Over a year EBV: No progress for recycling building materials in Erlangen

Veröffentlicht:

Von:

<p><strong>Meta-Beschreibung:</strong> Erfahren Sie in unserem Artikel, warum die Ersatzbaustoffverordnung (EBV) nach einem Jahr Inkrafttreten ihre Ziele nicht erreicht hat. Die Umfrage unter Bau- und Recyclingverbänden zeigt massive Probleme mit Bürokratie, Marktakzeptanz und dem Status von Recyclingmaterialien. Entdecken Sie die Herausforderungen und nötigen Veränderungen, um eine erfolgreiche Kreislaufwirtschaft im Bauwesen voranzubringen.</p>
<p> <strong> meta description: </strong> In our article you will find out why the replacement building materials regulation (EBV) did not achieve its goals after one year. The survey among construction and recycling associations shows massive problems with bureaucracy, market acceptance and the status of recycling materials. Discover the challenges and necessary changes to advance a successful circular economy in construction. </p> (Symbolbild/MB)

challenges of the circular economy: one year after the entry into force of the replacement building materials regulation

A year has passed since the replacement building materials regulation (EBV) came into force on August 1, 2023. This ordinance was introduced to promote the use of recycling materials in construction and reduce the amount of waste. However, despite these good intentions, current surveys show that the desired goals have not yet been achieved. Let's take a closer look at the challenges and their effects on the construction industry.

On a comprehensive survey of construction and recycling associations, in which 156 companies took part, it was found that only 5 % of the information surveyed has recycled more rubble or excavated to the ground after the introduction of the EBV. More than half of the respondents (52 %) did not report any changes, while 42 % even found that less material for recycling was processed. These results are highlighting the difficulties that the industries still have in the area of ​​switching to recycling materials.

A central problem is that the most replacement building materials are still classified as a waste and not received the status of a construction product. This means that clients often choose to use recycling material. Despite the equivalent quality of recycling building materials compared to new materials, the negative connotation of the term "waste" remains an obstacle. In addition, state and municipal construction projects often show little willingness to use recycling materials.

The companies surveyed also emphasize the high bureaucratic effort associated with the implementation of the EBV. In particular, the extensive documentation and the liability law issues as well as the risk of using replacement building materials help ensure that many companies continue to use primary building materials instead of using recycling materials. The bureaucracy monster, which in many cases inhibits the circular economy, therefore seems insurmountable.

These circumstances are not only important for companies, but also for society as a whole. The EBV could make a decisive contribution to environmental protection by reducing the dependence on primary raw materials and reduces the amount of construction waste that ends up on landfills. A successful functioning of the regulation is therefore not only important for the construction industry, but also crucial for the sustainable development of society as a whole.

Those responsible in the construction industry, such as Tim-Oliver Müller from the main association of the German construction industry, warn of the consequences of the current situation. It is appropriate that not only the legal framework is improved, but also a rethink in the construction industry. Müller warns that the product status for recycling materials is urgently needed to actually advance the circular economy.

Overall, the coming months are crucial for whether the EBV can find its place in German construction or whether it becomes a failed experiment. There are still many challenges ahead of us, but the will for improvement is obvious. The next steps have to be combined with combined forces to use the potential of the circular economy and to make the future of building sustainable.

The votes from the industry are clear: the government must act and make the necessary adjustments and reforms in the EBV in order to increase the acceptance of replacement building materials and ultimately relieve the environment. Only through a clear line and less bureaucracy can the construction industry become a pioneer in sustainability.