KT
K.Q.D. Tinneveld
info
Please Note
<p>This page displays the records of the person named above and is not linked to a unique person identifier. This record may need to be merged to a profile.</p>
1 records found
1
This thesis investigates the technical, regulatory and stakeholder-related conditions under which circular glass can be effectively implemented in façade glass replacements in the Netherlands. The focus is on refurbishments of existing buildings, particularly insulated glass units (IGUs), which are commonly replaced during renovation and maintenance projects. Although circular glass routes exist, new IGUs remain the default choice in practice. The main challenge is therefore not only technical feasibility, but implementing circular glass as an accepted, traceable and contractually defensible product.
The research was structured around three complementary sub-questions. First, different circular glass routes were compared with new IGUs in terms of technical, economic and environmental feasibility through a systematic literature review. Second, regulatory conditions were examined through a desk-based analysis of regulations and standards. Third, stakeholders, barriers, drivers and responsibility structures were analysed through a desk-based stakeholder roles and responsibilities analysis, complemented by five semi-structured stakeholder interviews.
The findings show that several circular glass routes are relevant for façade refurbishments. Direct reuse is the highest-value route when recovered glass is technically defensible and suitable for a new application. Remanufacturing is relevant when direct reuse at product level is not possible, but components can still be used in a new or adapted product. High-quality closed-loop recycling is relevant when higher-value routes are not feasible, while downcycling remains a fallback route. The feasibility of these routes depends on glass condition, yield, process control, logistics, documentation and acceptance requirements.
The regulatory and standards analysis indicates that circular glass does not necessarily require fundamentally different technical performance requirements compared with new IGUs. The main difference lies in the availability and reliability of documentary evidence. New standardised IGUs are supported by product documentation, performance declarations, warranties and established acceptance routines. Circular glass therefore needs to close this documentary gap by being delivered as a traceable and auditable product with sufficient evidence. Circular glass should consequently be approached as a product consisting of “glass + evidence”.
The stakeholder analysis shows that implementation depends on coordinated responsibilities across the reverse supply chain. Stakeholders do not primarily reject circular glass because of technical infeasibility, but because of organisational, documentary, warranty and acceptance difficulties. Main barriers include yield loss due to damage and contamination, missing traceability, weak standardisation of evidence, unclear liability and warranty logic, vague procurement requirements and conservative market behaviour. Key drivers are controlled recovery, early procurement clarity, traceability, stakeholder role clarity, quality assurance and stronger standardisation.
The combined findings are translated into a preliminary implementation kit consisting of four elements: circular route decision logic, a regulatory evidence checklist, a preliminary Responsible, Accountable, Supportive, Consulted and Informed (RASCI) responsibility matrix, and stop-and-go gate logic. The kit provides practical decision support for determining the appropriate circular route, required evidence, responsibilities and decision moments. It is not intended as a formal certification system or legal approval tool, but as a framework to make circular glass implementation more explicit, auditable and manageable.
The thesis concludes that circular glass can be effectively implemented when three conditions are met simultaneously: a technically defensible circular route is available; the glass is supported by traceable and auditable evidence; and governance across the reverse supply chain is structured through early procurement clarity, controlled recovery, stakeholder role clarity and staged decision-making. Circular glass implementation is therefore not primarily constrained by the absence of possible circular routes, but by insufficiently standardised processes for preserving material value, documenting performance and allocating responsibilities. The thesis recommends incorporating circular glass ambitions early in project requirements and tender documents, using staged stop-and-go moments, maintaining traceable product information and developing more standardised evidence requirements. Future research should test the implementation kit in real façade refurbishment projects.
...
The research was structured around three complementary sub-questions. First, different circular glass routes were compared with new IGUs in terms of technical, economic and environmental feasibility through a systematic literature review. Second, regulatory conditions were examined through a desk-based analysis of regulations and standards. Third, stakeholders, barriers, drivers and responsibility structures were analysed through a desk-based stakeholder roles and responsibilities analysis, complemented by five semi-structured stakeholder interviews.
The findings show that several circular glass routes are relevant for façade refurbishments. Direct reuse is the highest-value route when recovered glass is technically defensible and suitable for a new application. Remanufacturing is relevant when direct reuse at product level is not possible, but components can still be used in a new or adapted product. High-quality closed-loop recycling is relevant when higher-value routes are not feasible, while downcycling remains a fallback route. The feasibility of these routes depends on glass condition, yield, process control, logistics, documentation and acceptance requirements.
