Shifting the Focus from Salvage to Reuse
By Ted Reiff
Recently I was invited by Canyon Construction to speak at a meeting of the Green Remodeler's Guild (www.build-green.org). My topic was -- surprise, surprise -- the donation of building materials and homeowner tax benefits through deconstruction, salvage and materials reuse.
Patrick Hayes, from the City of Oakland, and Jamie Christensen, an independent appraiser, preceded me at the podium and Ed Young of Canyon Construction followed. Patrick explained some of the newer technologies in deconstruction, including the recycling of materials that used to be landfilled, a pneumatic denailer, and a mobile planer that also removes lead paint in an environmentally safe manner. Jamie addressed the tax benefits of salvaging and donating used building materials and the application of those benefits to any size job, from a bathroom remodel to a complete building deconstruction. Ed did the wrap-up, summarizing two actual jobs -- a full deconstruction and a partial one, complete with salvage and recycling diversion statistics.
My presentation focused on three topics: 1) the difference between reuse and recycling; 2) the economic and environmental benefits of deconstruction and building materials salvage, regardless of the size of the project; and 3) the ultimate destination of salvaged materials. This article addresses the third topic.
Not only has TRP been a pioneer in deconstruction and building-materials salvage, we have also developed a nonprofit business model that encourages these practices by making reuse the focus. There are two keys to this model:
1. Being clear about the mission. In TRP's case, the mission is to divert salvaged building materials from the solid waste stream and distribute them for reuse.
2. A knowledge of markets, market demands, and physical distribution (unitizing, warehousing, transportation, and breaking-bulk).
Without a focus on reuse, the financial and environmental utility of deconstruction is greatly reduced. Many nonprofit organizations have entered the deconstruction trades and have been recipients of donated building materials (I know of at least 5 in California alone), but to my knowledge only TRP has solved the problem of distribution.
To keep materials out of landfills is a noble cause. However, if those materials simply sit in a warehouse or yard taking up space, the primary purpose of solid waste diversion (saving resources) remains unrealized. How many times have you heard about contractors saving and storing perfectly good materials only to throw them away at a later date because of weather-damage or insufficient storage space? The shopper looking for a door still ends up buying a new one while a perfectly good used door sits in Sacramento, Boulder, Seattle or Tucson gathering dust (or termites).
Which brings us back to the second '"key" mentioned above: market knowledge and physical distribution, crucial steps in completing the cycle that begins with materials salvage and donation. TRP has solved the problem of distribution in California and is in the process of rolling out its model on a regional basis.
Don't let anyone fool you, this is not strictly a local problem. It has regional, national and international impact. It is often impossible to reuse locally all materials salvaged in a given locale. So while we may laud ourselves for salvaging something, the issue is greater than salvage, it is distribution and reuse.
|
