Circular architecture needs material passports

In our ongoing series of opinion pieces, Rachel Hoolahan explains the pressing case for material passports

If we want to have a future world, we must embrace circularity. If we want to embrace circular architecture, material reuse is essential. And, if we want to embrace material reuse, I believe that material passports are vital.

The construction industry is currently facing two critical challenges. Firstly, we need to stop emitting carbon (and other harmful pollutants). Secondly, we need to slow down the extraction of natural resources. The simplest solution for both problems is to just stop building and live with the spaces that already exist.

But this isn’t the right answer either – we need spaces and places for our populations to thrive in an equitable way, and much of our current building stock just isn’t up to scratch. Therefore, the only alternative is to stop using new materials – or at the very least limit their use.

We are increasingly seeing project teams reusing as much of existing buildings as much as possible. Generally, a substantial amount of the original structure is retained. But any materials that must be removed from site as part of the demolition process ordinarily end up in a downcycling loop. Imagine if we could just carefully deconstruct the building and reuse the materials, either as they are, or with a light refurbishment?

In today’s industry, this is a seemingly impossible task. It’s considerably more expensive to deconstruct rather than demolish, and the materials typically haven’t been designed for deconstruction, often being glued together so it’s almost impossible to pull them apart without damaging something. It’s also perceived as a very risky business to take a material that you frankly know nothing about and install it ‘as new’ elsewhere.

A material passport is, as the name suggests, an identity document for construction materials. The basic idea is that if you have access to useful information, such as the original specification and life history of an element, you have a better chance of deciding if it has a future life or not. Most of the research work to date has focused on developing the concept for new materials, but at Orms we believe that we need to go beyond this and find a way to safely reuse the materials that are already in existence.

When we launched our research in 2021, we hoped that it would spark some conversations and inspire others to join the effort. We didn’t expect the level of interest and sheer quantity of offers of support that followed – from all corners of the industry, and increasingly, all corners of the world.

In 2022, we launched a material passport working group. The aim is to bring together the testing, thinking and debate, and to truly collaborate as an industry. Slowly, we’re starting to make meaningful progress as a collective and encourage others to join the chorus of voices advocating for material reuse and finding a way to make it happen.

Our role as architects is to identify and maximise the potential that each building opportunity presents. We must reflect on our current built environment, particularly the buildings that are not suitable for reuse, so we can truly understand how to design for circularity and carry this wisdom on to our future work. As custodians of our built environment, our sphere of influence is enormous – and we must choose to use it wisely.

Rachel Hoolahan is an associate at Orms, a Member Plus practice of the LSA Practice Network