal with the alkali-silica reaction (ASR) because of the abnormally high content (70%) of reactive silica in the glass (FHWA, 1997). In addition
2

British Glass: http://www.britglass.org.uk/Industry/Recycling.html accessed on 21 March 2005.

Y. Huang et al. / Resources, Conservation and Recycling 52 (2007) 5873

61

to the described recycling processes, waste glass can be utilised as an aggregate in asphalt road construction should the technical specication as described later are being met. 2.2. Steel slag The amount of steel slag can be estimated based on the output from steel production process, assuming that the process is stable and the rate of slag generation consistent. According to US NSA (National Slag Association), steel slag accounts for 7.515% of steel produced (NSA, 2001). The marketable slag is estimated by USGS (US Geological Survey) at a rate of 1015% steel production (USGS, 2001). One advantage of recycling steel slag is that it can be collected from a low number of steel plants, making the collection more efcient than that of most other solid waste materials. In addition, it is relatively easy to control and achieve a consistent quality of this waste material. UK transport research laboratory reported that some 1 Mt of basic oxygen steel (BOS) slag is produced annually in the UK, with about 4 Mt in stockpiles (TRL, 2003). Owing to decades of research and practice, UK has now achieved a 100% recycling rate for steel slag, 98% of which are used as aggregates, mainly in concrete and asphalt (ODPM, 2002). The UKs steel production saw a decline from some 18 Mt in 1997 to not even reaching 12 Mt in 2002, before rising to 13.3 Mt in 2003, with further increase expected in the coming years (UK Steel, 2005).3 Although 100% of steel slag is recycled the application in asphalt pavements is valued due to its properties as described later. 2.3. Tyres It is estimated by TRL that the UK generates over 0.44 Mt of waste tyres per annum. About 21% is shredded and used as raw materials for other processes, 22% sent for energy recovery, and around 34% is disposed to landlls, stockpiles or illegal dumps where it is mixed with other waste making the recovery difcult (Viridis and TRL, 2002; Viridis and TRL, 2003). Approximately 40,000 t (or 9%) is combusted in cement kilns, as scrap tyres have a comparable energy value to coal, and have been used as a cement making fuel in the last decade or so (Bluecircle, 2003; UTWG, 2002). According to TRL, the high processing cost is responsible for the growth of unregulated tyres disposal (Viridis and TRL, 2003). European Tyre Recycling Association (ETRA) estimated the transport cost of waste tyres at about 1/tonne/km in average (Shulman, 2000). Use of scrap tyres in asphalt or other pavement applications, although technically viable (see Section 4.3), needs to be subsidised in order to compete with conventional aggregates (Washington DOT, 2003) in meeting the technical requirements for asphalt pavements. 2.4. Plastics About 2.8 Mt of waste plastics is generated per annum in the UK. Most of those recycled are from industrial and commercial sources; recycling from domestic sources (e.g. bottles)
3

UK Steel: http://www.uksteel.org.uk accessed on 22 March 2005.

62

Y. Huang et al. / Resources, Conservation and Recycling 52 (2007) 5873

is more difcult, for economic reasons (TRL, 2004). A future increase in recycling relies on the successful recycling of plastics mixed with other waste, and the support from robust environmental assessment method (British Plastics Federation, 2005,4 Patel et al., 2000). Similar to tyre rubber, a signicant means of recovery of plastics waste is to retrieve the thermal content (38 MJ/kg), comparing favourably to that of coal (31 MJ/kg) and reducing energy use as well as CO2 emissions (British Plastics Federation, 2005,5 Patel et al., 2000). Data from UK WRAP indicate that about 0.4 Mt of waste plastics generated each year is suitable for aggregates use. Presently only 0.008 Mt is being recycled for that purpose. Recycled plastics are mainly used in the form of street furniture, insulation, ducts and pipes, etc. Very little so far is used in pavement construction (WRAP, 2003a). Similar to glass, the low PRN is blamed for such low recycling levels (DTI, 2004). Although plastic packaging accounts for most waste plastics recycled in the UK, PVC (polyvinyl chloride) is among the main types that have the lowest recycling rate (WRAP, 2003c). Financial incentives are believed to be more effective than specications in affecting the recycling activity (WRAP, 2003b). Thus plastics used in asphalt pavements may provide an important outlet for such materials.

3. Property requirements for materials in asphalt pavements 3.1. Property requirements for aggregates A European standard (BSEN13043, 2002) for the specication of aggregates for use in asphalt was introduced in 2004 into the UK market. This standard species aggregates in terms of technical requirements alongside relevant test methods. Therefore recycled materials that are intended for aggregates use in asphalt mixtures are subject to the same requirements for property classication and testing as are virgin aggregates. Pavement engineers are now responsible for dening categories for aggregates properties relevant to their specic applications, as well as benchmarking the quarrying industry and other material suppliers. Selected requirements for aggregates in surface layers asphalt are shown in Table 1. 3.2. Property requirements for asphalt In order to withstand tyre and weather, pavement surface layers contain the strongest and most expensive materials in road structures. Characteristics they exhibit like friction, strength, noise and ability to drain off surface water are essential to vehicles safety and riding quality. Some are already associated with a standard test method (BSEN13036, 2002). Apart from the nature of component binder and aggregates, asphalt performance strongly depends on the mixture type. Selection of a type for surface layers has to consider a multitude
4 British Plastics Federation: http://www.bpf.co.uk/bpndustry/process plastics recycling.cfm accessed on 09 February 2006. 5 British Plastics Federation: http://www.bpf.co.uk/bpssues/Waste Management.cfm accessed on 08 February 2006.

