Riley Weissenborn
1
Reuse Warehouses: Recycled Building Materials Making Their Way
into Everyday Life
A study of how the efforts of reuse centers affect the communities in which they reside, as well as
how much progress their efforts are making in regards to waste diversion and sustainability.
February 22, 2011
Riley Weissenborn
University of California, San Diego
Urban Studies and Planning Program
USP 187
Email: rweissenborn@yahoo.com
Abstract
Throughout the United States, and most of the world, the realization of the need to reduce waste
and increase recycling efforts has never been more apparent. The new and emerging idea of
recycling and reusing building materials instead of newly manufactured materials is beginning to
take hold across the United States. This study examines one of the most effective and influential
reuse systems in regards to recycled building materials: reuse warehouses. The purpose of this
study is twofold: 1) to show the effectiveness of waste diversion through reuse warehouses and
2) to show the additional opportunities reuse warehouses provide as a result of their operations.
These two arguments will be supported through the analysis of two case studies. Evidence for
this study was collected through interviews with facility managers and personal observations.
This study shows that not only do reuse warehouses divert large amounts of waste, but also
provide other opportunities such as being licensed places for recycling, offer deconstruction and
hauling services, and donate time and money for charitable causes.
Key Terms: reuse warehouse, building materials, recycle, sustainability, waste diversion
Introduction
With the rising need to reduce the use of virgin resources, as well as the need for the
encouragement of recycling programs, many ideas and goals have been established to try and
solve these problems. However, in a day and age where sustainable living practices are
Riley Weissenborn
2
romanticized, little is being done to actually obtain these goals on a larger scale. But there are
some bright spots. Over the last decade, reuse warehouses have been solidifying their position in
the recycle world as one of the best avenues for recycle and reuse efforts. Not only do reuse
warehouses provide an environmental service to the community and country, but they also
impact their communities through positive and negative social, political and economical effects
as well. The establishment and extreme progress of reuse warehouses in the United States
appears to be making steps in the right direction in regards to addressing the issues of reduce,
reuse, and recycle.
Reuse warehouses are places that sell recycled, salvaged and donated building materials
at reduced prices, often times 30-70% less than that of the normal cost of new materials
(CalRecycle, 2010). Recycled buildings materials include a wide variety of items such as wood
beams, bricks, roof shingles, doors, and sinks. These recycled materials mostly come from
construction, renovation, deconstruction, and demolition sites, but can also come from anyone
who is donating usable building materials. One reason for which material waste and landfill
usage is at an all time high is because of the waste and dumping practices stemming from these
construction and demolition sites. With about 40% of annual waste in the United States, as well
as worldwide, stemming from construction and demolition, it is becoming ever more apparent
that places such as reuse warehouses become standard practice in waste diversion (CalRecycle,
2010). One study conducted in Florida looked at which forms of recycling (material recycle, byproduct use, and adaptive reuse) were most efficient for specific types of construction and
demolition materials, as well as which materials had the highest recycling benefit. What they
concluded was that adaptive reuse was most effective, especially with products such as wood,
Riley Weissenborn
3
concrete and metals (Brown 2003). This study is one of many that solidifies the important role
that material reuse plays in our society.
Findings from the study showed that different goals and styles of operation of different
reuse warehouses still yield a substantial impact in diverting construction and demolition waste.
However, reuse warehouses will not reach their full potential until more awareness is brought to
the forefront of businesses and individuals alike. The intent of this study is to analyze the ways in
which two reuse warehouses interact with and affect the communities in which they reside. This
study also aims to analyze how effective reuse warehouses are in the United States and how
much progress they are making in regards to sustainability. By looking at the ways reuse
warehouses interact with the community and environment, we may better be able to understand
and accommodate specific types and sizes of warehouses depending on location (rural, suburban,
or urban), size of city, and need of specific materials and services.
