Overcoming the barriers to using re-purposed materials

The rate of commercial refurbishments is reaching an all-time high. The amount of waste and carbon associated with this is astounding, with only 1% of materials estimated to be reused. Fortunately, the industry is starting to wake up to the challenge.

Conferences such as FOOTPRINT+ are making these issues their headline act and in the past three years, we have encountered like-minded demolition (now deconstruction contractors), clients, engineers and innovative platforms all hell bent on challenging the status quo.

When designing for deconstruction, the overwhelming feedback from on-the-ground professionals has been: ‘Don’t over complicate it!’ While intricate Japanese joints have their place, a friendly demo contractor told me that if they could see how a building had been constructed and access the materials, they could deconstruct and reuse them.

However, we are not building in the same climate as we were 50 years ago and this comes with a whole new set of challenges as we deal with existing materials that were designed for demolition not deconstruction.

At Marks Barfield Architects (MBA), we have always strived to build responsibly, but this took on a new dimension in 2021 when we decided to try to become ‘regenerative’ rather than just sustainable’. This led to a four-year long obsession with the possibility of a circular economy. We have (so far) successfully reused materials from raised access floors and fire doors to lighting and partitioning, saving 577,041 kgCO2e on one project alone (which equates to over seven million bananas or over 3.5 million miles by London bus). Perhaps more crucially for the client, we saved £1,655,660!

There are barriers, and it may take some initiative and a willingness to make mistakes to overcome them, but it can be done. To achieve effective reuse, we must be mindful of the obstacles and tackle them at an early stage.

Costs

Let’s start with the big hitter– costs. The preconception is that reuse and the circular economy costs more, and it often does. The costs of labour, extended deconstruction periods, early design stage auditing and interrogation all need to be considered as do on-site remediation, reinstallation and recertification.

You need to establish your strategy and pick your battles. Ask the right questions at the early stages. Is the carbon, condition and labour associated worth the costs of this item being deconstructed and reused? Does this warrant it being reused in situ or in a recipient project? Is there an industry demand for this material? Is there a take back scheme or resale market?

Then prioritise and eliminate. On 22 Baker Street, we prioritised the raised access floors and fire doors, the former because it was an easy win, the latter because it made financial sense… and we fancied a challenge! This yielded such significant cost savings that we could start to explore the deconstruction and reuse of other materials, donating them to wider charity and community projects. With material costs rising, this proved to be a lot cheaper.

Timing

Cost is closely followed by the issue of time. Pre-planning is critical. If you decide three weeks before the demolition is about to start that you would like to deconstruct 200m of cable trays and 1000sqm of suspended ceilings, without writing it into the tender documents and contracts, the programme will be tight.

Clients need to ensure the following three aspects are considered:

• The time taken by the design team at stages 0-2 to audit and identify the reuse strategy;
• The longer deconstruction period (one project went from two weeks to two months, which did the team a huge favour as we were unable to access the building for surveys and opening works prior to this but meant a squeezed stage 4);
• And the time taken for any recertification or remediation works.

However, with material lead-in times growing and uncertainties surrounding supply increasing, isn’t it nice to know you’ve got it on-site?

Warranties and certification

The big issue on everyone’s lips in recent years has been the issue of warranties and certification. The reuse of fire doors on one of our projects is still unresolved with worries surrounding the new building safety regulations.

This has been overcome by being more flexible in initial contracts between landlords and tenants. Will a new tenant accept a reused partition that may not have the warranty but has the carbon and cost saving benefits? Will a tenant accept on-site acoustic testing with new gaskets and seals? It may seem unlikely, but it has been achieved on commercial projects.

An early ‘walk around’ of the building between landlords and prospective tenants could help to identify what may be required new and what can be kept. This alongside carbon budgets for tenant fit outs should help to reduce unnecessary waste.

Pressure needs to be put on suppliers to offer re-warranty and take back schemes – visionaries such as D-Line, SAS and Interface are starting to tackle this.

Contracts and specifications

The way briefs, specifications and contracts are written are huge enablers to reuse. They need to clearly set out the obligations, roles and responsibilities between the design team and contractors. Who is the reuse guardian at what stage?

Clear tendering is needed for demolition contractors and contractors with an already established material audit and reuse strategy, with performance-based specifications giving contractors the flexibility to use second-hand materials.

Storage

A particular bugbear of ours at MBA is the lack of physical infrastructure needed to support this growing industry. Time and time again, we have seen the costs of storage and the complexities of logistics bring a brave idea to its knees. Just-in-time delivery is a pipedream in the current climate.

The procurement of second-hand needs to be easier and mirror the process of procuring new materials. A number of pilot schemes and innovative businesses are starting to tackle this. Just give the Material Reuse Group, Lawmens or the FIS a call.

MBA are currently part of the Circular Do Tank, exploring solutions to the storage and logistics issue via Workstream 4.

Health and safety

The big lesson learnt is to reuse in-situ where possible. This avoids the tricky logistics of getting it out of the building and into another one in the first place. Consider the practicalities. How large is it? is there a large enough goods lift? Can it be carried by two people? There are health and safety constraints to the latter, so make informed decisions at an early stage or ask a friendly demolition team.

Designers need to start designing in smaller modules for deconstruction.

Mindsets

If the above leaves you thinking ‘can’t, too hard’, then this last one is for you. We would argue that the biggest barrier is mindset. We are at a real moment of change and with this comes the chance to really revolutionise our industry and put right the wrongs of the last 30 years. Or are we going to keep taking and wasting for the next 30 years resulting in a WALL-E-esq wasteland?

We have found that through conversation, an open mind, know-how and a real drive to DO something, great results can be achieved. Effective collaboration is needed.

So the solutions we suggest are:

1. Pick your battles and go for low-hanging fruit
2. Understand the value you could add (environmental, social, economic)
3. Question the norm
4. DO rather than dwell

Darcy Arnold-Jones, architect and circular economy lead, Marks Barfield Architects