Y. Huang et al. / Resources, Conservation and Recycling 52 (2007) 5873 Table 1 Property requirements and test methods for aggregates in surface layers asphalt (PD6682-2, 2003) Property category Geometric Physical and mechanical Chemical Thermal and weathering Test method BS EN933 BS EN1097 BS EN1744 BS EN1367 Property requirements

63

Grading, nes content, akiness index Resistance to fragmentation, polished stone value (PSV), aggregate abrasion value (AAV) Leaching Water absorption, magnesium sulphate value

of factors including trafc, climate, condition of existing surface, and economics. No single mixture type could provide all the desired properties, often some are improved at the expense of others, making the selection difcult and contentious. Stone mastic asphalt (SMA), porous asphalt or open graded friction course (OGFC) have a reputation for low tyre noise and high resistance to rutting and skidding, and are therefore preferred to hot rolled asphalt (HRA) for road surface that is subject to heavy trafc in terms of volume and loading (NAPA and FHWA, 2000). For both mixture types, a number of properties are required of the component (particularly the coarse) aggregates such as PSV, resistance to fragmentation, afnity with bitumen, etc. Dense bituminous macadam (DBM) is commonly used in binder course and base. 4. Performance of asphalt pavements containing recycled SWM 4.1. Waste glass Satisfactory performance has been observed of asphalt pavements containing 1015% crushed glass in surface course mixtures. 4.75 mm is the maximum size commonly accepted considering a range of engineering properties including safety issues (skin cut, tyre puncture) for that application. Anti-strip agent, typically 2% hydrated lime, is added to retain the stripping resistance. Glass in asphalt of higher content and larger size is reported to have led to a number of problems such as insufcient friction and bonding strength, and is considered more suitable for use in lower courses. In practice, the same manufacturing equipment and paving method designed for conventional asphalt can be used for asphalt containing recycled glass (Airey et al., 2004; CWC, 1996; FHWA, 1997; Maupin, 1997; Maupin, 1998; Su and Chen, 2002). RMC (now CEMEX) UK has been using recycled glass in DBM for binder course and base, with a 30% replacement rate. Twenty millimeters seems to be the maximum size of processed glass particles. In 2002, hot mix asphalt (HMA) containing 10% recycled glass sand was used in a pilot resurfacing project by Tarmac Situsec. Economics in these UK applications is reported to be cost neutral (WRAP, 2005).6 4.2. Steel slag The angular shape, hardness and roughly textured surface give steel slag the ability to substitute coarse aggregates in asphalt where mix stability (resistance to rutting) and
6

Case studies from AggRegain, WRAP: http://www.aggregain.org.uk/index.html accessed on 10 March 2005.

64

Y. Huang et al. / Resources, Conservation and Recycling 52 (2007) 5873

skid-resistance are concerned. Collaborative research was carried out by US Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP) and University of Petroleum and Minerals in Saudi Arabia. It was found that mix durability (resistance to moisture, fatigue) was improved when coarse slag aggregates were supplemented with limestone ller and ne aggregates, and the bitumen prepared using polymer modication (Bagampadde et al., 1998; Khan and Wahhab, 1998). In 1994, trial section of asphalt containing 30% steel slag was laid in Oregon, followed by a 5-year eld inspection of ride and skid performance. The trial section did not exhibit as expected higher rutting and skid resistance than control mixture. The report attributed the lack of measurable increase to the low content and small size (6.312.7 mm) of slag particles, and it mentioned the economic disadvantage of using slag aggregates due to increased mix density (implying higher transport cost) and mixing temperature (implying higher energy use) (Oregon DOT, 2000). UK TRL reported based on a 3-year investigation, that BOS slag produced from main UK sources can be used in pavement surface where a minimum PSV of 60 is required. Although the report suggested that when assessing the anti-skid properties of asphalt made with slag aggregates, traditional PSV test should give way to known in-service performance under comparable situations (TRL, 2003). Nottingham Centre for Pavement Engineering (NCPE) studied the mechanical (stiffness modulus, resistance to permanent deformation, resistance to fatigue cracking) and durability (aging susceptibility, moisture susceptibility) performance of asphalt containing slag aggregates. Seventy one percent coarse steel slag particles were mixed with 21% ne BFS aggregates in SMA surfacing. Stiffness modulus was enhanced compared with control mixture made of gritstone, while mix density and aging susceptibility also increased (Airey et al., 2004). Steel slag (9.5 mm) after 3 years of aging (7 days expansion below 1%) replacing 62% of basalt aggregates was used in SMA mixtures in China laboratory, resulting in improved surface performance (texture, friction, etc.), resistance to rutting and low temperature cracking (Wu et al., 2007). The Research Association of Iron and Steel Slags (FEhS, Germany) studies conrmed that BOS slag asphalt exhibit superiority in bearing and anti-polishing performance over asphalt made with established premium aggregates (basalt, int gravel, etc.). Volumetric stability and leaching behaviour caused the most concerns. Precautionary treatment was practised at the steel plant to reduce the free CaO/MgO content of steel slag before use as aggregates; and mandatory leaching test twice a year was required for use in roads and hydraulic structures (Motz and Geiseler, 2001). European standard permits the use of steel slag in asphalt provided the 7 days volumetric expansion is no more than 3.5% (BSEN13043, 2002). 4.3. Scrap tyres Use of tyre rubber in asphalt generally has two distinct approaches. One is to dissolve crumb rubber in the bitumen as binder modier, the other to replace a portion of ne aggregates with ground rubber that is not fully reacted with the bitumen. These are referred to as the wet process and the dry process, respectively. Modied binder from the wet process is termed asphalt rubber; asphalt made by the dry process is rubberised asphalt (FHWA, 1997).

