Ecological Engineering 61P (2013) 706714

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Ecological Engineering
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ecoleng

Laboratory study on the potential use of recycled inert construction

waste material in the substrate mix for extensive green roofs
Slobodan B. Mickovski a,b, , Kirsty Buss a , Blair M. McKenzie b , Birol Skmener c
a

Civil Engineering Department, University of Dundee, Nethergate, Dundee DD2 7HR, UK

James Hutton Institute, Invergowrie, Dundee DD2 5DA, UK
c
Jacobs Engineering UK Ltd., 95 Bothwell Street, Glasgow G2 7HX, UK
b

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history:
Received 4 August 2012
Received in revised form 11 February 2013
Accepted 11 February 2013
Available online 11 April 2013
Keywords:
Green roofs
Sustainability
Recycled aggregate
Construction waste
Drainage
Slope stability

a b s t r a c t
Green roofs, dened as roofs of buildings that are partially or completely covered with vegetation planted
in a growing medium can provide multiple sustainability benets. There is potential to increase the
sustainability benets of green roofs by using recycled construction materials for green roof construction.
This study investigates the viability of using recycled aggregates in the substrate mix for extensive
green roofs where a carpet of plants is supported by lightweight growing media (substrate) overlying a
drainage layer. We investigated the adequacy of recycled inert construction waste as a growth medium,
the drainage properties of the substrate mix containing recycled materials as well as its susceptibility to
erosion and resistance to sliding when placed on a slope.
In this laboratory study we compared the establishment, development and performance of both grass
and sedum model green roofs under simulated rainfall and found that the substrate mix containing
recycled construction waste materials was adequate in supporting plant growth, was resistant to erosion and slippage and capable of providing good drainage. When vegetated, the green roof can provide
attenuation of the drainage water with magnitude depending on the type and percentage of vegetation
cover.
We attempt to put the results of this small scale laboratory investigation on extensive green roofs into
the wider perspective of sustainability benets offered by the green roofs.
2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
A green roof (sometimes referred to as living roof or vegetated roof) is a building roof that is partially or completely covered
with vegetation planted in a growing medium over a waterproof
membrane. Green roofs may include root barriers, drainage and
irrigation systems.
Green roofs serve several purposes, such as intercepting and
retaining rainwater, providing insulation, creating habitat for
wildlife, helping to lower urban air temperatures and combatting
the heat island effect (Grant et al., 2003; Dunnett and Kingsbury,
2004; Dunnett, 2006; CIRIA, 2007; Berndtsson, 2010). There are
two types of green roof: intensive and extensive. While the intensive green roofs are thicker and can support heavy plants including
trees, extensive green roofs usually have a carpet of plants supported by lightweight growing media overlying some form of a

Corresponding author. Present address: Glasgow Caledonian University, 70

Cowcaddens, Glasgow G4 0BA, UK. Tel.: +44 1412731105.
E-mail address: slobodan.mickovski@gcu.ac.uk (S.B. Mickovski).
0925-8574/$ see front matter 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2013.02.015

drainage layer. Standard construction and operation principles as

well as codes of practice exist in many countries such as FLL (2002)
in Germany and GRO (2011) in the UK.
Recent green roof research has focussed on thermal benets including reducing the urban heat island effect (Kumar and
Kaushik, 2004; Lazzarin et al., 2005; Onmura et al., 2001) and producing suitable habitats to promote biodiversity and wildlife (Grant
et al., 2003; Dunnett and Kingsbury, 2004; Dunnett, 2006). Concurrently, research on the hydrological properties of green roofs
has operated on an experimental plot scale (Berghage et al., 2007;
Gregoire and Clausen, 2011; Stovin, 2010) showing the contribution of green roofs to the attenuation and retention of storm water,
as well as decrease in annual runoff.
The integrated approach of managing the excess rainfall water
and satisfying the need for water on a building or settlement scale
has been investigated in the past (Van Seters et al., 2007; Berghage
et al., 2007; Newton et al., 2007), and found to be dependant on the
green roof make up, local climatic conditions, atmospheric deposition characteristics and rainfall chemistry. Green roofs are often
quoted to provide additional environmental benets including the
use or re-use of recycled materials in their construction (Dunnett

S.B. Mickovski et al. / Ecological Engineering 61P (2013) 706714

2. Materials and methods

The green roof test-beds consisted of growth trays lled with
substrate and planted with test species, a channel to collect surface
runoff and subsurface channels to capture basal drainage.
2.1. Growth trays
High density poly-ethylene (HDPE) trays (408 mm 310 mm
86 mm; volume 0.011 m3 ; Camlab Ltd., Cambridge, UK) were
used as growth trays. At the bottom of the tray, was a 10 mm
thick layer of plastic chips (diameter 12 mm covered with needle punched polypropylene geotextile secured to the sides of the
tray to serve as a drainage layer for the substrate. Below this,
the base of each tray was perforated to allow basal drainage to
the plastic ducts that were installed inside and below the trays
(Fig. 1). The surface runoff channel was wrapped in needle punched
polypropylene geotextile to prevent sediment entering the
channel.
Surface runoff was collected in a measuring beaker with graduation scale (5 ml) that was connected to the surface runoff drainage
channel via a 6 mm diameter plastic pipe (Fig. 1). Another measuring beaker was used to collect the basal drainage from the tray.

Fig. 1. Schematic of the growth tray with modications allowing quantication of

drainage.

2.2. Substrate
A mixture of calcareous (65% weight) and siliceous (35% weight)
aggregate from construction and demolition waste was sourced
from local waste management and disposal services (WasteCare
Ltd., Livingston, Scotland). The sourced coarse gravel- and cobblesized aggregate was crushed to <5 mm diameter to produce a
substrate expected to allow efcient drainage.
To provide the nal substrate mix for planting the crushed
aggregate (20% of the substrate mix weight) was mixed with inert
loam at eld wetness of approximately 20 gg1 (sieved from the
top 10 cm of a Stagnic Cambisol (FAO classication) at the James
Hutton Institute site at Invergowrie ((56.27N, 3.40W); 65%) and
compost directly from the compost bags (John Innes No. 3; 15%) to
provide the nal substrate for planting. The substrate was initially
mixed by hand before further mixing in a clean cement mixer, and
then stored in plastic boxes covered with plastic and left for 24 h
to equilibrate.
The particle size distribution of the substrate was determined
by dry sieving (BS 1377-2:1990). From the grading curve (Fig. 2)
the mix is a gravelly silty sand (19% gravel, 64% sand, 17% clay and
silt).
2.3. Packing procedure
To ensure consistent packing of all test trays used for planting,
we performed preliminary tests on packing repeatability. Empty
growth trays including the drainage channels and the drainage
100
90
80