The regulatory and standards analysis indicates that circular glass does not necessarily require fundamentally different technical performance requirements compared with new IGUs. The main difference lies in the availability and reliability of documentary evidence. New standardised IGUs are supported by product documentation, performance declarations, warranties and established acceptance routines. Circular glass therefore needs to close this documentary gap by being delivered as a traceable and auditable product with sufficient evidence. Circular glass should consequently be approached as a product consisting of “glass + evidence”.
The stakeholder analysis shows that implementation depends on coordinated responsibilities across the reverse supply chain. Stakeholders do not primarily reject circular glass because of technical infeasibility, but because of organisational, documentary, warranty and acceptance difficulties. Main barriers include yield loss due to damage and contamination, missing traceability, weak standardisation of evidence, unclear liability and warranty logic, vague procurement requirements and conservative market behaviour. Key drivers are controlled recovery, early procurement clarity, traceability, stakeholder role clarity, quality assurance and stronger standardisation.
The combined findings are translated into a preliminary implementation kit consisting of four elements: circular route decision logic, a regulatory evidence checklist, a preliminary Responsible, Accountable, Supportive, Consulted and Informed (RASCI) responsibility matrix, and stop-and-go gate logic. The kit provides practical decision support for determining the appropriate circular route, required evidence, responsibilities and decision moments. It is not intended as a formal certification system or legal approval tool, but as a framework to make circular glass implementation more explicit, auditable and manageable.
The thesis concludes that circular glass can be effectively implemented when three conditions are met simultaneously: a technically defensible circular route is available; the glass is supported by traceable and auditable evidence; and governance across the reverse supply chain is structured through early procurement clarity, controlled recovery, stakeholder role clarity and staged decision-making. Circular glass implementation is therefore not primarily constrained by the absence of possible circular routes, but by insufficiently standardised processes for preserving material value, documenting performance and allocating responsibilities. The thesis recommends incorporating circular glass ambitions early in project requirements and tender documents, using staged stop-and-go moments, maintaining traceable product information and developing more standardised evidence requirements. Future research should test the implementation kit in real façade refurbishment projects.
...
This thesis investigates the technical, regulatory and stakeholder-related conditions under which circular glass can be effectively implemented in façade glass replacements in the Netherlands. The focus is on refurbishments of existing buildings, particularly insulated glass units (IGUs), which are commonly replaced during renovation and maintenance projects. Although circular glass routes exist, new IGUs remain the default choice in practice. The main challenge is therefore not only technical feasibility, but implementing circular glass as an accepted, traceable and contractually defensible product.
The research was structured around three complementary sub-questions. First, different circular glass routes were compared with new IGUs in terms of technical, economic and environmental feasibility through a systematic literature review. Second, regulatory conditions were examined through a desk-based analysis of regulations and standards. Third, stakeholders, barriers, drivers and responsibility structures were analysed through a desk-based stakeholder roles and responsibilities analysis, complemented by five semi-structured stakeholder interviews.
The findings show that several circular glass routes are relevant for façade refurbishments. Direct reuse is the highest-value route when recovered glass is technically defensible and suitable for a new application. Remanufacturing is relevant when direct reuse at product level is not possible, but components can still be used in a new or adapted product. High-quality closed-loop recycling is relevant when higher-value routes are not feasible, while downcycling remains a fallback route. The feasibility of these routes depends on glass condition, yield, process control, logistics, documentation and acceptance requirements.
The regulatory and standards analysis indicates that circular glass does not necessarily require fundamentally different technical performance requirements compared with new IGUs. The main difference lies in the availability and reliability of documentary evidence. New standardised IGUs are supported by product documentation, performance declarations, warranties and established acceptance routines. Circular glass therefore needs to close this documentary gap by being delivered as a traceable and auditable product with sufficient evidence. Circular glass should consequently be approached as a product consisting of “glass + evidence”.
The stakeholder analysis shows that implementation depends on coordinated responsibilities across the reverse supply chain. Stakeholders do not primarily reject circular glass because of technical infeasibility, but because of organisational, documentary, warranty and acceptance difficulties. Main barriers include yield loss due to damage and contamination, missing traceability, weak standardisation of evidence, unclear liability and warranty logic, vague procurement requirements and conservative market behaviour. Key drivers are controlled recovery, early procurement clarity, traceability, stakeholder role clarity, quality assurance and stronger standardisation.