Y. Huang et al. / Resources, Conservation and Recycling 52 (2007) 5873

65

4.3.1. The wet process In the wet process, crumb rubber (0.150.6 mm) is blended with bitumen for a minimum of 45 min at elevated temperature prior to contact with aggregates, usually in the range of 1822% bitumen weight (Hicks, 2002). Light fractions of bitumen transfer into the rubber making the rubber particles swell and the bitumen harden. The binder viscosity is increased allowing for additional bitumen to be used, which in theory can help reduce topdown thermal cracking and bottom-up reective cracking, and improve mix durability (e.g. resistance to moisture, oxidation and fatigue). The modication effect can be inuenced by a number of factors including the base bitumen composition, blending time and temperature, percentage and gradation of crumb rubber, and the grinding method (FHWA, 1997; West et al., 1998). These variables were studied following the SUPERPAVE (SUperior PERforming asphalt PAVEment) method at NCPE and US Texas DOT (Department of Transportation) (Airey et al., 2003; Texas DOT, 2000). FHWA believe that rubber particles in the wet process will reduce resilient modulus of the asphalt mixture, and therefore its resistance to permanent deformation (FHWA, 1997). The opposite was observed in Brazil and India where the asphalt rubber mixture had lower rutting potential because of higher stiffness and tensile strength at high temperatures (Bertollo et al., 2004; Palit et al., 2004). As for low temperature performance, a study at Kansas State University (KSU) suggested an 1822% of rubber content, and stated that a change within this range was less signicant in affecting the tensile and fracture performance of the asphalt than varying the binder content between 6 and 9% (Hossain et al., 1999). This was conrmed by Arizona State University (ASU) that longer fatigue life exhibited by asphalt rubber mixture came from the higher binder content (Zborowski et al., 2004). University of Liverpool had the permissible rubber (0.30.6 mm) content set at 10% of binder containing pen-50 or pen-100 bitumen. Resistance to rutting, fracture and fatigue was increased as a result (Khalid and Artamendi, 2006). Projects also revealed problems from the use of asphalt rubber in road surface. Bleeding and loss of coarse aggregates were observed on a Virginia SAM (stress absorbing membrane) trial section containing 20% crumb rubber in the binder, and the SAM did not hinder reective cracking as expected (Maupin and Payne, 1997). A chip seal (or surface dressing) project in Iowa showed that the asphalt rubber compromised the friction performance (Iowa DOT, 2002). A project in Texas indicated that OGFC represented the best application for asphalt rubber in terms of cost, resistance to cracking and raveling (Tahmoressi, 2001). NCPE suggested that asphalt rubber not be used in polymer modied bitumen (PMB), because the PMB-rubber interaction compromised the rheological properties of the aged binder and as a result, the durability of asphalt mixtures (Airey et al., 2002). The design method for conventional HMA can be used for asphalt rubber mixtures, with mix stability being the primary design factor. A rule of thumb is that if 20% crumb rubber is used in the binder, the binder content would be 20% higher than conventional. The binder content is recommended even higher in spray applications, for instance 45% higher in stress absorbing membrane interlayer (SAMI) than that required for conventional asphalt. Placement of asphalt rubber mixtures can be accomplished using standard paving machinery except for pneumatic tyre roller as asphalt rubber will stick onto the roller tyres (Epps, 1994). The main concerns include the narrowed paving temperature window (e.g.