Percentage smaller

and Kingsbury, 2004; Thormark, 2006; Carter and Keeler, 2008;

Berndtsson, 2010).
Apart from studies with limited coverage of the issue (Kolb et al.,
2001; Roth-Kleyer, 2001; Fischer and Jauch, 2002; Emilsson, 2008),
the potential to add environmental benets by using recycled
aggregates in green roof construction and operation, which is
the main objective of this study, has not been explored in detail.
Recycled aggregates are derived from reprocessed construction
waste as an alternative to quarried material. Examples include
recycled concrete from construction and demolition and railway
ballast that together represent more than 25% of the total aggregates used in the UK (QPA, 2007). Incentives exist to increase
this percentage and thus decrease waste to landll (WRAP, 2011).
Acknowledging recycled materials may contain pollutants (e.g.
heavy metals, PAHs, etc.), and that any use must comply with
proper environmental restrictions this study focuses on the use of
recycled inert construction waste material.
Some of the problems and issues related to the use of inert
recycled construction waste in green roof construction are explored
here. These include the adequacy of the recycled material for use
in the substrate, the drainage and attenuation properties of substrate containing recycled materials, the susceptibility to erosion,
as well as overall stability of the vegetated substrate against sliding/failures. The establishment and early development of physical
model green roofs, vegetated with grass and sedum, was recorded
and is discussed in the following sections, together with their
performance under different durations of simulated rainfall. The
strength of the substrate mix permeated with grass roots was also
investigated in order to help understand the maximum slope for
green roof installation.
Additionally, an attempt is made to put the results of this
small scale laboratory investigation on extensive green roofs into
the wider context of the sustainability benets offered by the
green roofs. They are seen to offer a more sustainable approach
to stormwater management contributing to Sustainable Urban
Drainage Systems (SUDS) and Rainwater Harvesting (RWH), where
natural catchment processes (inltration, conveyance, storage, biological treatment) control runoff quality and quantity (CIRIA, 2007;
Stovin, 2010) but also addressing urban water quality and providing amenity value.

707

70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0.01

Green roof substrate

0.1

Particle size [mm ]

10

Fig. 2. Particle size distribution of the substrate mix used for planting in this study.

708

S.B. Mickovski et al. / Ecological Engineering 61P (2013) 706714

layer were weighed, before the substrate was added in 10 mm layers and compacted. The weight of the full tray was recorded and
the test repeated three times for each tray.
After the preliminary tests, trays were lled producing 75 mm
thick substrate layer, using this established method. Each layer was
compacted after being laid with one passing of a concrete cylinder
with 50 mm diameter, 200 mm length and a mass of 3.5 kg.
2.4. Seeding, planting, and growth conditions
After packing, the trays were left to settle for 24 h before planting. Five trays were planted with Sedum lydium, an alpine plant
species commonly used in green roong. The plants were sourced
from established nursery stock (Sedum Supply Ltd., Welshpool,
UK) and were of uniform size (approximate radius 80 mm) when
planted in the trays. The planting density of the Sedum plants
was 6 plants per tray3 rows 2 columns, spaced equidistantly
between the tray edges. The remaining ve trays were seeded with
a standard grass seed mix (25% Perennial ryegrass Lolium perenne,
20% Creeping red fescue Festuca rubra, 30% Hard fescue Festuca
longifolia, 10% Smooth stalked meadow grass Poa pratensis, 10%
Brown top bent grass Agrostis capillarys, and 5% White clover Trifolium repens; Hogarths Ltd, Preston, UK) at 50 g/m2 rate. One tray
was packed using the method described above and left unplanted
to be used as a control.
All trays, including the control, were kept in a controlled environment glasshouse (day 20 3 C, night 14 3 C) and watered
regularly (approx. 300 ml of water per day per tray) over the subsequent 2 weeks. After the initial 14 day growth period, the water
supply was terminated for 7 days prior to each rainfall simulation
experiment taking place.
Digital photographs of each tray were taken on a daily basis.
These were used to determine the area of established vegetation (green area) as a proportion of the total tray area
using a freely available pixel-counting programme (ImageJ;
http://rsb.info.nih.gov/ij/index.html).
After 21 days the grass had grown to approximately 120 mm,
and the sedum plants expanded on average 40 mm in radius (Fig. 3).
2.5. Rainfall simulation experiments
To assess the ability of the green roofs to attenuate and retain
rainwater, as well as to potentially offset the peaks in rainwater
discharge, rainfall simulation tests were performed. A rainfall simulator comprising a closed line of 48 syringe needles (6 8 grid
forming a 500 500 mm frame) was used to supply mains water
dispersed over a ne wire mesh (Ball et al., 1999). An empty tray
under the mesh collected the rainfall for a set time to determine
the ow rate and the rainfall volume theoretically reaching the substrate. This procedure was replicated three times for each rainfall
duration: 15, 30, and 60 min. The replication, intensity and duration of the simulated rainfall were chosen to minimise variability,
ensure robust analysis and to focus on the comparable behaviour
of growth trays under different vegetation.
Before a rainfall simulation test, each tray was exposed to a dry
period of 7 days. After the dry period, each growth tray, including
the control, was placed in sequence in the test area of the simulator at a 10 slope, taking care that the simulator more than covered
the area of the tray and, thus, minimising any edge effects. For each
rainfall simulation test, surface runoff and basal drainage were collected and the volume (ml) was recorded. Once the pre-determined
rainfall duration was achieved, the growth tray was removed from
the rainfall simulator and placed onto a bench at the same angle,
taking care not to disturb the drainage ow that continued to be

Fig. 3. (a) Typical growth trays after planting/seeding with Sedum lydium (front
row) and grass (back row). Typical short and long grass samples (b), and typical
vegetation cover for Sedum lydium (c) after 5 weeks from seeding/planting.

