Content area
Full Text
Abstract
This paper presents findings of a comparative study on the removal and disposal of fenestration units in two separate buildings, belonging to the same period and built with similar construction materials. Demolition techniques were used for removing the fenestration units from a building that was undergoing refurbishment; while, deconstruction techniques were used for dismantling similar units from another building that was being selectively demolished.
It was concluded that the amount of energy consumed, time taken and waste generated, were far greater, and the revenues much lower, when conventional demolition techniques and tools were used. Hence, from the point of view of resource conservation (material, energy, time, and money) deconstruction was found to be more advantageous in the disposal of reusable building components.
Keywords: Demolition, Deconstruction, Resource Conservation, Reuse, Recycling.
INTRODUCTION
Many resources go into the production of a building; such as material, labour, energy, time and money. But buildings cannot stand forever, as with the passage of time they may become dilapidated, redundant or even a liability. When this happens a decision has to be made as to their fate: to renovate orto demolish. Whatever the decision may be, more resources are needed for the job at hand, while those that were used at the outset to construct the building are in imminent danger of being wasted altogether.
The question is which of these resources can be saved from being wasted and what can be done to conserve or salvage them. The only way forward is to first assess the building disposal procedures from the point of view of these resources and then analyze the feasibility of the options at hand, i.e. complete demolition, selective demolition or deconstruction. The demand for used building material in many countries is an incentive to opt for selective demolition, which in turn involves both deconstruction (of reusable building components) and demolition (of the structure).
Deconstruction is considered to be an expensive option compared to demolition since considerable time is required to deconstruct a building properly. It is believed that when a building is demolished using explosives or machines (such as excavators and bulldozers) the disposal process is speedy; and since time is money, the demolition option would be more economical. It should be noted here that...