# Waste Reduction Methods Used in Construction Companies with Regards to Selected Building Products
## 4 Results  
Table 1 presents the results of the questionnaire studies concerning the use of the above-mentioned methods of reducing construction waste in relation to the five tested building products. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**No**} & **Methods of Reducing the Amount** & **Respondent’s** & **Steel** & **Concrete \({}^{*}\)** & **Masonry** & **Ceramic** & **Wood** \\  & **of Construction Waste** & **Answer** & & & **Products** & **and Stone** & **Tiles** & **Wood** \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{1} & \multirow{2}{*}{Adequate storage.} & Yes & 120 & 89 & 86 & 92 & 100 \\  & & No & 20 & 51 & 54 & 48 & 40 \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{2} & Ordering products as per size and & Yes & 123 & 73 & 77 & 93 & 95 \\  & in the right quantity. & No & 17 & 67 & 63 & 47 & 45 \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{3} & Training of employees in waste & Yes & 111 & 103 & 91 & 89 & 101 \\  & management. & No & 29 & 37 & 49 & 51 & 39 \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{4} & \multirow{2}{*}{Use of monitoring systems.} & Yes & 89 & 91 & 78 & 79 & 81 \\  & & No & 51 & 49 & 62 & 61 & 59 \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{5} & Proper transport and unloading of & Yes & 124 & 117 & 114 & 111 & 110 \\  & products. & No & 16 & 23 & 26 & 29 & 30 \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{6} & Appropriate involvement of & Yes & 83 & 81 & 67 & 73 & 73 \\  & subcontractors. & No & 57 & 59 & 73 & 67 & 67 \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{7} & \multirow{2}{*}{Site security.} & Yes & 127 & 124 & 121 & 122 & 123 \\  & & No & 13 & 16 & 19 & 18 & 17 \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{8} & \multirow{2}{*}{Use of prefabricated elements.} & Yes & 54 & 51 & 22 & 25 & 25 \\  & No & 86 & 89 & 118 & 115 & 115 \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{9} & \multirow{2}{*}{Waste segregation on site.} & Yes & 82 & 68 & 57 & 48 & 64 \\  & & No & 58 & 72 & 83 & 92 & 76 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: The application of construction waste reduction methods for the five tested building products. The analysis of the results contained in Table 1 shows a significant diversification of the YES/NO answers, which proves that the specified methods are used with varying degrees of intensity in construction companies. Figure 5 presents charts that illustrate--in each group of products--the frequency of using individual waste reduction methods, which are ranked from the maximum to the minimum. The most frequently used methods are marked in green, frequently used--in blue, and rarely used--in red. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**No**} & **Methods of Reducing the Amount of Construction Waste** & **Respondent’s Answer** & **Steel** & **Concrete \({}^{*}\)** & **Masonry Products** & **Ceramic and Stone** & **Wood** \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{10} & Designation of a place for waste segregation. & Yes & 82 & 68 & 57 & 48 & 64 \\  & & No & 58 & 72 & 83 & 92 & 76 \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{11} & Reuse of products within the construction. & Yes & 80 & 41 & 26 & 22 & 100 \\  & & No & 60 & 99 & 114 & 118 & 40 \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{12} & \multirow{2}{*}{Timely delivery of products.} & Yes & 111 & 99 & 97 & 88 & 95 \\  & & No & 29 & 41 & 43 & 52 & 45 \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{13} & \multirow{2}{*}{Use of a waste management plan.} & Yes & 54 & 37 & 33 & 31 & 81 \\  & & No & 86 & 103 & 107 & 109 & 59 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}  
* including a concrete mix and precast concrete elements.  
\end{table} 
Table 1: _Cont._  
Figure 5: The distribution of the frequency of application of individual methods of waste reduction in relation to the studied groups of products (* including a concrete mix and prefabricated concrete elements). As shown in Figure 5 and Table 2, surveyed companies use waste reduction methods most often on steel and wood products; that is probably related to the purchase costs of materials.