measured. Each tray, including the control, was subject to separate

tests under 15, 30, and 60 min rainfall.
After all rainfall simulation tests had been conducted on the
trays seeded with grass, the grass was cut to a uniform length
(approx. 50 mm). The growth trays with cut grass were allowed a
7 day antecedent dry period, then tested under the rainfall simulator in the same manner as the original length grass, and the results
compared.
2.6. Surface runoff and drainage analysis
2.6.1. Soil and water pH
To determine any effect of the chemical composition of the substrate and/or chemical reaction with the vegetation, we tested the
pH of the substrate and the drainage water both at the beginning and at the end of the experimental programme. Differences in
drainage water pH after rainfall events of different duration were
considered possible if leaching from the substrate mix occurred
(Javed, 2011). This test was a preliminary check to test whether

S.B. Mickovski et al. / Ecological Engineering 61P (2013) 706714

underlying processes affecting pH could potentially preclude the

use of inert recycled construction waste in the substrate mix.
Ten grams of substrate were extracted from each of the trays
prior to planting and placed in a jar. 20 ml of a solution containing 0.02 g CaCl2 was added to each specimen and left for 20 min
before testing using a desktop pH meter (Mettler Toledo MP220).
The water collected from the surface runoff and basal drainage from
each tray was tested directly using the same instrument.
2.6.2. Inltration rate and hydraulic conductivity of the substrate
mix
A single-ring inltrometer (diameter 400 mm, height 500 mm)
packed with substrate to the same bulk density (9.20 kN m3 ) as the
growth trays was used to test the inltration rate to the substrate
(Reynolds, 2008). The hydraulic conductivity was then calculated
using standard falling head inltrometer equations (Liu and Evett,
1998):
The hydraulic conductivity (K) of the substrate mix was also
estimated from the particle size analysis as:
K = a(D50 )b
where a and b are empirically derived terms based on the soil type,
and D50 is the diameter of the 10 percentile grain size of the material
deduced from the particle size determination analysis (Shepherd,
1989; Hazen, 1892).
2.6.3. Attenuation and drainage retardation
To investigate the effect of vegetation on the modication and
distribution of the simulated rainfall, both surface runoff and basal
drainage were measured and compare with the amount of rainfall.
The attenuation was calculated as the difference between the rainfall quantity reaching the growth tray during the rainfall simulation
event and the quantity of drained water (surface runoff and basal
drainage). The attenuated quantity was, then, normalised for rainfall duration by expressing it as percentage of the rainfall quantity
reaching the tray to allow comparison between three vegetation
treatments (short grass, long grass, sedum).
The ow retardation for both basal and surface runoff drainage
was measured as the time from the start of the rainfall simulation
to the rst measured drainage or runoff from the growth tray. The
retardation time was averaged across all rainfall durations for each
treatment.

709

tests were undertaken. A wet sieving method based on the principle that unstable soil-aggregates will breakdown and pass through
a 1 mm sieve more easily when gently agitated in water for
3 min. Samples (4 g dry weight equivalent) of each treatment were
assessed by standard procedure using an Eijkelkamp wet sieving
apparatus (Hermawan and Cameron, 1993).
2.7. Substrate shear strength
To assess the resistance of the substrate to slippage and to investigate the effect of the green roof vegetation on the shear strength of
the substrate modied standard (BS 1377-7, 1990) shearbox tests
were carried out.
Substrate mix was packed into 25 plastic drainage pipes using
the same procedure as outlined for the growth trays. The pipes had
150 mm inner diameter and 150 mm length. Each tube was pre-cut
at a shear depth of 75 mm from the surface to create two sections. To
maintain a gap between the plastic pipe faces, and so prevent locking surfaces during shear testing, 3-mm thick spacers were inserted
between the two sections of the pipe, before securing the sections
together using a strong adhesive tape. The bases of the pipes were
covered with a geotextile membrane to allow drainage and to retain
the soil. 15 of the pipes were seeded with the same grass mix and at
the same rate as outlined for the growth trays. After seeding, all 25
pipes were transferred to the glasshouse and kept under the same
growth conditions as the trays for 21 days. After this period and
immediately before testing, each sample was saturated with water,
mimicking the conditions when slips within the substrate are most
likely to occur, and then tested in shear using a purpose-built shear
apparatus (Mickovski et al., 2008) under no surcharge (3 seeded, 2
fallow samples) and under three different normal vertical loads
(BS 1377-7, 1990; 22 kPa, 35.6 kPa and 49.2 kPa; 3 seeded and two
fallow samples per each load). The samples were sheared at a constant rate of 1 mm min1 for maximum displacements of between
45 and 90 mm, while the force and horizontal displacement of the
sample were logged with a Campbell 21X data logger (Campbell
Scientic, UK). The angle of internal friction and the cohesion of
the non-vegetated and vegetated substrate were then calculated as
the slope and intercept, respectively, of the normal stress vs shear
stress plot, as a measure of the ability of the substrate to withstand
shear stress.
3. Results

2.6.4. Turbidity
To ascertain the quantity of dispersed clay within the substrate
mix, turbidity of an aqueous solution of the substrate mix was
measured using a light scattering method. Whilst larger material
will settle from water, colloidal material will remain as a sol. The
percentage light transmitted is inversely proportional to the concentration of ne particles in the sample. The absorbance, or optical
density, is directly proportional to the nes concentration (Hindell
et al., 1997a). The method used in this study was as described by
Hindell et al. (1997b).
The same method was used to determine whether dispersed
clay was present in the drainage water. The basal drainage water
from each tray was tested for turbidity after the 60 min simulated
rainfall. In addition, basal drainage water samples from one grass
and one sedum growth tray were tested for turbidity throughout
the duration of a 60 min rainfall by analysing samples collected
from the drainage water at 10 min intervals.

3.1. Substrate packing, plant establishment, and growth

2.6.5. Soil-aggregate stability

To assess the ability of the substrate to resist disruption from
mechanical and physicochemical forces, soil-aggregate stability

The simulated rainfall intensity was constant at 1.13 mm min1

for the 15, 30, and 60 min durations. The rainfall quantity over the
surface are of a growth tray was 144.6 ml min1 .