Literature Review
As the growing world continues to look to answer the questions of sustainability and increasing
waste production, possible solutions are becoming more apparent as time goes on. From mass
transit options to solar and wind energy, new technologies are trying to make an impact in
energy and resource reduction. However, a new and exciting area of recycling and reusing are
emerging with the implementation of reuse warehouses. Reuse warehouses are just another
option in trying to encourage recycling and the reuse of materials, as well as do their part to
prevent landfills from filling up.
Although the issues of massive amounts of waste and overflowing landfills have begun to
garner some attention over the years, dealing with waste production and disposal as always been
Riley Weissenborn
4
a problem throughout history. Strasser (1999) notes that civilizations have been creating ways to
handle trash and waste disposal for centuries. In the city of Pompeii, “visitors can see the
remains of stepping stones in the pavement that kept citizens clean from the garbage filled streets
as the maneuvered their way through the city” (Strasser 1999, 16). Another ancient site that
displayed waste disposal measures was the city of Knossos, Greece. Here, remains are left of
what used to be drains and other disposal strategies throughout the streets and buildings. Farmers
even created smaller dumps on their properties that were filled with unused pottery, glass and
other materials (Strasser 1999).
Over the course of time, civilizations and countries began to understand the importance
of reuse and recycling. Strasser points out that the process of extracting new materials,
distribution, and reuse of materials was once cyclical, if not almost perfectly so. She goes on to
argue that waste products were a vital part of economic growth, in that they provided raw
materials for many other industrial processes. However, toward the end of the nineteenth century
in the United States, separation between disposal and production began to occur, thus
transforming America’s relation to waste (Strasser 1999, 17). Lastly, Strasser notes that the
evolution of trash and trash making became an integral part of the American economy when the
markets for new products began springing up. These new markets relied on the rapid disposal of
old products, thus resulting in a new way of life in which new was best and out of date was
looked down upon.
Many sources and studies show that one of the major contributors to overcrowding and
use of landfills throughout much of the developed world comes from construction and
demolition sites. Because of situations such as these and the dire need to curb wasted space of
landfills, recycling and reusing of these building materials tends to be one of the main solutions
Riley Weissenborn
5
to try and divert construction and demolition waste. A study done in 2001 in Hong Kong showed
that 38% of its landfill usage came from construction and demolition waste. In order to try and
alleviate this issue, recycling and reuse practices were suggested. The study noted three positive
outcomes that would result from recycling: (1) reduce the demand upon new resources; (2) cut
down on transport and production energy costs; and (3) use waste which would otherwise be lost
to landfill sites (Tam, 2006). These three factors from recycling will be recurring themes
throughout case studies on the topic.
Another study done in Hong Kong, China also addresses the issue of construction and
demolition waste, however in a different manner. They too agree that construction and
demolition waste is one of the major contributors to overflowing landfills. This study however
focuses solely on the sorting of construction and demolition waste on site. By doing so, reusable
materials are saved from entering landfills and are able to be reused. This study provides
different alternatives for sorting and recycling different materials, based on whether the site is a
construction or demolition site, as well as how congested the area is in which the work is being
performed. What the study found was that different alternatives worked best with different
scenarios, however widespread use of sorting waste will not be implemented in Hong Kong
unless dumping fees increase drastically or nationally mandated laws are passed that force sites
to sort their materials (Poon, 2001). This is just one study that not only shows the potential
economic inefficiencies of sorting waste, but also shows the struggle that begins so early in the
process of recycling and reusing building materials from construction and demolition sites.
A study done in Sweden measured the amount of energy that would be saved through
recycling or reusing of construction and demolition materials. Results showed that an increase of
energy and virgin resource savings would range from 20-40%, which would provide enough
Riley Weissenborn
6
alternate energy to annually heat 180,000-220,000 single family homes (Thormark, 2001). The
study goes on to note that although the findings are promising, this is only one study. Many more
studies on recycling and reusing of building materials need to be performed in order to best
understand the most effective recycling procedures for the future. If new products are to be made
of scarce materials, then they must be able to be recycled and reused in the future in order to be
able to preserve them as long as possible.
