Carbon, economics, and labor: a case study of deconstruction’s relative costs and benefits compared to demolition

Abstract

The authors formed a collaborative working group with the “specific aim to investigate the circular potentials of the local built environment by researching and proposing methods for material reuse and recycling, reversible construction, reactivating embodied values, creating green jobs, and reinventing the underlying business models of construction.” Seeking to demonstrate deconstruction as an alternative to demolition, the group found a collection of 11 residential structures from the year 1910 that were planned for demolition. The group was able to convince the developer to deconstruct – instead of demolish – one of the structures. Over the course of five days in January 2022, a crew of up to eight workers methodically carved the 420 square meter, 13-bedroom structure into sections from top to bottom. Data was collected during this process on material quantities successfully salvaged from the structure in relation to its total mass, the associated carbon savings the salvage of these materials indicate, their resale value, and labor time and costs required to both remove and process these materials for resale. The results of the study show an increase in carbon savings and sequestration through deconstruction and reuse when compared to demolition, but increased labor and economic costs. However, the resale of materials significantly discounts a significant portion of the cost of the deconstruction, and as capacity and knowledge is built in the local reuse ecosystem the authors believe deconstruction can reach parity with demolition in the future.