The uniform packing procedure resulted in a mean weight

of 9.05 0.08 kg (here and throughout: mean SE) for all the
prepared samples trays. This gave a dry bulk soil density of
9.25 0.77 kN m3 , which is consistent with published values (FLL,
2002).
Substrate samples were taken during the packing of each tray
and gravimetric water content determined. The mean water content by weight of the substrate at packing was 19.5 0.6%.
Fig. 4 shows the rate of sedum and grass establishment. The
percentage vegetation cover in the sedum plants increased steadily
from approximately 40% at planting to just above 80% on average
after 5 weeks. The grass seed mix cover increased rapidly in the rst
three weeks after planting before reaching totally covering the tray
surface four weeks after planting.
3.2. Rainfall simulation

710

S.B. Mickovski et al. / Ecological Engineering 61P (2013) 706714

100

250
Long Grass
Short Grass

Surface runoff volume [ml]

Vegetation cover [%]

90
80
70
60
50
40
30

Grass seed mix

20

200

Sedum

150

100

50

Sedum lydium

10

0
1

15mins

Weeks after planting

30mins

60mins

Rainfall duration

Fig. 4. Increase in the vegetation cover over time in the experimental trays planted
with Sedum lydium and seeded with a standard grass seed mix.

Fig. 6. Average surface runoff volume collected for different treatments (long and
short grass, sedum) and different rainfall durations (15, 30, and 60 min).

Soil pH, and the pH of runoff water were not changed as a result
of changing rainfall duration (p > 0.05). Similarly, there were no
signicant differences between the pH of drainage/runoff water
between treatments, and rainfall durations.

from the grass tray increased throughout the rainfall duration, suggesting that the dispersed clay particles may have been more easily
removed from the growth medium containing grass roots

3.3. Soil-aggregate stability

3.5. Hydraulic conductivity

Between 68 and 96% (mean 80.10 0.05%) of the substrate

remained on a 1 mm sieve after wet-sieving suggesting that the
substrate is unlikely to be broken apart by rainfall. There were no
signicant differences between treatments.

The inltration rate of the substrate calculated from the

inltrometer test was 1.39 105 m s1 , while the permeability calculated from the PSD is between 4.96 103 and
7.42 103 m s1 , depending on the calculation formula (Shepherds or Hazens). It was considered that the inltrometer test gave
the most realistic estimate of the substrate permeability based on
the fact that the calculation methods for the soil permeability using
the PSD are based on empirical results obtained for lter sands
or similarly graded engineered soils with little or no ne content
(Odong, 2007).
The results obtained for the inltration rate of the substrate
(values between 103 and 105 m s1 ) correspond to pervious to
semi-pervious medium and are characteristic of well sorted sands
and gravels or very ne sand (Bear, 1988). This compares well with
the grading curve shown on Fig. 2 and allows efcient drainage of
the green roof and decreasing the risk of ponding, build-up of pore
water pressures, and instability.

3.4. Turbidity
The presence of dispersed clay in the aqueous solution of the
substrate mix, as shown through the transmittance tests, ranged
from 21.4 to 83.5% (mean 66.8 5.0%) on average for all tested samples. Similarly, the absorbance caused by the presence of dispersed
clay in the solution ranged from 8% to 66% (mean 23.7 5.9%).
The transmittance of the basal drainage water from the grass
trays ranged from 88 to 97% (mean 94%) and for the sedum trays
from 86 to 93% (mean 91%), measured after the end of a 60 min
simulated rainfall. One-way ANOVA showed that there was no signicant difference in the transmittance of the drainage water from
the grass and sedum growth trays.
The transmittance of the basal drainage water from the sedum
tray increased in the rst stages of the 60 min simulated rainfall
before a decrease to an almost constant value at the later stages of
the rainfall event (Fig. 5) The transmittance of the drainage water
100
99

Water transmittance [%]

98
97
96
95
94
93
Grass

92

Sedum

91
0

10

20
30
40
50
Minutes after start of 60 min. simulated rainfall

60

70

Fig. 5. Transmittance of the basal drainage water from a sedum and grass tray
during a 60 min simulated rainfall.

3.6. Runoff and drainage analysis

3.6.1. Surface runoff
2-way ANOVA showed the effect of treatment on the quantity
of surface runoff from the tested samples with sedum producing signicantly (p < 0.001) greater runoff volumes than the grass
seeded trays (Fig. 6). Similarly, increased rainfall duration signicantly increased (p = 0.008) the quantity of the surface runoff. The
combined effect of the treatment and rainfall duration also signicantly (p < 0.001) increased surface runoff quantity. Regression
analysis showed that 78% of the variation in the tested samples
(R2 = 0.777) was accounted for by this model.
Two-way ANOVA showed that the surface runoff retardation,
dened as the time between rainfall start and onset of surface
runoff, was signicantly longer (p < 0.001) from the grass seeded
trays than from the sedum trays. Similarly, rainfall duration had a
signicant effect (p = 0.008) on the attenuation of the surface runoff
with the runoff onset occurring earlier with the longer rainfall duration. The combined effect of the treatment and rainfall duration also
signicantly (p < 0.001) changed the start of the runoff. This model
accounted for nearly 70% of the variation (R2 = 0.693).

S.B. Mickovski et al. / Ecological Engineering 61P (2013) 706714

711

70

8000
Long Grass
Sedum
6000
5000
4000
3000

50
40

y = 0.6418x - 1.7546
R 2= 0.9588

30
20

2000
vegetated soil

10

1000

non-vegetated soil

0
15mins

30mins
Rainfall duration

60mins

3.6.2. Basal drainage

2-Way ANOVA showed that there was signicantly (p < 0.001)
more total basal drainage from the sedum planted trays than
the grass seeded trays (Fig. 7). Similarly, rainfall duration signicantly changed (p < 0.001) the quantity of the total drainage,
with the longer rainfall events yielding larger volumes of drained
water. The combined effect of the treatment and rainfall duration
also signicantly changed (p < 0.001) total runoff volume. Regression analysis showed that this model accounted for 99% of the
variation in the samples (R2 = 0.991) with the amount of surface
runoff.
Two-way ANOVA showed that the onset of drainage from the
grass seeded trays was signicantly (p < 0.001) later than the onset
of drainage from sedum planted trays for the same rainfall duration. Similarly, the longer rainfall events resulted in signicantly
(p < 0.001) quicker onset of the drainage for all tested trays. The
combined effect of the treatment and rainfall duration on drainage
retardation was also signicant (p < 0.001). This model accounted
for 82% of the variation (R2 = 0.823).
Rainfall duration had a very small effect on the drainage water
pH (p = 0.047), with the pH levels generally increasing with the
rainfall duration (Fig. 8). The vegetation type also had a very small
effect on the drainage water pH (p = 0.008) with highest pH levels
measured for the short grass, followed by sedum and long grass.

