YaBeSH Engineering and Technology Library

    • Journals
    • PaperQuest
    • YSE Standards
    • YaBeSH
    • Login
    View Item 
    •   YE&T Library
    • ASCE
    • Practice Periodical of Hazardous, Toxic, and Radioactive Waste Management
    • View Item
    •   YE&T Library
    • ASCE
    • Practice Periodical of Hazardous, Toxic, and Radioactive Waste Management
    • View Item
    • All Fields
    • Source Title
    • Year
    • Publisher
    • Title
    • Subject
    • Author
    • DOI
    • ISBN
    Advanced Search
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Archive

    Policy Options for Hazardous-Building-Component Removal before Demolition

    Source: Practice Periodical of Hazardous, Toxic, and Radioactive Waste Management:;2000:;Volume ( 004 ):;issue: 003
    Author:
    Scott K. Sheridan
    ,
    Timothy G. Townsend
    ,
    John L. Price
    ,
    Jeff T. Connell
    DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)1090-025X(2000)4:3(111)
    Publisher: American Society of Civil Engineers
    Abstract: A small fraction of the solid waste generated during the demolition of buildings contains chemicals hazardous to human health and the environment. Examples include mercury-bearing fluorescent and high-intensity discharge lamps, polychlorinated-biphenyl-containing lighting ballasts, lead-acid and nickel-cadmium batteries, and lead roof flashings. While these components represent a small mass of the total demolition waste stream, they are very concentrated sources of hazardous chemicals and may present a risk to human health and the environment upon disposal or recycling. A study was conducted to evaluate the policy alternatives for ensuring removal of hazardous building components from structures prior to demolition. The parties involved include demolition contractors, those contracting demolition work, environmental regulators, building code officials, and demolition debris facility operators. Prohibition of disposal of hazardous building components in landfills is probably insufficient to ensure removal prior to demolition. A system where the property owner and the demolition contractor have some degree of accountability is needed. Efforts to address this issue are currently underway in two states, Florida and Minnesota, and are cited as examples.
    • Download: (108.7Kb)
    • Show Full MetaData Hide Full MetaData
    • Get RIS
    • Item Order
    • Go To Publisher
    • Price: 5000 Rial
    • Statistics

      Policy Options for Hazardous-Building-Component Removal before Demolition

    URI
    http://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/53628
    Collections
    • Practice Periodical of Hazardous, Toxic, and Radioactive Waste Management

    Show full item record

    contributor authorScott K. Sheridan
    contributor authorTimothy G. Townsend
    contributor authorJohn L. Price
    contributor authorJeff T. Connell
    date accessioned2017-05-08T21:29:42Z
    date available2017-05-08T21:29:42Z
    date copyrightJuly 2000
    date issued2000
    identifier other%28asce%291090-025x%282000%294%3A3%28111%29.pdf
    identifier urihttp://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl/handle/yetl/53628
    description abstractA small fraction of the solid waste generated during the demolition of buildings contains chemicals hazardous to human health and the environment. Examples include mercury-bearing fluorescent and high-intensity discharge lamps, polychlorinated-biphenyl-containing lighting ballasts, lead-acid and nickel-cadmium batteries, and lead roof flashings. While these components represent a small mass of the total demolition waste stream, they are very concentrated sources of hazardous chemicals and may present a risk to human health and the environment upon disposal or recycling. A study was conducted to evaluate the policy alternatives for ensuring removal of hazardous building components from structures prior to demolition. The parties involved include demolition contractors, those contracting demolition work, environmental regulators, building code officials, and demolition debris facility operators. Prohibition of disposal of hazardous building components in landfills is probably insufficient to ensure removal prior to demolition. A system where the property owner and the demolition contractor have some degree of accountability is needed. Efforts to address this issue are currently underway in two states, Florida and Minnesota, and are cited as examples.
    publisherAmerican Society of Civil Engineers
    titlePolicy Options for Hazardous-Building-Component Removal before Demolition
    typeJournal Paper
    journal volume4
    journal issue3
    journal titlePractice Periodical of Hazardous, Toxic, and Radioactive Waste Management
    identifier doi10.1061/(ASCE)1090-025X(2000)4:3(111)
    treePractice Periodical of Hazardous, Toxic, and Radioactive Waste Management:;2000:;Volume ( 004 ):;issue: 003
    contenttypeFulltext
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian
     
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian