Chapter 6
Implications for Design

Scarcity pushes us to see resources as part of a network of social and temporal relationships, into which the designer intervenes………Design becomes concerned with the temporal life of objects, with what comes before and after the instant of completion…..design under conditions of scarcity takes on an ethical dimension because the construction of scarcity often leads to an inequitable distribution of resources.

(Jeremy Till1)

In The Science of the Artificial, Herbert Simon describes design as ‘the process by which we devise courses of action aimed at changing existing situations into preferred ones.’2If we wish to create a more ecologically grounded built environment, based on circular approaches, we need not only to design buildings that perform better with regards to resource use, but, more fundamentally, to devise a system and infrastructure that will achieve this. Two aspects need to be addressed:

  1. From the demand side, the building procurement and design community needs to review and adapt conventional practices in order to increase demand for, and effectively integrate, reclaimed materials and components.
  2. From the supply side, the reclaimed material sector needs to revise its processes and marketing to improve security of supply, information, standardization, and communications, so that it finds a broader audience for its products.

Both aspects need different responses and appropriate processes. This chapter explores the characteristics of how the design process needs to change. It is clear from the many projects reviewed in this book that there are significant differences to the design process if a circular system that values used resources is a goal. These are based on availability, supply chain, ownership, detailing and information. The situation may change as the supply of used materials and components improves and knowledge of how to make use of them becomes more common. However, the different characteristics and patterns of availability need to be recognized and accommodated. Also, the different supply chain requires design teams to be more flexible and to develop their proposals around available reclaimed materials and components (Figure 6.1), rather than the traditional process of designing the main features of the building and then identifying the components that will meet the required specifications.

image

Figure 6.1 Salvaged baseboards and crown mouldings were mounted in vertical strips inspiring beautifully patterned, corrugated walls and screens at the NRDC office renovation in Chicago by Studio Gang.

6.1 Design Process Characteristics

By proposing a building made from materials at hand, the project introduces an entirely new paradigm for a project delivery process that has not changed substantially in the last fifty years. It radically alters the way a building is both conceived and made: form follows availability.

(Jeanne Gang3)

The previous chapters of this book highlight the experimental nature of working with used materials. As design teams adopt strategies to increase use of reclaimed materials and components, it is likely that the standard project management stages typically used by architects may need to be adapted to facilitate a process better suited to circular strategies. From the various sections in this book some key characteristics have emerged. These are discussed here.

Strong Commitment and Setting Goals

As using reclaimed materials and components is still more difficult than using of-the-shelf components, a successful project needs commitment from the entire design team and client. Setting and committing to clear goals with defined targets early on in the process can help to unite the team, avoid conflicts and guide the design through the development stage through to the more detailed specifications. If structural reuse is expected the structural engineer needs to be committed. Having someone on the team with experience of previous projects that feature reuse is also helpful. Without previous experience target setting can be difficult. The level of reuse targeted can be based on the following criteria:

  • Smaller projects can have more ambitious targets due to the relatively small volumes of reclaimed materials currently available.
  • Previous experience of the design team and contractor with the use of second use materials.
  • The amount of flexibility in time available during both design and/or construction phases.
  • Client commitment.

The team should agree a decision making process with criteria (or a protocol) for making decisions about types of reuse, which may include technical, aesthetic, economic and environment considerations.

An Integrated Design Team

Experience suggests that design teams that use an integrated design process (IDP) gain a clear benefit and a greater likelihood of successfully reusing materials and components. A decision making process that involves the whole design team, and profits from the creativity, expertise and ideas of all the participants, is more likely to succeed. The process may require the team to revise its normal working practices, include additional expertise such as demolition consultants or reclaimed materials brokers and be prepared to take the initiative when it comes to overcoming unpredictable hurdles that may present themselves. Collaboration and enthusiasm are both important. Involving trades, suppliers and contractors is also helpful. Possible additional design team members may include:

  • salvage materials broker/consultant;
  • demolition consultant;
  • construction manager;
  • materials scientist;
  • specialist trades.
  • industrial ecologist.

Flexible Approach to Process and Timing

Since availability of reclaimed materials and components is currently less predictable, flexibility and tolerance to alternatives by the project team and owner are important. This allows opportunities to be grasped when they present themselves, even if it is not at the appropriate time in the schedule. This is assisted by an integrated design approach. The design team needs to be prepared to revisit decisions when new material opportunities arise.

Material availability may occur early or late in the process. For early materials they may need to be secured/purchased and stored before construction has started, so the client needs to put into place a mechanism to make this happen. This may include early commitment of funds. Involvement of the management contractor at the design stage can help with this. Materials that become available later may involve late changes and some redesign. The design and construction teams should be prepared for this. Building flexibility into the structural design and particularly the depth for accommodating the structure can allow adjustment of the design to suit component availability later in the process and the ability to accommodate components with small variations in specification. This requires appropriate contractual procedures to be used, as the final materials may not be specified at the time of tendering.

A further aspect of timing is the need to connect supply with demand (Figure 6.2). For example, if materials are coming from a demolition site elsewhere, when will demolition occur? And will the materials be available at the time needed for the new project? Until suppliers begin to store significant amounts of reclaimed materials and components, coordinating timing between projects will be necessary. From the time something is schematically designed until it is constructed is usually many months or years. This means that to design for the use of a specific reclaimed component is to take risk about its availability if it is not procured or reserved during the design process.

image

Figure 6.2 The University of Toronto Scarborough Campus Student's Centre featured reused steel taken from a local demolition which required careful coordination of the two projects and nearly failed due to scheduling issues.

New Relationships

Sourcing reclaimed materials and components requires designers to foster new relationships with organizations they may not traditionally be in touch with. This can improve their choices when used components are desired. Designers can benefit from developing working relationships with:

  • Local salvaged material handlers who may have access to useful materials.
  • Demolition contractors who are aware of buildings that are up for demolition and could be deconstructed.
  • Materials brokers.
  • Industries with waste streams that may have value in construction.
  • Contractors of infrastructure projects who may need to dispose of materials that have a construction use.
  • Specialist reclaimed materials procurement consultants who are emerging in some locations and can take on the task of identifying particular used materials. Their experience can reduce the risks of disruption or delay.

Material and Tectonic Centred Design

A market for salvaged materials and components needs to develop in each country with regular availability and easy exchange though websites, suppliers and other market mechanisms. Until this happens, the starting point for designers will often be identifying an inventory of potential second use materials and components, and developing their design ideas around their tectonic characteristics. This can be seen as a restriction or a positive inspiration for creating meaningful ecological architecture suitable for the circular economy. Jeanne Gang suggests that used materials should not be seen as a straight replacement for new, but rather their particular features offer unique solutions that need to be explored.3 For many of the projects in this book, the design concepts were inspired by the reclaimed materials and components that were identified as locally available.

Opportunistic

The creative ability to see the opportunities presented by available materials and components (and to look for materials of opportunity) helps to increase the possible scenarios of reuse. A simple and flexible design helps to maximize opportunities. For structural design, the size and length of the available members can be used to determine the bay sizes in the new structure, thus maximizing structural efficiency from the available components. This approach requires that the available components are identified early in the design process and that they are purchased or reserved to prevent the salvage contractor from selling them elsewhere. If the intention is to reuse all or part of an existing building in situ, the search for a suitable building will need to commence at the pre-design stage of the project.

Other areas to look for opportunities are in the labour cost for processing reclaimed materials. Several projects have used not-for-profit youth training programmes or government job reskilling programmes as a way of providing economic opportunities for the less fortunate and lowering the cost of material reprocessing.

Design–Build

Ken Shuttleworth of Make Architects suggests that architects getting involved on site and working very closely with construction teams is necessary to innovate and advance knowledge of the circular economy.4 In many of the case study projects in Chapter 3, the close collaboration between the design team and construction team benefited from a formal design–build process, with the two teams working as one. Also, the practitioners featured in Chapter 5 all connected design and construction very closely in their processes. Often in such projects the boundary between design and construction disappears, as construction decisions and materials purchasing may occur well before work starts on site, and, conversely, design revisions need to be made late on in construction if materials become available. In typical procurement processes used today these may be practices to avoid but with reclaimed materials opportunities can be lost if the process cannot adapt to suit them. Design–build management of the process has often been found to be appropriate, and even extending this to deconstruct–design–build can give greater control of the materials supply chain.

For example, tres birds workshop (see Chapter 3.1.2) is a Colorado-based design firm that has established the capability to take on deconstruct and build roles. This allows it to be nimble and make a quick decision when an opportunity to get used materials arises. When working on the Posner Centre, the opportunity arose to remove components from the Hewlett Packard Technology Center in Colorado Springs that was being demolished due to structural problems. Within two weeks, it was able to see the demolition site, get client approval for the used components and extract them. As a result, a variety of components were salvaged for reuse.

Research and Experimentation

Due to the innovative nature of most reuse projects, they may require considerable additional research by the design team at the front end of the project to identify, locate, inspect, choose, adapt and prototype appropriate materials and components. Responsibility for identifying reclaimed components needs to be clearly established – who is responsible for sourcing a particular component? Often the starting point is a research process about available local material sources and the opportunities and limitations to their use. This may require audits of locally available suppliers and demolition projects. Investigation on how materials have been used in the past and what possibilities exist may follow. Sometimes mock-ups and tests are required to prove performance and aesthetics.

The design team may need to establish procedures for assessing and grading sourced materials and components to ensure they meet functional requirements and regulatory standards. This may require protocols and weighted analysis using agreed criteria to assist with selection and to convince the client of the appropriateness of a material. The process may require visual inspection, structural or other testing, prototyping and possible refurbishment. This helps to ensure approvals and successful inspections, as some municipalities are often unfamiliar with and, therefore, hesitant to allow the use of reclaimed components.

Aesthetic Concerns

Many old buildings, often with worn material surfaces and imperfections, are seen as full of character and uniqueness. However, materials with similar characteristics in new buildings are often regarded suspiciously, as unacceptable, poor quality, tacky and second best. Some reused materials such as structural steel components are usually buried deep in the building envelope and not apparent, so aesthetic imperfections are unimportant. But many reclaimed material and components have unique aesthetic characteristics and when exposed they can become distinctive and inspiring architectural features. For example, the Pocono Environmental Centre (Chapter 3.4) and the Kaap Skil Museum (Chapter 3.4) expose the uniqueness of old materials, and this is what makes the projects successful and popular. The concept of Storywood (Chapter 4.2) highlights the uniqueness of old wood.

The culture of newness is gradually changing and creative architectural solutions inspired by old materials can assist with this process. Reuse of materials and components offer an opportunity to celebrate their individual qualities and characteristics and to reinvent and transform them in a creative way to reveal their uniqueness (Figure 6.3). Often visible scars and features of the old material are left intact and used in a decorative way to highlight the heritage of the material, and celebrate its reuse (Figure 6.4). Many interesting projects accept the damaged character of a material and develop an aesthetic approach that embraces this. This is common with reused brick, old stone, old timber, so why not other materials.

image

Figure 6.3 This clay tile wall panel created by the Nordic Built Component Reuse project features the imperfections of the reused pantiles (see Chapter 4.1).

image

Figure 6.4 At the University of Toronto Scarborough Campus Student's Centre the old markings and brackets were left in place to identify the steel as reused.

Economic Flexibility

The economics of material reuse is complex. Many in the industry assume that it will be more expensive (particularly for larger projects), but the reality seems to be varied. It is important for the client to understand that projects that use reclaimed materials and components typically have a unique cost breakdown significantly different to a regular building project, as there are non-typical costs. But the overall costs need not be higher and can sometimes be lower. Some of the cost issues include:

  • The split between labour and materials is likely to be significantly different. Typically, materials costs go down, as reclaimed materials are often cheaper than new (except for special, heritage and unique items), but more labour is needed to process and prepare them. Since labour is generally expensive, keeping the extra costs under control is important.
  • There can be additional design team costs. This can be due to additional research, testing, sourcing and redesign to suit the project. Value-based fees, where fees are based on the time/effort/material put in by the designer, may be appropriate.
  • There is likely to be greater uncertainty over cost early in the process until key components are sourced and secured.
  • Deconstruction is generally more expensive and time consuming than demolition, but provides useful resources at the end of the process.
  • Transport, storage and double handling can add significantly to costs. For this reason local materials and components are often the most cost effective, except for specialist items. Additional handing and off-site storage can add considerably to costs. It is preferable to avoid moving material several times with the associated loading and storage costs. The highest savings often occur for projects that focus on reuse of what is already on site.
  • The cost plan should include sourcing, deconstruction, refurbishment, transport and testing/verification costs while remaining flexible to allow for market fluctuations in supply and demand.
  • Securing materials can require early purchase by the client directly, so establishing a budget structure that allows this is important. For example, as a designer–builder, tres birds workshop often has to directly purchase items that it may use on a future project. If the team waited for the right project to come along before purchasing, then many reclaimed items would no longer be available.
  • In some countries (such as the USA) a powerful tool to encourage deconstruction (and therefore reuse) are tax credits. If a building owner disposes of salvaged materials and components through a non-profit organization (such as Habitat for Humanity ReStores), it can claim tax credit for the resale value of the donation.

Knowledge Based

Many organizations that have successfully created a business model around designing with reclaimed materials and components have developed a knowledge base and built a database of locally available sources. Many of the pioneers (see Chapter 5) operate an open source policy as they see their work as opening up the market for more circular practices. Warranty and market confidence are significant issues for reuse and can prohibit interesting solutions and prevent creative reuse. Establishing a common knowledge base helps to grow confidence in this approach.

Building Information Models (BIM)

Building information modelling can be valuable tool both for work flow modelling and also for storing information about component characteristics (materials passports) for future reuse.

Processing, Transport and Storage

Processing, handling and storage can add significantly to cost. It is important for the client to understand that materials may have to be acquired early in the process (whenever available, for example from a demolition nearby) and this will necessitate storage. An appropriate location may be required (preferably on site). Careful planning and the involvement of the main contractor in this process can alleviate some of the drawbacks. Timing can be important; for instance, when to move materials so as not to double handle them. Transport may be an additional cost if it is determined that additional processing or storage is required away from the site. Again this requires coordination with the main contractor, or supplier, and can have a significant impact on costs. This highlights the importance of having the construction manager at the decision table.