8.2

7.8

7.6

7.4

7.2

Short Grass
Long grass
Sedum

7
15 min

30min

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Normal stress [kPa]

Fig. 7. Average basal drainage volume collected for different treatments (long and
short grass, sedum) and different rainfall durations (15, 30, and 60 min).

pH

y = 0.6981x + 8.0344
R 2= 0.9401

60

Shear stress [kPa]

Basal drainage volume (ml)

7000

Short Grass

60min

Rainfall duration

Fig. 8. Average pH levels measured for the basal drainage water from the growth
trays planted with long grass, short grass, and sedum after 15 min, 30 min, and
60 min rainfall simulation.

Fig. 9. Shear strength of vegetated (standard grass seed mix) and non-vegetated
substrate.

3.6.3. Attenuation and drainage retardation

The average attenuation across the different rainfall durations
was the highest for the long grass samples (69%) followed by the
sedum samples (32%) and short grass samples (10%). The average
ow retardation time for the basal drainage was the highest for long
grass and sedum samples (9 min), followed by the short grass samples (4 min). The average surface runoff retardation was the highest
for the long grass samples (16 min), while short grass and sedum
samples retarded the surface runoff ow for 8.5 min on average.
3.7. Substrate shear strength
The shearbox test showed an increase in the shear resistance
of both vegetated and non-vegetated substrate with the increase
in normal vertical loading. Fig. 9 shows that the angle of internal friction of the non-vegetated substrate (approximately 32 )
does not signicantly differ from the angle of friction of the vegetated substrate. However, the effect of the green roof vegetation
is demonstrated through an increase of the cohesion of the rootpermeated substrate (8.03 kPa) when compared to the cohesion of
the non-vegetated substrate (virtually 0 kPa).
4. Discussion
This study investigated the potential for use of inert recycled
construction waste material in the substrate mix for extensive
green roofs. The factors related to the establishment of different
green roof vegetation, as well as the drainage properties of the vegetated substrate, were investigated on a small scale, in laboratory
conditions under different simulated rainfall events.
This study demonstrates that grass and sedum can effectively
establish on a relatively thin and lightweight substrate when sown
under optimal conditions. The vegetation cover developed quickly,
and in the case of grass seeded trays was complete four weeks
after planting. The rates of propagation and growth recorded were
within the ranges reported in the literature for similar conditions
(Busey and Myers, 1979; VanWoert et al., 2005). Additionally, it
is possible that the substrate mix including loam and crushed
recycled aggregate in this study provided variation, albeit not
differentiated, often found in normal soil proles which proved
benecial for seed and plug plant growth as previously postulated in the literature (Dunnett and Kingsbury, 2004; Emilsson and
Rolf, 2005). Although the vegetation was grown in controlled environment for this study, the establishment and growth results are
signicant and could be applicable in a wider context for modular
green roofs that are established and grown ex situ prior to transport
and installation in situ.

712

S.B. Mickovski et al. / Ecological Engineering 61P (2013) 706714

The thin substrate mix and rapid establishment of vegetation

cover show that such construction can be used for both new and
retrot applications due to its relatively small weight. The mean
weight of substrate was 740 N m2 . Even with thickness increased
to 150 mm and an additional 30 mm of lightweight drainage layer,
the total weight would not exceed the 2 kN m2 design limit typical
for ordinary tile roofs (Scrivens, 1980; FLL, 2002).
The use of recycled construction waste for green roof construction has wider environmental implications. For example, the
construction sector is the largest user of resources and generates
the most waste (e.g. in Scotland, approximately 10 million tones
or 45% of the total waste are generated by the construction industry; WRAP, 2006). This could be decreased by recycling or re-use
elsewhere, mainly within the construction sector. The need for
recycling has been acknowledged by the UK and other governments
with the inclusion of requirements for recycled content in tender
specications for construction procurement for all public bodies
since 2006 and commitment to 50% reduction of the construction,
demolition and excavation waste sent to landll by 2012 (WRAP,
2011). Although only inert construction waste was used in this
study, and no testing for chemical pollution or organic contaminants has been carried out, the potential of pollution within the
recycled material can not be discounted. The construction industry
has to respond with appropriate quality assurance and quality control systems which will certify construction or demolition waste
materials for (specic) re-use after adequate tests (and treatments
if required) have been carried out on it.
By using recycled construction aggregates instead of byproducts of other industrial processes not previously used in
construction (natural or manufactured secondary aggregates) in
substrate mix, the green roof industry has an opportunity to
improve, reduce its carbon footprint and promote sustainability
leadership. The energy used for production of secondary aggregates offsets the sustainability benets which characterise the
use of recycled construction aggregates. Green roof substrates
incorporating recycled aggregates will contribute towards the sustainability by supporting the industrys commitments of increasing
recycling and reducing construction waste
The aims of this study included testing whether the substrate
was sufciently free draining and both estimated and measured
values conrmed this. The discrepancy between the measured and
estimated hydraulic conductivity of the substrate may be due to
the assumptions used to derive the empirical formulae for estimation (Shepherd, 1989; Hazen, 1892) such as the one-dimensional
ow through uniform media. Hydraulic conductivity is normally
very difcult to predict because preferential ow paths can easily
establish.
In our study, the measured attenuation, dened as the ratio
between the sum of the surface runoff and basal drainage and the
rainfall quantity reaching the tray, ranged between 10% and 69%
The variation can be attributed to the differences in vegetation type
(larger vegetation cover and better developed foliage as in the long
grass trays would intercept more rainfall while the more developed
root systems as with the grass trays would tend to utilise larger
volumes of water reaching the substrate. Edge effects whereby the
rainfall water was diverted outside of the tray by the long grass
leaves may be another source of variation, although this is considered to be insignicant due to the care taken for this not to
occur during the experimental setup. Although the tests were conducted as part of a parametric study in laboratory conditions and
over a short time period, the results from our study compare well
with the larger scale studies reported in the literature. Large variation in the reported values of attenuation within one study and
between separate studies has also been reported in the literature.
Total attenuation values of 4570% for a functional green roof with