The combined findings are translated into a preliminary implementation kit consisting of four elements: circular route decision logic, a regulatory evidence checklist, a preliminary Responsible, Accountable, Supportive, Consulted and Informed (RASCI) responsibility matrix, and stop-and-go gate logic. The kit provides practical decision support for determining the appropriate circular route, required evidence, responsibilities and decision moments. It is not intended as a formal certification system or legal approval tool, but as a framework to make circular glass implementation more explicit, auditable and manageable.
The thesis concludes that circular glass can be effectively implemented when three conditions are met simultaneously: a technically defensible circular route is available; the glass is supported by traceable and auditable evidence; and governance across the reverse supply chain is structured through early procurement clarity, controlled recovery, stakeholder role clarity and staged decision-making. Circular glass implementation is therefore not primarily constrained by the absence of possible circular routes, but by insufficiently standardised processes for preserving material value, documenting performance and allocating responsibilities. The thesis recommends incorporating circular glass ambitions early in project requirements and tender documents, using staged stop-and-go moments, maintaining traceable product information and developing more standardised evidence requirements. Future research should test the implementation kit in real façade refurbishment projects.
The research was structured around three complementary sub-questions. First, different circular glass routes were compared with new IGUs in terms of technical, economic and environmental feasibility through a systematic literature review. Second, regulatory conditions were examined through a desk-based analysis of regulations and standards. Third, stakeholders, barriers, drivers and responsibility structures were analysed through a desk-based stakeholder roles and responsibilities analysis, complemented by five semi-structured stakeholder interviews.
The findings show that several circular glass routes are relevant for façade refurbishments. Direct reuse is the highest-value route when recovered glass is technically defensible and suitable for a new application. Remanufacturing is relevant when direct reuse at product level is not possible, but components can still be used in a new or adapted product. High-quality closed-loop recycling is relevant when higher-value routes are not feasible, while downcycling remains a fallback route. The feasibility of these routes depends on glass condition, yield, process control, logistics, documentation and acceptance requirements.
The regulatory and standards analysis indicates that circular glass does not necessarily require fundamentally different technical performance requirements compared with new IGUs. The main difference lies in the availability and reliability of documentary evidence. New standardised IGUs are supported by product documentation, performance declarations, warranties and established acceptance routines. Circular glass therefore needs to close this documentary gap by being delivered as a traceable and auditable product with sufficient evidence. Circular glass should consequently be approached as a product consisting of “glass + evidence”.
The stakeholder analysis shows that implementation depends on coordinated responsibilities across the reverse supply chain. Stakeholders do not primarily reject circular glass because of technical infeasibility, but because of organisational, documentary, warranty and acceptance difficulties. Main barriers include yield loss due to damage and contamination, missing traceability, weak standardisation of evidence, unclear liability and warranty logic, vague procurement requirements and conservative market behaviour. Key drivers are controlled recovery, early procurement clarity, traceability, stakeholder role clarity, quality assurance and stronger standardisation.
The combined findings are translated into a preliminary implementation kit consisting of four elements: circular route decision logic, a regulatory evidence checklist, a preliminary Responsible, Accountable, Supportive, Consulted and Informed (RASCI) responsibility matrix, and stop-and-go gate logic. The kit provides practical decision support for determining the appropriate circular route, required evidence, responsibilities and decision moments. It is not intended as a formal certification system or legal approval tool, but as a framework to make circular glass implementation more explicit, auditable and manageable.
The thesis concludes that circular glass can be effectively implemented when three conditions are met simultaneously: a technically defensible circular route is available; the glass is supported by traceable and auditable evidence; and governance across the reverse supply chain is structured through early procurement clarity, controlled recovery, stakeholder role clarity and staged decision-making. Circular glass implementation is therefore not primarily constrained by the absence of possible circular routes, but by insufficiently standardised processes for preserving material value, documenting performance and allocating responsibilities. The thesis recommends incorporating circular glass ambitions early in project requirements and tender documents, using staged stop-and-go moments, maintaining traceable product information and developing more standardised evidence requirements. Future research should test the implementation kit in real façade refurbishment projects.