6.2 Performance Issues

Performance is often mentioned as a concern or barrier to reuse. In this section various aspects of performance are discussed.

Codes and Standards

One of the major concerns about reuse revolves around their performance and acceptability for code compliance. However, codes and standards are often not an barrier, although they can lead to more work to demonstrate compliance, sometimes requiring alternative compliance paths. Most codes permit reclaimed materials and components if they can be shown to comply with the requirements and relevant standards. The emergence of performance or objective based codes makes it easier to develop innovative solutions and has helped to provide paths for acceptance of non-standard materials. There is often reasonable freedom given within such codes for designers to prove equivalency. However, problems sometimes occur when departing from the familiar prescriptive process. The alternative compliance process places the onus on the design team to prove equivalency and challenges building department officials leading to inconsistent interpretation and varying attitudes and requirements. From the designer's and client's point of view this can result in uncertainty about what may be required and can act as a deterrent to taking an alternative design approach. Some projects featuring reuse have involved building code officials in the project at an early stage so they have a good understanding of the project objectives.

In Europe there is concern about how the requirement for CE markings may become a barrier for some types of reuse. A CE marking indicates that the product meets all the legal requirements and can be sold throughout Europe. It is not currently clear how reused components should be dealt with by the CE system and it has been proposed to create an annex to standards EN 1090: 1 and 2 to address this.

Structural Performance

Clearly engineers will only be happy to specify used structural components if their characteristics can be established with confidence. This includes the physical, mechanical and chemical properties. Also, insurers will not be willing to accept materials where their performance is uncertain. Usually there is less of an issue if the structure remains in place, as with adaptive reuse, although strengthening and adapting to meet new code requirements for seismic or snow loads may be required. The situation becomes different when salvaged structural components are reused in a new building and for a different use. In that case there are a variety of guidelines for establishing structural performance, particularly for timber and steel, which are the most likely structural materials to be reuse.

For example, there are established procedures published by the Steel Construction Institute in the United Kingdom for identifying the characteristics of old steel.5 If the age of steel components is known and they can be inspected then a good estimate of structural characteristics can be made. Sometimes additional testing may be required. Portable non-destructive testing equipment to establish chemical and mechanical properties is available. From historical and dimensional information it is often possible to identify the codes and standards that were adopted in the original design, and thus to estimate the expected performance of the component. Additional safety factors are often used.

Without extensive damage, heavy timber generally has the mechanical and physical qualities that allow it to be reused in structural applications, but it will need inspection and grading, usually by an engineer. Also, old wood is dry and can have properties superior to current sawn products and has a desired heritage character (see Chapter 4.2). There are many examples of reuse of heavy timber components, such as in the CK Choi building on the University of British Columbia campus in Vancouver, Canada, where approximately 65% of the heavy timber structural components were salvaged from the Armouries Building nearby (Figure 6.5).

image

Figure 6.5 CK Choi building in Vancouver reused heavy timbers from locally dismantled buildings.

Due to the limited research on the properties of used lightweight timber there is some hesitance to reuse stick built framing lumber. Most codes do not allow uncertified or ungraded lumber to be used in structural applications in residential buildings. Although the material can be evaluated by a licenced grader or an engineer who can render the material to be suitable for use as a structural component, this is currently usually not economical. There are no established grading rules for stress grading reused framing timber.6 However, the US Forest Service has carried out research into structural applications of reclaimed lumber to investigate appropriate rules and guidelines for stick built lumber to be reused structurally (Box 6.1). When regrading, often a conservative approach is taken and the grade is considered one degree lower than that of freshly sawn lumber. This can be regardless of whether any significant damage is present. Davis suggests that it is most appropriate for reused framing timber to take loads in the same way as their original construction (compression members reused as columns and bending members reused as beams).7 A new web site created by the Building Materials Reuse Association provides useful resources for timber reuse (www.reusewood.org).

Precast concrete buildings could, in principle, sometimes be deconstructed for reuse, but many precast elements have a cast-in-place topping and connections to other structural elements. The in situ concrete makes it difficult to recover the original precast elements without damage.

So the suitability of reclaimed components for structural use currently needs to be considered on a case-by-case basis, dependent on the available information. Generally, the closer the new function is to the original the more likely it is that it can be structurally used. Also, standard components and sizes, and simplicity and flexibility in structural design approach, are likely to be helpful.

Thermal Performance

There is little information on reuse of reclaimed thermal insulation. Also, there is less interest in reusing old insulation products due to difficulty with getting sufficient volumes of high quality used insulation that is necessary for modern low carbon buildings, and because there are several viable alternatives available for new insulation materials that are made from waste materials. These include cellulose insulation that uses old newspapers, and cotton and wool insulation products that use old clothing and spare wool fleece. Nevertheless, some companies do offer reclaimed or left-over board insulation in volumes suitable for small projects.