a range of substrates and under natural conditions with low rainfall and irrigation during the summer months have been reported
by Kolb (2004). In the US, on a range of roofs with minimal slope
(03 ) and substrates ranging in thickness between 50 and 100 mm
vegetated with a variety of species including Sedum, Moran et al.
(2004) and Liptan (2003) reported attenuation values of 85% and
1035%, respectively. Although the results from our tests fall within
the range reported in the literature, the direct comparison with
these studies is impossible due to the differences not only in the
growing conditions (glasshouse vs outdoors), but also vegetation
type, planting techniques, planting substrate characteristics, slope
angle, different antecedent dry weather periods before the rainfall
events, as well as the seasonal variations in vegetation potential
for evapotranspiration which would be evident over a longer time
period under natural conditions., Similar to the attenuation, surface runoff and basal drainage retardation was greater under better
developed foliage and root systems, such as for the long grass, that
intercepted the rainfall better with potential modication of the
precipitation distribution into lower throughfall and higher stemow (Dunnett et al., 2008). Although all test trays were subject to a
7-day antecedent dry period prior to being subjected to rainfall, it is
expected that the moisture content of the soil would not have been
the same between treatments and within a treatment due to differences in water consumption by the plants. This, combined with the
potential accumulation of water quantity from a longer-duration
rainfall, may explain the quicker onset of surface runoff for longer
rainfall events when compared to the shorter rainfall durations.
The soil-aggregate stability and turbidity results show that there
is little risk of the substrate breaking down and dispersed clay
entering the drainage and potentially prohibiting the use or disposal of the drainage water due to its turbidity. Turbidity results of
the runoff show water of low turbidity, while the measurements
during the course of a 60 min simulated rainfall suggest improving
transmittance with time for the grass growth trays. Low turbidity and the soil-aggregate stability data suggest that aggregates in
the mix are relatively stable, are unlikely to disperse and hence
are likely to resist erosion. Low turbidity of the drained water also
suggests that the drainage water harvested from the green roofs
could be used for non-potable purposes with minimum or no treatment with regards to turbidity. The growth and development of
ne roots through the substrate contributes to the aggregate stability by mechanically binding the soil particles and preventing all
but the nest fraction from dispersal and washout during a rainfall event. The grass has more numerous and ner roots than the
sedum (Daubenmire, 1941) and, hence, is better at stabilising soil
particles (Tisdall and Oades, 1982) leading to lower turbidity of the
drained water. On the other hand, sedum provides better surface
cover in the initial period after planting, minimising the early risk
of surcial erosion. Thus there is scope for the plants to be used in
synergy for erosion protection purposes.
The shearbox test showed that the substrate had an angle of
internal friction of 32 . Assuming a factor of safety of 1.5 for the stability of the substrate placed on a roof, the maximum angle of the
roof where the substrate can resist slip failures is 22 which compares to the minimum angle of 10 when slope stability calculations
are recommended for green roofs (FLL, 2002). This value does not
take into account the stabilising effect that the vegetation roots will
have on the green roof through the added cohesion (Mickovski and
van Beek, 2009), and is relevant to the initial stages of the green
roof installation when the vegetation cover is not established and
the substrate is exposed and most prone to slippage.
Green roofs alone cannot lower the risk of ooding from very
large (extreme) rainfall/storm events. However, their value may
lie within the source control domain of a more comprehensive sustainable drainage system approach which would include

S.B. Mickovski et al. / Ecological Engineering 61P (2013) 706714

rainwater harvesting (RWH). Green roofs can be used as part of

RWH systems in order to contribute towards reducing the pressure
on centralised water supply and distribution systems (Dixon et al.,
1999). As RWH from conventional roofs could provide potentially
better quality and larger volumes of water, the sustainability and
the cost-effectiveness of RWH from green roofs approach may not
be evident on a single-building scale and should be analysed on
a larger (e.g. catchment, settlement) scale (Roebuck et al., 2011).
Adding green roofs as part of RWH systems, especially for nonpotable water use, require less maintenance, particularly where
the water is captured on the roof surface and passed through the
recycled aggregate substrate acting as a primary lter. In this case,
the maintenance is likely to be on an annual basis (CIRIA, 2001a). If
RWH from green roofs is used to replace the mains water supply,
the mains water savings from the green roof systems will depend
on the local rainfall patterns, roof or catchment size, and size of collection tanks, and will be greatest where there is a large roof area to
building users ratio such as ofces, schools or factories. Although
conventional roof and RWH from it will produce larger quantities
and better quality of water to be used as mains water, the use of
green roof as part of the RWH could provide additional sustainability benets in terms of improving biodiversity and offsetting the
carbon footprint of the building.
This study shows no evidence of detrimental quality of the
water drained through the green roofs and suggests possible use
of the drained water for non-potable purposes. The present study
investigated the use of inert construction waste material in the
substrate mix and pollution beyond pH change, turbidity, and
nutrient leaching, as aspects of water quality directly dependent
on the substrate type, was not expected. It should be noted that
the views on the potential water quality risks usually range from
fears of permanent leaching of nutrients to endorsements of the
drained water as natural or environmentally benign (Stovin, 2010)
while in reality the water quality is likely to depend upon the
type of substrate, the local climatic conditions, atmospheric deposition characteristics and rainfall chemistry (CIRIA, 2001a; Stovin,
2010). The results of this study showed an increase, albeit not statistically signicant, in the pH levels of the soil after the rainfall
simulation. The pH levels of the drained mains supply water were
measured only to investigate any differences between the drainage
from different vegetation types. The pH, nutrient screening and
turbidity were used in this study to highlight potential for pollution stemming from the use of certain type of substrate mix and
vegetation type without detailed chemical analysis for pollutants
with a view of using the drained water for non-potable purposes.
To ascertain the existence of an effect of the substrate mix and
vegetation type which could potentially preclude the use of certain recycled aggregate or vegetation type, longer-term larger-scale
studies with monitoring of the changes in the substrate chemistry should be carried out, coupled with monitoring of the rainfall
chemistry and varying the composition of substrate and vegetation cover. With such studies, the quality of the drained water
can be recorded over a longer period and investigated in more
detail.
Further research should be concentrated on the quality aspects
of the rainwater drained or collected from the green roofs. While
this study touched upon the aesthetic and chemical quality parameters such as turbidity and pH, future studies should investigate
the microbiological aspects of the collected rainwater (bacteria
and pathogenic organisms) as well as the physical parameters
(dissolved solids, etc.) as these are aspects also considered as barriers to uptake not only of green roofs, but also of rainwater for
use in buildings (CIRIA, 2001b). Long term monitoring on larger
scale experimental or working green roofs, where the values of
total suspended solids and dissolved organic carbon (DOC) are