66

Y. Huang et al. / Resources, Conservation and Recycling 52 (2007) 5873

no laying with ambient temperature below 13 C), and potential toxic emissions (see the paragraph below) (Hicks, 2002). Noise studies at Rubber Pavements Association (RPA) found that the use of tyre rubber in open-graded mixture binder reduced tyre noise by at least 50% (Rubber Pavements Association, 2006).7 Rubber particles of multiple sizes were believed to have a better sound absorbing effect in spray applications (Zhu and Carlson, 1999). By 1995 there was no such sign that mixing and paving asphalt rubber materials impose additional environmental burdens than conventional asphalt (Emery, 1995). More recent leaching test at Oregon State University (OSU) indicated that about 50% of leachate contaminants from asphalt rubber mixtures were released into surface and ground water system within the rst few days after laying, with benzothiazole, aluminum and mercury being the elements detected at potentially harmful concentration of 0.54, 1.5 and 0.02 mg/l, respectively (Azizian et al., 2003). Projects in the late 1980s showed that asphalt rubber in dense-graded mixtures helped reduce the asphalt layer thickness by 2050% without compromising its performance (Kirk, 1991). The thickness reduction was conrmed by accelerated load testing (ALT) at University of California Berkeley and South Africa (Hicks, 2002). Another benet of using asphalt rubber is to prolong the pavement life. A project in Brazil having 15% rubber in the HMA overlay binder found that cracking was developed 56 times slower than in conventional asphalt; also the asphalt rubber mixture outperformed in terms of surface deection, interface strain and rut depth (Nunez et al., 2005). Similarly, binder of 15% rubber (size of 0.2/0.4/0.6 mm) was used in dense-graded asphalt in Japan. The mixture exhibited improved performance in dynamic stability, 48 h residual stability, exural strength and strain value; and asphalt containing 0.2/0.4 mm-sized rubber showed the best laboratory results (Souza et al., 2005). On the other hand, FHWA conrmed that the production of crumb rubber modied asphalt is normally 50100% more expensive than producing conventional (FHWA, 1997). Practice by individual State DOT revealed a range of cost increase: 21% in Colorado (Harmelink, 1999), 50100% in Virginia (Maupin, 1996), 2575% for gap-graded and 80160% for open-graded in Arizona (Way, 1998), $10$15/tonne in Oregon (Hicks, 2002), $16/tonne in California (Caltrans, 2003), to name but a few. However, life cycle cost analysis (LCCA) was recommended by all practitioners for assessing the cost effectiveness of the use of asphalt rubber, taking an analysis period of 3040 years including the maintenance and user cost. LCCA was conducted at ASU and OSU using the World Banks Highway Development and Management model (HDM-4) and the FHWAs LCCA method (FHWA, 1998), respectively. According to their results, the use of asphalt rubber was cost effective. Meanwhile, they recognised that this is not always the case, and the results depend on many input variables which need to be studied on an individual basis (Jung et al., 2002; Hicks and Epps, 2000). 4.3.2. The dry process In the dry process, ground rubber (0.856.4 mm) substitute for ne aggregates in the asphalt, at typically a 13% replacement rate.
7 Rubber Pavements Association: http://www.rubberpavements.org/library/noisereduction.asp accessed on 26 January 2006.

Y. Huang et al. / Resources, Conservation and Recycling 52 (2007) 5873

67

Asphalt properties of particular interest in the dry process include resilient modulus and noise reduction. Where there was a 1020% increase of binder content as required, the resilient modulus of the rubberised asphalt was reduced implying an increase of layer thickness, compared with conventional mixtures (FHWA, 1997). Some other laboratory results showed a reduced permanent deformation (Reyes et al., 2005; Selim et al., 2005). Acoustic analysis and eld measurement conrmed that rubberised asphalt paving is effective in reducing trafc noise from light-duty vehicles (Sacramento County, 1999). Leaching test indicated that rubber in sand-based root zones (typically seen in sports and recreation elds) reduced by more than half the nitrate concentration of leachate into ground water, by replacing traditional gravel of comparable size in the drainage layer (Lisi et al., 2004). The design method for conventional mixtures can be used to design rubberised asphalt containing 13% of ground rubber particles. A target air void of 24% is the primary design factor (FHWA, 1997). The time and temperature at which the bitumen reacts with rubber particles need to be controlled with care, to retain the physical shape and rigidity required for the dry process. A project in Turkey found that when Marshall Stability, ow, VMA (voids in the mineral aggregate), unit weight and VFA (voids lled with asphalt) all were taken into consideration, the optimum technical parameters were: 0.95 mm for tyre rubber gradation, 10% for tyre rubber ratio, 5.5% for binder ratio, 155 C for mixing temperature, 15 min for mixing time and 135 C for compaction temperature (Tortum et al., 2005). 4.3.3. Other applications in pavement structure Tyre shreds have applications in road foundation. Compared with compacted soil, tyre rubber is of: (1) light weight, (2) low thermal conductivity, (3) high hydraulic conductivity and, (4) high shear strength at large strains. Leaching potential seems to be the main concern. ASTM-D6270 and EN12457 procedures are followed in the States and Europe, respectively, to measure and characterise the leachate. Constituent analysis of tyre sample indicated that although it contained leachable hydrocarbons (e.g. PAH), metals (e.g. zinc) and respiratory dust, the released concentration was not of a concern to human health or surrounding environment under normal operating conditions (e.g. open air, neutral pH value) (Edeskar, 2004). Tyre rubber used in lower pavement layers can help reduce the depth of frost penetration in winter time. Processing of scrap tyres has a by-product: waste bre, which was added into SMA mixtures to prevent the drain down of bitumen from aggregates, without compromising deformation resistance or moisture susceptibility of the mixture in which traditional stabilising additives like cellulose or mineral bre are commonly used (Putman and Amirkhanian, 2004). 4.4. Plastics Similar to tyre rubber, recycled plastics can either replace a portion of aggregates, or serve as a binder modier. DBM with recycled plastics, mainly low density polyethylene (LDPE) replacing 30% of 2.365 mm aggregates, reduced the mix density by 16% and showed a 250% increase in Marshall Stability; the indirect tensile strength (ITS) was also improved in the Plastiphalt mixtures (Zoorob and Suparma, 2000). Recycled LDPE of a size between 0.30 and 0.92 mm replacing 15% aggregates in asphalt surfacing nearly doubled the Marshall quotient, and increased the stability retained (SR) by 15%, implying