The performance of reclaimed air-based insulation materials, such as glass fibre, mineral fibre and expanded polystyrene, is largely dependent on its physical condition. If it has been extracted from its previous use in a largely undamaged form it should function satisfactorily. However, some high performance foam insulation materials may degrade over time as the gases in their pores may leak out. Over a long period of time the performance of these maybe closer to the air-based insulants.

A few projects have experimented with using any material that traps air in small pockets as an insulation material. For example, the Waste House project (see Chapter 3.4.4) uses old cloths, packing beads and tooth brushes to fill wall cavities. Such methods are likely to provide a reduced insulation performance compared to established insulation products but may, nevertheless, be useful ways to use some discarded materials.

Durability

Sometimes it is assumed that used materials will not last as long as new materials. Concern about how well old materials will last, and their ability to maintain performance, need to be considered on a case-by-case basis. The long term performance of a component is a characteristic of its material properties, the way it is integrated into a building and the maintenance regime. Visual inspection and, if necessary, selective testing can establish if there are any concerns. As has been noted, some old materials, such as older timber components, can be of higher quality than what is currently available new. In fact, mechanical stiffness of older reclaimed solid wood products tends to be higher than their virgin counterparts because the wood has more time to dehydrate, if kept in a dry environment.8 Also, other components have additional heritage value that may justify reconditioning to improve durability and extend their life. Where and how a material or component was previously used is also significant. For example, damage of exterior cladding varies depending on which face (north, south, east, or west) of the building it was located.

Environmental Performance

One of the major reasons for reusing materials and components is the potential environmental benefits, which are generally regarded as greater than for recycling. Reuse can potentially reduce new resource extraction, save on embodied energy and carbon, and reduce waste. Various studies have demonstrated that there are environmental and economic benefits that favour a shift away from recycling to reuse. In the United Kingdom, the BRE showed that reused steel has only 4% of the CO2 emissions of new steel.10 The REBRICK project (see Chapter 4.3) claimed that each reused brick saves 0.5 kgCO2 emissions. A US Environmental Protection Agency study showed that waste reduction efforts resulting from reuse of components can generate energy and greenhouse gas emissions savings of over 60% greater than recycling.11

However, an uncoordinated supply chain can lead to higher costs and environmental impacts. Research also indicates that bottlenecks, such as limited supply of reused components due to insufficient deconstruction, lack of technical feasibility to reuse and limited market demand, can invert the situation.12Thus, there is a need to address barriers in the supply chain and increase knowledge of technical issues relevant to reuse. The designer's role in the process is important to reduce bottlenecks.

Life cycle assessment (LCA) is often used as a tool to quantify environmental benefits. LCA is a complex calculation process, which quantifies the inputs and outputs of a process or product, and assesses their environmental impact in a series of categories. The ISO 14040 series of standards was developed to provide an established framework and guideline to perform LCA studies.13 This is a complex process and there is some discussion about how to factor in recycling and reuse into LCA calculations, and where to set system boundaries for reused components. Furthermore, reused materials are usually localized but the data used in these calculations usually relies on industry averages, which may not truly reflect the local conditions. However, tools such as Athena Impact Estimator14 One Click LCA, Talley (a plug in to Revit) and the ICE materials database15 make it possible for design teams to carry out LCA calculations of building projects.

A simplified analysis can look at only energy and/or carbon emissions resulting from the supply process. Since there is a growing interest in reducing embodied carbon emissions, this type of calculation is more common and some designers are using embodied carbon analysis in their decision making, which makes reused components more attractive.

Contemporary questions around different aspects of scarcity in the built environment mean that this is a good time for architecture to embrace a new, materialist mode of practice.

(Jon Goodbun and Karin Jaschke16)

Materiality and Tectonics

Stewart Brand talks about buildings being pushed around by three irresistible forces – technology, money and fashion.17 To that we can also add the natural forces of the climate. Architecture, by nature, is susceptible to time: rust, rot, discolouring, mould. Brand also talks about ‘age’ (representing a presence of history) as being the single most loved characteristic of buildings – people prefer old buildings to such an extent that many building are designed to look artificially old. However, the marks and imperfections that reveal the history of materials in an old building are often not appreciated in a new building context. In new buildings we have an expectation of perfection for material surfaces and shapes; this reduces individuality and leads to loss of variety and material choice. Material characteristics, such as irregularity, discolouration and unevenness, can add beauty and character, both in a new building context as well as in old buildings. An aesthetic of reuse is beginning to emerge with emphasis on recognizing and exploiting the uniqueness of old materials. For example, Dan Phillips of Phoenix Commotion talks about using patterns and repetition to make imperfections desirable.