713

measured, will contribute towards understanding of water ltration process through the substrate mix and the potential leaching
of nutrients or organic content into the harvested rainwater. High
values of DOC in the harvested rainwater may prohibit its use if
it is disinfected by chlorination, such disinfection could lead to
high concentrations of disinfectant by-products (Mendez et al.,
2010). Also, the leakage of pollutants into the drainage water
from non-inert recycled material used in substrates need to be
investigated.
The shortcoming of this study was the small scale of the experimental setup which was ideal for laboratory conditions but the
results of which may not be easily extrapolated to a large scale
deployment of green roofs particularly in colder climates. However, the objectives of this study warranted and the results justied
the scale of the experiment as a feasibility study and the rst step
into the investigation of the use of recycled construction waste
aggregates for green roof construction.
Acknowledging that different climates will have different
effects on growing media and vegetation (Stovin, 2010) this study
provided an accurate parametric investigation analysis on several sustainability and environmental benets of green roong.
Other environmental benets that may accrue from implementing
more sustainable green roofs will include amenity opportunities,
reduction in the urban heat island effect, biodiversity and ecological enhancements, as well as rain water quality improvement
through ltration and bio/phyto-remediation and storm water
runoff reduction. More large scale trials and monitoring through a
longer time period are needed on different substrate mixes as well
as vegetation mixes in order to ascertain the ecological advantages,
especially with regards to maintenance of the system. Furthermore,
monitoring of live green roofs needs to be carried out and recorded
for specic climate and vegetation conditions in order to realistically capture the establishment, development phases, and response
of green roof construction to different environmental conditions
such as seasonal and temporal changes in temperature, humidity,
insolation, and precipitation.
5. Conclusions
This laboratory study investigated the potential for use of
recycled construction waste in extensive green roofs substrate,
the investigation focussed on the establishment of vegetation, as
well as the drainage properties of such substrate under different
simulated rainfall events. Providing an accurate parametric investigation and analysis on several sustainability and environmental
benets of green roong, the main conclusions of this study are as
follows:
Grass and sedum can effectively establish on a relatively thin
and lightweight substrate mix comprising recycled construction
waste in laboratory conditions.
Substrate mix comprising recycled construction waste (20%
weight), inert loam (65%) and compost (15%), can provide
relatively free-draining properties (e.g. high coefcient of permeability; Bear, 1988), and also attenuation and drainage ow
retardation.
The material in the mix was relatively stable, unlikely to disperse
and hence likely to resist erosion.
The root permeated substrate had increased shear strength,
allowing even steeper roof slopes to be stable.
There is no evidence of detrimental quality of the water drained
through the substrate suggesting, subject to rainwater quality,
that green roof drainage may be appropriate for non-potable
purposes.

714

S.B. Mickovski et al. / Ecological Engineering 61P (2013) 706714

The use of recycled construction waste for green roof construction has wider environmental implications in terms of reducing
the amount of landll waste.
Acknowledgements
This research was funded by a Dundee University scholarship.
The help of Michael McNamara with the laboratory shear tests,
as well as the advice and guidance of Dr M.F. Bransby are greatly
appreciated. We thank the Scottish Government Rural and Environment Science and Analytical Services (RESAS) for funding from
the Sustainable AgriculturePlants Programme.
References
Ball, B.C., Scott, A., Parker, J.P., 1999. Field N2 O, CO2 and CH4 uxes in relation to
tillage, compaction and soil quality. Soil Till. Res. 53, 2939.
Bear, J., 1988. Dynamics of Fluids in Porous Media. Dover, New York.
Berghage, R., Jarrett, A., Beattie, D., Kelley, K., Husain, S., Rezaei, F., Long, B., Negassi,
A., Cameron, R., Hunt, W., 2007. Quantifying evaporation and transpirational
water losses from green roofs and green roof media capacity for neutralizing
acid rain. NDWRCP Research Project Report. The Pennsylvania State University,
State College, PA.
Berndtsson, J.C., 2010. Green roof performance towards management of runoff
water quantity and quality: a review. Ecol. Eng. 36, 351360.
BS 1377-7, 1990. Methods of test for soils for civil engineering purposes. Classication tests. Shear strength tests (total stress), British Standards Institution
(BSI).
Busey, P., Myers, B.J., 1979. Growth rates of turfgrasses propagated vegetatively.
Agron. J. 71, 817821.
Carter, T., Keeler, A., 2008. Life-cycle costbenet analysis of extensive vegetated
roof systems. J. Environ. Manage. 87, 350363.
CIRIA, 2001. Rainwater and greywater use in buildings: decision-making for water
conservation. Project Report PR80. CIRIA, London.
CIRIA, 2001b. Rainwater and Greywater Use in Buildings: BEST Practice Guidance.
Publication C539. CIRIA, London.
CIRIA, 2007. Building Greener: Guidance on the Use of Green Roofs, Green Walls
and Complementary Features on Buildings. Publication C644. CIRIA, London.
Daubenmire, R.F., 1941. Some ecologic features of the subterranean organs of Alpine
plants. Ecology 22, 370378.
Dixon, A., Butler, D., Fewkes, A., 1999. Water saving potential of domestic water
reuse systems using greywater and rainwater in combination. Water Sci. Technol. 39, 2532.
Dunnett, N., Kingsbury, N., 2004. Planting Green Roofs and Living Walls. Timber
Press, Cambridge, UK.
Dunnett, N.P., 2006. Green roofs for biodiversity: reconciling aesthetics with ecology. In: Proc. of 4th North American Green Roof Conference: Greening Rooftops
for Sustainable Communities, Boston, MA. May 2006. The Cardinal Group,
Toronto, pp. 221236.
Dunnett, N., Nagase, A., Booth, R., Grime, P., 2008. Inuence of vegetation composition on runoff in two simulated green roof experiments. Urban Ecosyst. 11,
385398.
Emilsson, T., Rolf, K., 2005. Comparison of establishment methods for extensive
green roofs in Southern Sweden. Urban For. Urban Green. 3, 103111.
Emilsson, T., 2008. Vegetation development on extensive vegetated green roofs:
inuence of substrate composition, establishment method and species mix. Ecol.
Eng. 33, 265277.
Fischer, P., Jauch, M., 2002. Substrate fuer einschichtige Extensivbegruenungen
Langzeitbeobachtungen. Dach+Gruen 11, 1923.
Gregoire, B.G., Clausen, J.G., 2011. Effect of a modular extensive green roof on
stormwater runoff and water quality. Ecol. Eng. 37, 963969.
Green Roof Organisation (GRO), 2011. The GRO Green Roof Code: Green Roof Code
for Best Pratice for the UK 2011. Groundwork, Shefeld, UK.
FLL, 2002. Richtlinie fr die Planung, Ausfhrung und Pege von Dachbegrnungen. Forschungsgesellschaft Landschaftsentwicklung. Landschaftsbau e.V, ISBN:
393448459x, pp. 99.
Grant, G., Englebeck, L., Nicholson, B., 2003. Green Roofs: their existing status and
potential for conserving biodiversity in urban areas. English Nature Research
Reports 498, 959.
Hazen, A., 1892. Some physical properties of sands and gravels, with special reference to their use in ltration. 24th Annual Report, Massachusetts State Board of
Health, Pub. Doc. No. 34, 539556.