68

Y. Huang et al. / Resources, Conservation and Recycling 52 (2007) 5873

improved rutting and water resistance. A 20% increase of binder content was required in this case (Qadir and Imam, 2005). The blending of recycled LDPE to asphalt mixtures required no modication to existing plant facilities or technology (FHWA, 1997). Flexural behaviour of asphalt containing recycled plastics (PVC bottle) was studied. Bending strength was increased by adding 26% mixture weight of plastic particles, with further investigation suggested to depict the bending strength against plastics content curve (Ergun et al., 2005). Recycled plastics (PE lm) used at 0.4% of mixture weight (or about 8% of binder weight) as bitumen modier, increased the Marshall Stability before and after water logging (60 C, 24 h) by 3.3 and 2.6 times, respectively (Justo and Veeraragavan, 2002).

5. Discussion The use of recycled materials in roads varies across the UK (TRL, 2001). This is probably due to the difference in access to suitable natural aggregates and in the capacity of local landlls. Other than technical barriers may exist, as for example, lack of collecting infrastructure, alternative use of recycled SWM, limited market information and additional cost all may inhibit the waste from being recycled into pavement asphalt. The government encourages recycling by legislation, purchasing power and grants that are offered to companies to help initiate recycling locally (QPA, 2004). The use of recycled SWM in asphalt pavements must have a value-added prospect and is likely to be practical where there is a consistent supply. From a technical perspective, asphalt with well crushed glass (e.g. 4.75 mm) replacing a few percent (e.g. 1015%) of ne aggregates should not be excluded from use in asphalt surface layers, as glass particles are ground too nely to present any safety risks, and PSV and AAV requirements apply only to coarse aggregates in the mixtures. However, this may pose a non-technical barrier as ne aggregates are only used in moderate amount in SMA and OGFC, where recycled SWM that can be used in larger size (e.g. steel slag) makes a better choice because of less processing requirements and a higher replacement rate. It is recognised that the replacement rate should be allowed to vary to the size of glass particles, and vice versa (Maupin, 1998). Steel slag should be used in place of coarse aggregates in surface asphalt, to make best use of its mechanical strength and skid resistance. Large particle size and high content are recommended by laboratory and trial results. The main drawback is the high specic gravity of steel slag (3.23.6), if used in stone-dominated mixtures like SMA or OGFC, will drive up the overall mix density, implying an increase of transport cost. The presence of free CaO/MgO in slag makes it liable to expand in humid condition and therefore unsuitable for use in structures vulnerable to volumetric expansion. The common approach is to expose the slag to spray water or natural weathering for a period of between 12 and 18 months (Airey et al., 2004; FHWA, 1997). The time span could be reduced if chemical treatment is performed before the slag leaves the steel plant as is the practice in Germany, although the associated cost and environmental implication need to be further investigated. Leaching potential is one of the main environmental concerns over the use of secondary materials in road structures (Mroueh et al., 2001). Research in Germany has identied pH-value,

Y. Huang et al. / Resources, Conservation and Recycling 52 (2007) 5873 Table 2 Waste arising in the UK and application in asphalt pavements Waste arising (Mt/year) Recycling rate (%) Aggregates use (%) Use in asphalt pavements Aggregates Replace rate (%) 1030 3062 13 1530 Binder X X Replace rate (%)

69

Glass 3.4 33 4.1 Steel slag 1.0 100 98 Scrap tyre 0.44 21 N/A Plastics 2.8 5 0.29 indicates an option; X indicates not an option.

1822 8

electrical conductivity and Chromium concentration in the leachate as the main concerns for using slag aggregates (Motz and Geiseler, 2001). In general, tyre rubber is used in asphalt mixtures to reduce cracking, improve durability and mitigate noise. Depending on the application, different variables need to be considered when assessing the technical performance of asphalt containing tyre rubber: binder properties in the wet process, and mixture properties in the dry process. So far, most laboratory and eld work has been focused on the wet trial. It is generally agreed that asphalt rubber mixtures improves durability and low-temperature performance. On high-temperature performance however, there are mixed views in the United States ranging from better, similar or comparable, to worse. Results from the dry trial so far are of limited number, and are as well far from conclusive. Generally, rubberised asphalt does not show signicantly improved performance to offset the additional cost (FHWA, 1997; Oregon DOT, 2002). The wet process is more tolerant, whilst the dry process requires extra care in materials selection, mix design and asphalt manufacture. The economic break-even point in both processes is whether the increased cost (e.g. waste processing, higher binder usage) can be warranted by a return through longer pavement life. Life cycle cost analysis can be helpful to nd out when and where the use of tyre rubber in asphalt is cost effective. Recycled LDPE can substitute a portion between 15 and 30% of aggregates depending on its particle size and if properly designed, the rutting, cracking and aging performance of the mixture may improve as a result. Recycled PE accounting for 8% of the binder as a bitumen modier, can also increase the mixtures Marshall Stability. Similar to tyre rubber in the dry process, a number of asphalt properties when using recycled plastics are yet to be reported, nor are certain the cost and environmental implications, due to the limited practice so far (Table 2).

6. Conclusion and recommendation The use of recycled materials in pavement asphalt represents a valuable outlet for such materials. Yet value applications usually come with additional property requirements and technical restriction. These are liable to drive up the processing cost, often higher than that of purchasing virgin aggregates. Overcoming the many barriers, technical as well as non-technical, requires the commitment from all stakeholders to act accordingly (WRAP, 2006). Government efforts, in most cases are important, if not essential, to provide research

70

Y. Huang et al. / Resources, Conservation and Recycling 52 (2007) 5873

and information service free from commercial restriction, and enhance the protability of recycling through legislation or nancial incentives. When assessing the performance of asphalt pavements containing recycled SWM, some conditions need to be studied and specied unambiguously such as: (1) Mixture type, as different mixtures (e.g. SMA, HRA) impose different property requirements for component aggregates. (2) Particle size of recycled SWM and the replacement rate. (3) Nature and processing techniques of the SWM (e.g. weathering for steel slag). It is obvious that each recycled SWM will have more than one potential use. Recycling materials back into its initial use (e.g. recycled glass cullet to glass making) often are more sustainable rather than nding new applications. The responsibility for the asphalt industry is to nd the right source of SWM and use as the right components in pavement asphalt that make sense in both technical and nancial terms. Aggregates consumed by the asphalt industry alone outweigh the total arising of the four waste materials discussed above (around 7.6 Mt/year). Diverting other SWM to pavement use is therefore worth the ongoing efforts that have given approval to an expanding list of recycled SWM for use in road construction (TRL, 2004), to further ease landll pressures and reduce the demand for quarrying minerals. Apart from technical and economic factors, concerns over the use of recycled SWM in pavement asphalt also come from their potential of causing environmental burdens in road structures, such as run-off pollutants and leaching (CIRIA, 1997; Mroueh et al., 2001). Transport and processing of SWM into desired properties implies additional energy use and emissions. Conicting statements require objective environmental assessment tools that can quantify and compare the various environmental burdens for the different construction techniques, materials in use and maintenance options. This is highlighted when SWM replace primary resources to achieve for example sustainable construction methods. Life cycle assessment (LCA) emerges as a promising tool for the road sector to investigate the environmental impacts throughout pavement life, and present the results for communication.

Acknowledgements An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 4th International Conference on Maintenance and Rehabilitation of Pavements and Technological Control (MAIREPAV4), 18-21 August 2005, Belfast, UK. Financial support from Aggregate Industries UK Ltd is greatly appreciated.

References
Airey GD, Singleton TM, Collop AC. Properties of polymer modied bitumen after rubberbitumen interaction. J Mater Civil Eng 2002;14:244354. Airey G, Rahman M, Collop A. Absorption of bitumen into crumb rubber using the basket drainage method. Int J Pavement Eng 2003;4:10519. Airey GD, Collop AC, Thom NH. Mechanical performance of asphalt mixtures incorporating slag and glass secondary aggregates. In: Proceedings of the Eighth Conference on Asphalt Pavements for Southern Africa. South Africa: Sun City; 2004.