Architecture that uses technological parameters as a source of inspiration for design is described as tectonic in nature. Frampton describes tectonic architecture as a ‘poetic manifestation of structure…as an act of making and revealing.’18 The tectonics of reuse acknowledges different stages of the life of buildings, components and materials, and their changing nature over time. Hinte talks of a ‘building as a living thing/organism, constantly changing, growing, and degenerating, absorbing the superfluous.’19 The architecture of reuse recognizes that used materials and components have distinctive characteristics and does not hide the changing nature of these materials but expresses and celebrates it as a positive driver for architectural design. Reuse can become the generative idea to create an exciting and unique built environment that celebrates the imperfections and individuality of used materials (Figure 6.6). Thus, both matter and the means of making are made visible. This allows the user to take more pleasure in discovering a work of architecture and how it evolves.

image

Figure 6.6 This wall system was created by tres birds workshop for the TAXI project with a layer of sandblasted Plexiglass, 5-inch reclaimed PET bottle cylinders and a clear layer of Plexiglass.

6.3 Understanding Sources and Opportunities

To work in a circular economy, architects need to become familiar and comfortable with a new set of sources for the materials and components they design with. Innovative design based on availability can increase the chance for a high percentage of reuse being incorporated into projects. Some of the sources for second use materials that have commonly been used are discussed here. At the end of this section Figure 6.10 provides a matrix of sources used in the case studies discussed in Chapter 3.

Materials Present on the Site

Perhaps the easiest approach is to base a new design on the resources that are present on site. These can be whole buildings that are adapted, partial reuse of a structure (sometimes including foundations) or use of reclaimed components from deconstructing a previous building on the site. The design team needs to have the appropriate expertise to appraise the components that are available for suitability. The starting point is usually a survey of the building and an assessment of the available components.

The Mountain Equipment Coop has taken this approach for some of their recent stores in Canada, including in Ottawa (Figure 6.7) and Winnipeg. The site for its Ottawa store was previously occupied by a 40-year-old former grocery store. This building was not suitable for adaptive reuse but all the components were carefully dismantled and catalogued. The new building was designed around the available components from the old building, including using the old structural grid, footings and steel frame components. About 75% of the existing building was incorporated into the new building and the layout, aesthetics and performance of the new building were all influenced by the characteristics of the old components.

image

Figure 6.7 Mountain Equipment Coop store in Ottawa built with components from the previous building on the site.

Occasionally, other materials from the site can be used, including old industrial materials such as steel components, the earth available at the site, trees growing on or near the site or other agricultural waste such as straw from nearby. This is what was used at the Tysons Living Learning Centre (see Chapter 3.2.3).

Buildings Being Demolished Nearby

Looking further than the actual site, some designers find buildings that are at the end of their life and scheduled for demolition and come to an agreement with the demolition company and the owner for items that are of use to them to be extracted prior to destructive demolition. Lists of recent demolition permits and contacts with the demolition industry can facilitate this. In some cases it may be possible to deconstruct and relocate the entire structure for reassembly at the new site. This sometimes occurs with light industrial and warehouse buildings, but can also happen for other buildings. For example, the Roy Stibbs school (see Chapter 3.1.5) reused the steel structure from a dismantled school in a new location near Vancouver, BC. In other cases individual components can be extracted. Organizations such as tres birds workshop in Denver, CO, and Rotor in Belgium act as deconstructors–designers–builders and have the in-house expertise and resources to quickly strip a building of useful components when it becomes available.

Busby and Associates (now Perkins and Will Canada) used components from locally demolished warehouse buildings to provide many components for the new City of Vancouver Materials Testing Laboratory. Approximately three-quarters of the building's structure and fabric consists of salvaged and recycled materials, including heavy timber structural members, roof trusses, existing laboratory and mechanical equipment, light fixtures and furniture from buildings nearby (Figure 6.8).

image

Figure 6.8 The City of Vancouver Materials Testing Laboratory uses materials from local demolitions.

Before committing to particular components it is important to survey the building, examine the drawings (if possible) and inspect their condition to consider if an existing building is suitable for deconstruction and the components are suited for reuse.

Demolition Contractors

Some demolition contractors have marketing departments to gain additional value out of components that they deal with, and may even send out e-mail newsletters announcing what they will have available soon. The organizations described in Chapter 5 have all developed links with these contractors to help them connect with the construction salvage market.

Salvage Yards

Most local salvage yards will sell whatever they can find a market for. In the building sector this has mainly consisted of heritage components but if demand for other types of materials grows they may be able to provide a supply. Some specialist salvage yards collect heavy timber and steel components, interior components and others. Organizations such as Rotor DC are trying to build a market for a wider range of salvaged components. Habitat for Humanity ReStores can be a source for a variety of smaller components, such as windows, doors, kitchen units and ironmongery, mainly for small-scale projects.

Exchange and Sales Websites

Websites such as Craig's List and Kjiji often have construction materials and components, but in small amounts. For small projects these can be a suitable source. The digital age also makes this type of exchange easier to facilitate and a more general acceptance of purchasing from networks and Internet sources is making this form of exchange more common.

