Talk:Concrete recycling

Environment Low‑importance

	Environment portal This environment-related article is part of the WikiProject Environment to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the environment. The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on environment-related topics, as well as to ensure that environment articles are properly categorized. Read Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ and leave any messages at the project talk page.EnvironmentWikipedia:WikiProject EnvironmentTemplate:WikiProject EnvironmentEnvironment articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Climate change

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Climate change, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Climate change on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Climate changeWikipedia:WikiProject Climate changeTemplate:WikiProject Climate changeClimate change articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
If you are looking for ways to improve this article, we recommend checking out our recommended sources and our style guide

Merge with Recycling

I disagree with the merger, reasons stated on the Recycling page.--Anchoress 10:27, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I also disagree with the merger, but think that the article should be altered into a more general article dealing with recycled aggregates from all forms of construction and demolition waste; including recycled concrete aggregate (RCA), recycled aggregates (containing large proportions of masonry) and recycled asphalt planings. This all area of construction is particularly pertinent at the present moment of time and will become more so as the sustainability agenda increases.Kpeyn 21:28, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think off the top of my head that's a good idea, although I don't know if articles for those other types of recycling already exist? Could you look Kpeyn, I don't even really know what to look for.--Anchoress 21:39, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with the merger. This article needs to cover the techniques and processes associated with concrete recycling which will differ greatly from plastic recycling for example.--Alex 11:41, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Urbanite ?

Perhaps we can mentioned the term urbanite ? See http://www.concretenetwork.com/concrete/demolition/urbanite-recycled-concrete.html

I also added http://inhabitat.com/amazing-ero-concrete-recycling-robot-can-erase-entire-buildings/

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Concrete recycling. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:25, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Improved concrete recycling

Perhaps mention https://www.slimbreker.nl/why-smartcrushers.html?msh — Preceding unsigned comment added by Genetics4good (talk • contribs)

Is this article written in a "promotional tone?"

@Dustfreeworld: Why does the article have this cleanup tag? Jarble (talk) 17:41, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jarble; FYI, that tag was added August last year. The page at that time mainly contained views and headings like “Importance” and “benefits”, which seem to be promoting the recycling of concrete, but has neglected other potential drawbacks (plus, that section contains non-RS including personal blogs too). As concrete usually contains potentially toxic slag cement or coal ash (or even EAF slag and joss paper ash) with heavy metals, and during demolition and transportation concrete waste may also be contaminated by other construction wastes such as asbestos, the recycling of concrete (both the process and the resulting products) may cause harmful effects to the environment and to human health. These are not mentioned in the page.

Now the article has a section on health and environmental effects, which was added by me after adding the “promotional tone” tag, but the section needs expansion. Further, wordings like “importance” may need to be adjusted too ... --Dustfreeworld (talk) 10:31, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But to address to your concern, I’ve tagged some of the problematic sources, removed the tag on top and added a section tag instead. Hope this helps. Thanks. --Dustfreeworld (talk) 10:47, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is the article still unbalanced?

@Dustfreeworld If it is still unbalanced please could you explain how - thanks Chidgk1 (talk) 09:49, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]