海角视频

There is something elegantly simple about circular design.

It is the kind of logic we apply in our everyday lives 鈥� reusing containers, repurposing furniture, handing down clothes. And yet, in the building industry, we have long defaulted to a linear model: extract, build, demolish, landfill. We recycle, yes, but only at the margins. The core of our system still favors the new over the renewed.

Why did we not think of this before? The truth is, we did. We just did not act on it. We are used to doing things a certain way, and the inertia of tradition is powerful. But now, the urgency of climate change, the scarcity of resources, and the rising cost of construction demand a fundamental shift. Circular design is no longer a fringe idea. It has become a structural imperative.

The Structural engineer鈥檚 opportunity

As a structural engineer, I find this moment exhilarating. About 11-15% of global carbon emissions come from building materials and construction 鈥� primarily from cement production from concrete and from steel 鈥� which makes the buildings鈥� structure the majority contributor to embodied carbon emissions.

That means structural engineers have an outsized opportunity to reduce embodied carbon 鈥� especially when we reuse existing components. Reusing a beam, a column, or a foundation can bring its embodied carbon footprint close to zero.

In many ways, we have already been practicing circularity through adaptive reuse. We have renovated, retrofitted, and reimagined buildings for centuries. But circular design goes further. It asks us to think not just about preserving what is there but about designing for future disassembly and reuse. It is about designing buildings that can be taken apart and reassembled into something entirely new 鈥� just like Lego sets.

This is not just a technical challenge 鈥� it is a cultural one. It requires a shift in mindset, from permanence to adaptability, from ownership to stewardship. And it requires every actor in the built environment 鈥� engineers, architects, developers, policymakers, and manufacturers 鈥� to work in concert.

From demolition to disassembly

The shift from demolition to disassembly is both philosophical and practical. It challenges the very foundation of how we design and build. In a linear economy, buildings are designed for a single use, with little thought given to what happens at the end of their life. In a circular economy, buildings are designed as material banks 鈥� repositories of valuable components that can be recovered, reused, and reimagined.

This is not a new idea. In fact, many of the principles of circular design have been around for centuries in places like ancient Rome and Egypt where building components such as stones, block, marble columns, etc. were frequently reused from older buildings. What is new is the urgency 鈥� and the opportunity 鈥� to implement these principles at scale.

We are seeing this in projects around the world. In Europe, cities like London are leading the way with policies that prioritize reuse over demolition. In the U.S., cities like Portland, Palo Alto, San Antonio, Boulder, and San Francisco are experimenting with deconstruction ordinances. And in New York City, the Science Park and Research Campus (SPARC) Kips Bay project is setting a new precedent by requiring circular design principles in a major public development. At 海角视频, we have been advocating for circular design for many years. And now, we are seeing real momentum. The LAX Midfield Satellite Concourse South project, for example, is a remarkable example of modular construction. The building was also designed to be assembled, disassembled, moved, and reassembled elsewhere.

This is circularity realized 鈥� not just theorized. Additionally, consider our work on the Hudson鈥檚 site in Detroit where we have reused substructure from the previous building on site, and the adaptive reuse of historic buildings like the Book Tower and the Tammany Hall. These projects demonstrate that circular thinking can be applied at every scale, from foundations to fa莽ades to entire buildings. These projects are not just proof of concept 鈥� they are proof of possibility.

SPARC and the NYCEDC guidelines: A turning point

Perhaps the most exciting development is happening right here in New York City. The SPARC Kips Bay project, led by the NYC Economic Development Corporation (NYCEDC), is the first public project in the United States where we are implementing circular principles from demolition through construction as it is explicitly required by NYCEDC.

The NYCEDC鈥檚 Circular Design and Construction Guidelines are a bold step forward. They call for design teams to conduct a complete site audit of the existing buildings at the project location in order to create a database of existing components, and when designing the new buildings, assess the possibility to reuse and consider the full lifecycle of materials, including planning for disassembly. This is not just about sustainability 鈥� it is about resilience, equity, and long-term value. It is this intersection of public agencies, policy and design innovation that holds the key to driving meaningful change in the building industry together.

As one of the first projects to implement NYCEDC鈥檚 guidelines, the team is focused on embedding regenerative strategies into SPARC in order to advance a resilient, low-carbon future for New York鈥檚 life sciences ecosystem.

Sarah Sachs, 海角视频 partner and Mid-Atlantic region lead and the Project Principal on the SPARC project.

Circular design challenges the notion that buildings are static, finite objects. Instead, it invites us to see them as dynamic systems 鈥� assemblies of parts that can evolve, adapt, and be reborn.

The missing link: A materials reuse database

One of the most critical enablers of circular design is something deceptively simple: information. Specifically, we need a centralized, accessible, and dynamic database of materials available for reuse.