Databases of local and available reclaimed construction materials, with criteria that materials have to meet to get on the list, are springing up in various locations,and can help inform, educate and inspire developers, architects and clients alike. Such databases help break down some of the barriers to material reuse. Examples include opalis.be, seconduse.com and planetreuse.com.

Specialist Brokers

This is a new type of networking organization that works to find value in discarded materials. These ‘matchmakers’ have the skills necessary to recognize the potential of available waste and surplus materials, and understand the logistics of transport and refabrication to make such materials useful. They connect potential users of these resources with their current owners, saving them from landfill. This has helped to grow the market for reclaimed construction materials and components. Examples include Rotor in Belgium, the Scottish Materials Brokerage Service, Boston Building Resources Reuse Center and Planet Reuse in the USA. Their popularity is growing and they can also be hired to search out particular types of materials and components.

Architects need to understand these networks, which generally start as local enterprises but are now beginning to work at national level, sharing information about materials that are available. Their experience can reduce the risks of disruption or delay. Sometimes such organizations are hired as a consultant as part of the design team or as client advisors. They offer advice to the client and design team on the potential for reclaimed materials and disposal of materials on construction projects, and some can help source materials and provide quantified assessments of the potential reduction in environmental impact from using reclaimed materials.

Industrial Waste Streams

Some industrial waste streams provide useful materials that can be remanufactured or upcycled into construction products. Construction uses for industrial waste are demonstrated in several of the case studies in this book (see Chapter 3.4). This usually requires research into waste streams and creative thinking from the design team. For example, Superuse Studios demonstrated that timber from the centre of large waste cable reels, which are used to distribute large amounts of communication wires, are suited for use as cladding in a building. It developed a fixing system and an aesthetic, which it used in the Villa Welpeloo, based on these short timber lengths (see Chapter 5.4). Another example is the use of waste tyres by MooRoof in the PEEC (see Chapter 3.4.1).

Infrastructure Waste

Some large infrastructure projects use durable materials for short periods, for example as temporary structures, and often with little consideration for what they could be used for after the initial use ends. There is often considerable potential for these materials. The Big Dig project in Boston (see Chapter 3.4.2) is an example of this approach, using components from temporary highway bridges. Research into these projects and establishing contacts with the contractors involved is needed to make this happen. Another example is shipping containers, which have been used in a variety of building projects, including the Upcycle House in Denmark (see Chapter 5.3 and Figure 6.9).

image

Figure 6.9 Shipping containers used in the Upcycle House.

The Client's Other Building Resources

Clients with a large portfolio of buildings (for example universities, school boards, local municipalities, pension funds) may have several construction projects planned or in progress. One project may generate a stock of discarded elements that could be fed into other projects. In particular, interior elements of fit out projects can be reused in this way. For such clients it can be beneficial to develop a strategy and mechanism for identifying components that may have a future value and facilitating a mechanism to connect them to new projects or to store them. Careful scheduling is needed.

Reconditioned Goods Direct from Supplier

Some types of components may be returned to the supplier, reconditioned and resold, sometimes with a warranty and a similar specification. These include electrical and mechanical components, carpet tiles, furniture and acoustic ceiling panels. It is an area that is likely to expand into other sectors of the industry as interest in a circular economy grows. Sourcing such components has less effect on the process, as they are usually readily available and can be identified as a requirement in the specification.

image

Table 6.1 Matrix of sources for the case study buildings.

6.4 Decision Process

A review of the case study projects and practitioner experiences suggests that when choosing materials and components from the various sources, design teams need to consider the following questions:

  • What materials and components are available locally?
  • Is the volume sufficient for the project?
  • Are there any contamination risks?
  • What are the transport implications – how far is it coming?
  • Does it need reprocessing – where will this happen and what does it involve?
  • Does the timing work for supply when needed?
  • Is there a need for storage – where can it be stored on site?
  • What prototyping and testing is required?
  • Are there any code issues?
  • Are there any performance concerns – does it conform to the required performance standard?
  • What are the environmental benefits – can they be quantified?
  • What are the cost implications – relative capital cost, operating costs and whole life costs?
  • Does it help with achieving a credit in an environmental rating such as LEED, BREEAM or LBC?
  • What condition is it in – how long will it last, has its durability been reduced by previous use or the deconstruction process?
  • Are there more valuable uses available for this material/component?

6.5 Conclusion

Three nutrition groups exist in ecosystems: producers (plants), consumers (animals) and decomposers (bacteria). The third group of decomposers is critical as it links the circle by making waste from the other two into a valuable resource. Manufactured systems have typically focused on producers and consumers and relied on nature to absorb and deal with the wastes that result. Little effort has been made to consider decomposer (or end of life) processes within man made systems. This discards the value that is present in used resources and leads to a build-up of waste.