Y. Huang et al. / Resources, Conservation and Recycling 52 (2007) 5873

71

Azizian MF, Nelson PO, Thayumanavan P, Williamson KJ. Environmental impacts of highway construction and repair materials on surface and ground waters: case study: crumb rubber asphalt concrete. Waste Manage 2003;23:71928. Bagampadde U, Wahhab HIA-A, Aiban SA. Optimization of steel slag aggregates for bituminous mixes in Saudi Arab. J Mater Civil Eng 1998;1999:305. Bertollo SM, Bernucci LB, Fernandes JL. Mechanical properties of asphalt mixtures using recycled tyre rubber produced in Brazila laboratory evaluation. In: Proceedings of the TRB Annual Meeting; 2004. Bluecircle. Alternative cement making fuels; 2003. British Glass (2004) Glass recycling reporttowards sustainable development. BSEN13036. Road and aireld surface characteristicstest methods. British Standards Online; 2002. BSEN13043. Aggregates for bituminous mixtures and surface treatments for roads. In: Airelds and other trafcked areas. British Standards Online; 2002. Caltrans. Asphalt rubber usage guide. California: DOT; 2003. CIRIA. Use of industrial by-products in road constructionwater quality effects (CIRIA R167); 1997. CWC. Best practice in glass recyclingrecycled glass in asphalt. Clean Washington Centre; 1996. DETR. Building a better quality of lifea strategy for more sustainable construction. Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions; 2000a. DETR. Waste strategy 2000: England and Wales (part 1); 2000b. DTI. Development of asphalt and concrete products incorporating alternative aggregates. Department of Trade and Industry; 2004. EAPA. Industry statement on the recycling of asphalt mixes and use of waste of asphalt pavement. European Asphalt Pavement Association; 2004. Edeskar T. Technical and environmental properties of tyre shreds focusing on ground engineering applications. Lulea University of Technology; 2004. Edwards DW, Schelling J. Municipal waste life cycle assessment (part 2)transportation analysis and glass case study. IChemE 1999;77:25974. Emery J. Evaluation of rubber modied asphalt demonstration projects. In: Proceedings of the TRB Annual Meeting; 1995. Epps JA. Uses of recycled rubber tyres in highways. In: Proceedings of the TRB Annual Meeting; 1994. Ergun M, Iyinam S, Iyinam AF. Flexural behavior of waste plastic added asphalt concrete mixture. In: Proceedings of the International Symposium on Pavement Recycling; 2005. EU. Directive 94/62/EC on packaging and packaging waste; 1994. FHWA. User guidelines for waste and by-product materials in pavement construction; 1997. FHWA. Life-cycle cost analysis in pavement design in search of better investment decisions pavement division interim technical bulletin; 1998. Gonzalez-Torre PL, Adenso-Diaz B, Ruiz-Torres A. Some comparative factors regarding recycling collection systems in regions of the USA and Europe. J Environ Manage 2003;69:12938. Grantthornton, Oakdenehollins. The impact of the carbon agenda on the waste management business; 2006. Harmelink, D. (1999) Using ground tyre rubber in hot mix asphalt pavementsnal report, Colorado DOT. Hicks RG. Asphalt rubber design and construction guidelines volume1 design guidelines; 2002. Hicks G, Epps J. Life cycle cost analysis of asphalt rubber paving materials; 2000. Highway Agency. Building better roads: towards sustainable construction; 2003. Hossain M, Swartz S, Hoque E. Fracture and tensile characteristics of asphalt-rubber concrete. J Mater Civil Eng 1999;11:28794. IAT. Asphalt professionals in the 21st century. The Institute of Asphalt Technology; 2000. Iowa DOT. Evaluation of recycled rubber in asphalt cement concreteeld testing; 2002. Jung J-S, Kaloush K, Way G. Life cycle cost analysis: conventional versus asphalt rubber pavements; 2002. Justo CEG, Veeraragavan A. Utilisation of waste plastic bags in bituminous mix for improved performance of roads. India: Centre for Transportation Engineering, Bangalore University; 2002. Khalid HA, Artamendi I. Post-consumer tyre rubber as a performance-enhancing additive in asphalt. Asphalt Professional; 2006. Khan MI, Wahhab HIA-A. Improving slurry seal performance in eastern Saudi Arabia using steel slag. Construct Build Mater 1998;12:195201.