Imagine a digital marketplace where structural steel, timber, fa莽ade panels, and mechanical systems from deconstructed buildings are cataloged, tested, and made available for new projects. This would transform demolition sites into resource banks. It would allow architects and engineers to design with existing materials in mind, rather than defaulting to new resources.

Right now, this kind of system does not exist at scale. The supply chain for reclaimed materials is fragmented, opaque, and inconsistent. Contractors often do not know what is available. Designers do not know what is viable. And clients do not know what is possible.

Creating a robust materials reuse database would require collaboration across the entire industry. It would require demolition contractors to document and report what materials are being removed. It would require testing agencies to certify the performance of reclaimed components. It would require digital platforms to aggregate and share this data in real time. And it would require designers to integrate this information into their workflows from the very beginning.

Some early efforts are already underway. Material passports 鈥� digital records that track the origin, composition, and lifecycle of building components 鈥� are gaining traction in Europe. Blockchain is being explored as a tool for ensuring traceability and trust. And a growing number of startups are building platforms to connect supply and demand for reclaimed materials.

But we need more. We need public investment, private innovation, and regulatory support. We need to treat material data as infrastructure 鈥� just as essential as roads, utilities, or broadband. Because without it, circular design will remain an aspiration rather than becoming a reality.

Designing for disassembly

Of course, circular design is not just about what happens at the end of a building鈥檚 life. It is about how we design from the start. Designing for disassembly means thinking about how components can be taken apart without damage. It means using mechanical fasteners instead of adhesives, modular systems instead of monolithic ones, and reversible connections instead of permanent bonds. It means documenting how things go together 鈥� and how they can come apart.

This approach opens new possibilities for creativity. It allows buildings to evolve over time, to be reconfigured as needs change, and to be relocated rather than demolished. It also creates opportunities for new business models and supply chains 鈥� leasing materials instead of selling them, offering take-back programs, or designing buildings as service platforms. But it also requires new skills, new tools, and new ways of thinking. It challenges the conventions of architectural detailing, structural engineering, and construction sequencing. And it demands a level of foresight and coordination that is still emerging in the industry.

Policy, codes, and cultural shifts

One of the biggest barriers to circular design is not technical 鈥� it is regulatory. Building codes, permitting processes, and insurance requirements are often written with linear assumptions in mind. They favor new materials, standardized products, and conventional methods. They rarely account for the performance of reclaimed components, or the nuances of disassembly.

To change this, we need policy reform. We need codes that recognize and reward reuse. We need permitting processes that support innovation. And we need incentives 鈥� financial, regulatory, and reputational 鈥� that make circular design the default rather than the exception.

We also need a cultural shift. In many parts of the industry, there is still a stigma attached to reused materials. They are seen as risky, inferior, or unprofessional. We need to change that narrative. We need to celebrate the beauty, history, and character of reclaimed components. We need to tell stories about buildings that have lived many lives 鈥� and are better for it.

Material health and transparency

Circular design also intersects with another critical issue: material health. As we reuse and repurpose materials, we must also ensure that they are safe, non-toxic, and environmentally responsible.

This is especially important in communities that have historically borne the brunt of environmental injustice. Circular design, when done thoughtfully, can help address these inequities by reducing exposure to harmful substances and minimizing waste in vulnerable neighborhoods.

Transparency is key. At 海角视频, we have partnered with Mindful Materials to promote transparency in building products. We need to know what is in our materials, how they were made, and what their long-term impacts might be. That is why initiatives like Mindful Materials, the Healthy Materials Lab, and the are so important. They provide frameworks for evaluating and disclosing material health 鈥� and for integrating that information into design decisions.

In a circular economy, transparency is not optional. It is foundational.

A call to courage and creativity

Ultimately, circular design is about courage and creativity. It asks us to break from convention, to question assumptions, and to imagine new possibilities. It is not just a technical challenge 鈥� it is a cultural one.

As engineers and architects, we are stewards of the built environment. We have a responsibility to design not just for today, but for tomorrow 鈥� and for the generations that will inherit what we build. Circular design gives us a framework to do that. It is not a trend. It is a return to common sense.

It is also a return to joy. There is something deeply satisfying about designing a building that can evolve, adapt, and live many lives. There is something poetic about seeing a beam from one project become the backbone of another. And there is something powerful about knowing that our work can be regenerative, not extractive.

Closing thought

What excites me most about this moment is that we are finally aligning our values with our actions. Circular design is no longer a distant ideal. It is happening 鈥� on job sites, in city halls, and around design tables. And it is only just beginning. We have the tools. We have the knowledge. What we need now is the will. Let us reassemble the future 鈥� one beam, one building, one bold idea at a time.

This article was originally published in on November 3, 2025.