This observation can be used as a conceptual tool to reconfigure design practices and the processes that we use to create and manage our urban environment into new and different directions that confront the challenges facing us. As Jeremy Till, Jeanne Gang and others point out, the emerging conditions of scarcity are rich in possibilities for the design professions. Recognizing the challenges and opportunities facing architects Buckminster Fuller's called for a new kind of designer, a ‘synthesis of artist, inventor, mechanic, objective economist and evolutionary strategist’.20 This is what is needed to embrace the opportunities that the circular economy and material reuse offers. But beyond this we need to build an infrastructure that embeds circular systems into its core assumptions.

References

  1. 1 Till, J. (2014) Scarcity and agency. Journal of Architectural Education, 68(1), 9–11.
  2. 2 Simon, H.A. (1996) The Sciences of the Artificial, 3rd edn, MIT Press, Boston, MA.
  3. 3 Gang, J. (2010) The cook, the prospector, the nomad and their architect, in Re-inventing Construction (eds I. Ruby and A. Ruby ), Ruby Press, Berlin, pp. 163–174
  4. 4 Shuttleworth, K. (2015) Presentation at Embodied Carbon organized by the Association of Sustainable Building Products (ASBP), London, June 2015.
  5. 5 Bussell, M. (1997) Appraisal of Existing Iron and Steel Structures. SCI 138. The Steel Construction Institute, UK.
  6. 6 Falk, R.H. , DeVisser, D. , Standen, C. and Stansbury, D. (1999) Effect of damage on the grade yield of recycled lumber. Forest Products Journal, 49, 71–79.
  7. 7 Davis, J.B. (2012) Suitability of salvage timber in structural design. MEng thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (http://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/73782; last accessed 13 May 2017).
  8. 8 Falk, R.H. , Maul, D.G. , Cramer, S.M. et al. (2008) Engineering properties of Douglas Fir lumber reclaimed from deconstructed buildings. Research Paper FPL-RP-650, US Department of Agriculture, Forest Products Laboratory, Madison, WI.
  9. 9 Johnson, B. (2013) Blanc house: rewriting the structural genetics of stick framing with post-consumer based materials. Paper presented at R+R 2013 Reclaim and Remake International Symposium, Washington, DC.
  10. 10 BioRegional (2008) The Reclaimed Building Products Guide. Waste & Resources Action Programme, http://www.bioregional.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/WRAPReclaimedBuildingProducts_May08.pdf (last accessed 13 May 2017).
  11. 11 Ferland, H . (2006) Solid waste management and greenhouse gases: a life-cycle assessment of emissions and sinks, https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi/60000AVO.PDF?Dockey=60000AVO.PDF (last accessed 16 May 2017).
  12. 12 Geyer, R. , Jackson, T. and Clift, R. (2002) Economic and environmental comparison between recycling and reuse of structural steel sections. Proceedings of the IISI World Conference, Luxemburg, pp. 13–18.
  13. 13 ISO (2006) Environmental Management – Life Cycle Assessment – Principles and Framework. National Standards of Canada CAN/CSA-ISO 14040:06.
  14. 14 Athena, The Athena Impact Estimator for Buildings. Athena Sustainable Materials Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada. http://www.athenasmi.org/our-software-data/impact-estimator/ (last accessed 13 May 2017).
  15. 15 Circular Ecology , Embodied energy and carbon – The ICE database. Circular Ecology, Bristol, UK. http://www.circularecology.com/embodied-energy-and-carbon-footprint-database.html#.WIJmIFMrKUk (last accessed 13 May 2017).
  16. 16 Goodbun, J. and Jaschke, K. (2012) Architecture and relational resources: towards a new materialist practice, in Scarcity: Architecture in an Age of Depleting Resources (eds J. Goodbun , J. Till and D. Iossifova ), Architectural Design, John Wiley & Sons Ltd, Chichester, pp. 38–43.
  17. 17 Brand, S. (1995) How Buildings Learn – What Happens After They are Built, Penguin, New York.
  18. 18 Frampton, K. (2008) Rappel à L'Ordre: A case for the tectonic, in Architectural Theory: Volume II, An Anthology from 1871–2005 (eds H.F. Mallgrave and C. Contandriopoulos ). Blackwell Publishing, USA, pp. 565–571.
  19. 19 Hinte, E.V. Jongert, J. and Peeren, C. (eds) (2007) Superuse: Constructing New Architecture by Shortcutting Material Flows, 010 Publishers, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
  20. 20 Buckminster Fuller, R. (1963) Ideas and Integrities, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

Image Credits

Figure 6.1 Courtesy Steve Hall © Hedrich Blessing; figures 6.2, 6.4, 6.5, 6.7 & 6.10 Author; figure 6.3 Courtesy of Vandkunsten; figure 6.6 Courtesy of Brooks Freehill and Mike Moore of tres birds workshop; figure 6.8 By Martin Tessler, courtesy: Perkins+Will; figure 6.9 By Jesper Ray, courtesy of Lendager Group

..................Content has been hidden....................

You can't read the all page of ebook, please click here login for view all page.
Reset
3.147.89.47