72

Y. Huang et al. / Resources, Conservation and Recycling 52 (2007) 5873

Kirk V. CalTrans experience with rubberized asphalt concrete. In: Technology transfer session of an introduction to rubberized asphalt concrete. US: Topeka; 1991. Krivtsov V, Wager PA, Dacombe P, Gilgen PW, Heaven S, Hilty LM, Banks CJ. Analysis of energy footprints associated with recycling of glass and plasticscase study for industrial ecology. Ecol Model 2004;174:175 89. Lisi RD, Park JK, Stier JC. Mitigating nutrient leaching with a sub-surface drainage layer of granulated tires. Waste Manage 2004;24:8319. Maupin GW. Hot mix asphalt rubber applications in Virginia. Virginia Transportation Research Council; 1996. Maupin, G. W. (1997) Final reportglasphalt test sections in Virginia, Virginia Transportation Research Council. Maupin GW. Effect of glass concentration on stripping of glasphalt. Virginia Transportation Research Council; 1998. Maupin GW, Payne CW. Evaluation of asphalt rubber stress-absorbing membrane. Virginia Transportation Research Council; 1997. Motz H, Geiseler J. Products of steel slags an opportunity to save natural resources. Waste Manage 2001;21:285 93. Mroueh U-M, Eskola P, Laine-Ylijoki J. Life-cycle impacts of the use of industrial by-products in road and earth construction. Waste Manage 2001;21:2717. NAPA, FHWA. HMA pavement mix type selection guide; 2000. NSA. Steel slaga premier construction aggregate; 2001. Nunez WP, Ceratti JAP, Wickbouldt V, Brito LAT, Oliveira JA. Delaying crack reection in overlays: an apt study comparing the efciency of conventional asphalt concrete and asphalt rubber. Belfast, UK: MAIREPAV4; 2005. ODPM. Summary sheet covering individual materials. Ofce of the Deputy Prime Minister; 2002. Oregon DOT (2000) Steel slag in hot mix asphalt concretenal report. OREGONDOT (2002) Crumb Rubber modied asphalt concrete in Oregonnal report. Palit SK, Reddy KS, Pandey BB. Laboratory evaluation of crumb rubber modied asphalt mixes. J Mater Civil Eng 2004;16:4553. Parker D. Councils urged to cut use of high spec aggregates. New Civil Engineers; 2004. Patel M, Thienen NV, Jochem E, Worrell E. Recycling of plastics in Germany. Resourc Conserv Recycl 2000;29:6590. PD6682-2. Aggregates for bituminous mixtures and surface treatments for roads, airelds and other trafcked areasguidance on the use of BS EN13043. British Standards Online; 2003. Putman BJ, Amirkhanian SN. Utilization of waste bers in stone matrix asphalt mixtures. Resourc Conserv Recycl 2004;42:26574. Qadir A, Imam M. Use of recycled plastic waste aggregate as a partial substitution material in pavement structure. In: Proceedings of the International Symposium on Pavement Recycling; 2005. QPA. Quarrying today joined up thinking linking quarries to life. Quarr Today; 2004. Reyes F, Reyes O, Figueroa AS. Study of the rutting in asphalt mixtures by addition of plastic waste. In: Proceedings of the International Symposium on Pavement Recycling; 2005. Sacramento County. Report on the status of rubberized asphalt trafc noise reduction in sacramento county. Sacramento County and Bollard & Brennan Inc; 1999. Selim AA, Muniandy R, Abdelrahman M. Potential use of ground tyre rubber in stone matrix asphalt (SMA)a laboratory evaluation. In: Proceedings of the 2005 International Symposium on Pavement Recycling; 2005. Shulman VL. Tyre recycling after 2000status and options. European Tyre Recycling Association; 2000. Souza R, Himeno K, Kobayashi A. Performance evaluation of asphalt-rubber concrete mixtures. Belfast, UK: MAIREPAV4; 2005. Su N, Chen JS. Engineering properties of asphalt concrete made with recycled glass. Resourc Conserv Recycl 2002;35:25974. Tahmoressi M. Evaluation of asphalt rubber pavements in texas. PaveTex Engineering and Testing, Inc; 2001. Texas DOT. A comprehensive laboratory and eld study of high-cure crumb rubber modied asphalt materials; 2000. Tortum A, Celik C, Aydin AC. Determination of the optimum conditions for tyre rubber in asphalt concrete. Build Environ 2005;40:1492504. TRL. Recycling in transport infrastructure; 2001.

Y. Huang et al. / Resources, Conservation and Recycling 52 (2007) 5873

73

TRL (2003) Basic oxygen steel slag as surface course aggregate: an investigation of skid resistance, TRL Report 566. TRL. Development of new materials for secondary and recycled aggregates in highway infrastructure; 2004. USGS. US geological survey minerals yearbook 2001: slagiron and steel; 2001. UTWG. Used tyre working group2001 statistics detail; 2002. Viridis, TRL. Tyre waste and resource management: a mass balance approach; 2002. Viridis, TRL. Civil engineering applications of tyres; 2003. Washington DOT. Evaluation of the use of scrap tires in transportation related applications in the state of washington; 2003. Way GB. OGFC meets CRMwhere the rubber meets the rubber. Arizona DOT; 1998. West RC, Page GC, Veilleux J. Effect of tyre rubber grinding method on asphalt-rubber binder characteristics. In: Proceedings of the TRB Annual Meeting; 1998. WRAP. Aggregain materials informationrecycled plastics; 2003a. WRAP. Standards and specications affecting plastics recycling in the UK; 2003b. WRAP. Survey of applications, markets & growth opportunities for recycled plastics in the UK; 2003c. WRAP. Recycled glass market study and standard review 2004 update; 2004. WRAP. Recycled roads 2: promotional campaign to local authorities to increase the specication, procurement and use of recycled and secondary aggregates in highway and street maintenance; 2006. Wu S, Xue Y, Ye Q, Chen Y. Utilization of steel slag as aggregates for stone mastic asphalt (SMA) mixtures. Building and Environment 2007;42:25805. Zborowski A, Sotil A, Kaloush K, Way G. Materials characteristics of asphalt rubber mixtures. In: Proceedings of the TRB Annual Meeting; 2004. Zhu H, Carlson DD. A spray based crumb rubber technology in highway noise reduction application. Rubber Pavements Association; 1999. Zoorob SE, Suparma LB. Laboratory design and investigation of the properties of continuously graded asphaltic concrete containing recycled plastics aggregates replacement (plastiphalt). Cement Concrete Composites 2000;22:23342.