Hermawan, B., Cameron, K.C., 1993. Structural changes in a silt loam under longterm conventional or minimum tillage. Soil Till. Res. 26, 139150.
Hindell, R.P., McKenzie, B.M., Tisdall, J.M., 1997a. Destabilization of soil during the
production of earthworm (Lumbricidae) and articial casts. Biol. Fertil. Soils 24,
153163.
Hindell, R.P., McKenzie, B.M., Tisdall, J.M., 1997b. Inuence of drying and aging
on the stabilization of earthworm (Lumbricidae) casts. Biol. Fertil. Soils 25, 27
35.
Kolb, W., 2004. Good reasons for roof planting green roofs and rainwater. International Conference on Urban Horticulture, Waedenswil, Switzerland. Acta Hort.
643, 295300.
Javed, M.T., 2011. Mechanisms behind pH changes by plant roots and shoots caused
by elevated concentration of toxic elements, PhD Thesis, Department of Botany,
Stockholm University, pp. 40.
Kolb, W., Trunk, R., Eppel, J., 2001. Recyclingbaustoffe zur Dachbegruenung.
Deutscher Gartenbau, 3235.
Kumar, R., Kaushik, S.C., 2004. Performance evaluation of green roof and shading
for thermal protection of buildings. Build. Environ. 40 (11), 15051511.
Lazzarin, R.M., Castellotti, F., Busato, F., 2005. Experimental measurements
and numerical modelling of a green roof. Energ. Buildings 37 (12), 1260
1267.
Liptan, T., 2003. Planning, zoning and nancial incentives for ecoroofs in Portland,
Oregon. In: Greening Rooftops for Sustainable Communities, Chicago, 2930
May, pp. 113120.
Liu, C., Evett, J.B., 1998. Soils and foundations. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River,
New Jersey.
Mendez, C.B., Afshar, B.R., Kinney, K., Barrett, M.E., Kirisits, M.J., January 2010. Effect
of Roof Material on Water Quality for Rainwater Harvesting Systems. Texas
Water Development Board, Austin, Texas.
Moran, A., Hunt, B., Jennings, G., 2004. A North Carolina eld study to evaluate greenroof quantity, runoff quality, and plant growth. In: 2nd Greening
Rooftops for Sustainable Communities Conference, Portland, 24 June, pp. 446
460.
Mickovski, S.B., van Beek, L.P.H., 2009. Root morphology and effects on soil reinforcement and slope stability of young vetiver (Vetiveria zizanioides) plants
grown in semi-arid climate. Plant Soil 324, 4356.
Mickovski, S.B., Hallett, P.D., Bengough, A.G., Bransby, M.F., Davies, M.C.R., Sonnenberg, R., 2008. The effect of willow roots on the shear strength of soil. Advances
in GeoEcology 39, 247262.
Newton, J., Gedge, D., Early, P., Wilson, S., 2007. Building greenER: Guidance on
the Use of Green roofs, Green Walls and Complementary Features on Buildings.
CIRIA, London, UK.
Odong, J., 2007. Evaluation of empirical formulae for determination of hydraulic
conductivity based on grain-size analysis. J. Am. Sci. 3, 5460.
Onmura, S., Matsumoto, M., Hokoi, S., 2001. Study in evaporative cooling effect of
roof lawn gardens. Energ. Buildings 33, 653666.
Quarry Product Association (QPA), 2007. Sustainable Development Report. QPA,
London.
Reynolds, W.D., 2008. Saturated hydraulic properties: ring inltrometer. In: Carter,
M.R., Gregorich, E.G. (Eds.), Soil Sampling and Methods of Analysis. , 2nd ed. CRC
Press, Boca Raton, pp. 10431056.
Roebuck, R.M., Oltean-Dumbrava, C., Tait, S., 2011. Whole life cost performance of
domestic rainwater harvesting systems in the United Kingdom. Water Env. J. 25,
355365.
Scrivens, S., 1980. Roof Gardens: construction. Architects Journal, 445449.
Shepherd, R.G., 1989. Correlations of permeability and grain-size. Ground Water
27, 633638.
Roth-Kleyer, S., 2001. Vegetationstechnische Eigenschaften mineralischer Substratkomponenten zur Herstellung von Vegetationstrag- und Draenschichten
fuer bodenferne Begruenungen. Dach+Grue n 10, 411.
Stovin, V., 2010. The potential of green roofs to manage urban stormwater. Wat.
Env. J. 24, 192199.
Thormark, C., 2006. The effect of material choice on the total energy need and
recycling potential of a building. Building Environ. 41, 10191026.
Tisdall, J.M., Oades, J.M., 1982. Organic matter and water-stable aggregates in soils.
Journal of Soil Science 33, 141163.
Van Seters, T., Rocha, L., MacMillan, G., 2007. Evaluation of the runoff quantity
and quality performance of an extensive green roof in Toronto, Ontario. In: 5th
Greening Rooftops for Sustainable Communities Conference, Minneapolis.
VanWoert, N.D., Rowe, D.B., Andresen, J.A., Rugh, C.L., Xiao, L., 2005. Watering
regime and green roof substrate design affect sedum plant growth. Hort. Sci.
40, 659664.
WRAP, 2006. The Sustainable Use of Resources for the Production of Aggregates in
England.
WRAP, 2011. Towards Resource Efciency WRAP Business Plan 200811: A Report
on Impact.