Another study done in Sweden analyzed the environmental impacts of a building that was
built with a large proportion of reused materials, compared to the same building if it were built
with brand new materials. What the study found was that the environmental impact of the
building was 55% less than if it were to have been built with all new materials (Thormark, 2000).
Most of the reused materials were brick and roof tiles, which account for a large majority of
demolition waste. The study goes on to argue that reusing materials has its limitations. If the cost
in energy and resources of transporting reusable materials outweighs the production of new
materials, then it is not economically or environmentally efficient to transport the materials. This
issue of lengthy transport of reusable materials can be a hindrance in the application of reusable
materials; however the strategic placement of reuse warehouses can cut out lengthy
transportation by having stations in accessible locations to virtually every construction site.
Through practices such as reusing recycled building materials in the construction or
renovation of homes, the term green buildings begins to enter the picture. Yudelson (2009)
describes green buildings as having the following characteristics: a building that considers and
reduces its impact on the environment and human health, using considerable less water and
energy than conventional buildings, and accounts for some measure of the life cycle impact of
Riley Weissenborn
7
building materials (Yudelson 2009, 19). The book goes on to mention that the reuse of building
materials helps accomplish each of these aspects.
Another term that is now being applied to the process of reusing building materials is that
of smart growth. Smart growth, as defined by Benedict and McMahon (2002), is growth that
enhances our quality of life. In other words, development that is economically sound,
environmentally friendly and supportive of community livability (Benedict & McMahon 2002).
The result of reusing materials mirrors the same aspects that smart growth is based off of. Hamin
(2007) builds off of these ideas by saying that reuse can save developers up to 40% on
construction costs, and that by utilizing recycled materials; a community can keep older more
historic materials that provide a sense of community and historic value (Hamin, 2007) . Hamin
also argues that by using recycled building materials, we as a community can reduce the waste of
new resources while building new affordable homes for those who need it; therefore coming
closer to creating a more efficient closed-loop cycle of recycling resources and materials.
Even though these ideas and studies provide ample support and verification of the
possibilities and outcomes of reusing recycled materials, there are still some challenges and
drawbacks that occur during this process. Challenges and hidden costs may result from issues
such as testing building materials for toxic chemical, asbestos or mold (Calkins 2009), or with
problems regarding lengthy deconstruction time and higher cost for workers (Integrated Waste
management Board 2001). Although these seem like minor issues, they can large deterrents of
contractors or demolition teams. When demolition can take a couple days to clear a house,
deconstruction and preservation of potential recyclable materials can take up to a couple weeks.
Although there is no literature to be found that directly studies reuse warehouses and their
impact on the environment and community, all of the scholarly research gathered for the
Riley Weissenborn
8
literature review touches on different aspects of reuse warehouses and the goals they strive to
achieve. Reusing and recycling materials has become one of the front runners of dealing with
waste in many countries around the world. By diverting waste from landfills and reducing the
need and use of virgin resources, reuse continues to show vast improvements and results over
many other forms of recycling and sustainable practices. Through analyzing two very different
reuse warehouses and the way the operate, this project will bring to life the dynamics that occur
between reuse warehouses and the communities they reside in, as well as the over arching impact
that they have on the environment.
Methodology
Although there is an abundance of literature regarding the use of recycled building materials and
the extremely promising outcomes of such uses, very little information is available directly
addressing reuse warehouse themselves. Due to this lack of information, data and archival
analysis of information regarding reuse warehouses is impossible, so alternate means of
gathering information is required. There are two main areas that the information gathered for this
study will address. The information gathered will address: 1) the positive steps and progress
made within the United States in dealing with construction and demolition waste, through the
small scope of the two case studies performed, and 2) the effectiveness of waste diversion and
additional opportunities provided by reuse warehouses.
The first area of information that is addressed is the positive steps and progress made
within San Diego and California in dealing with construction and demolition waste. In order to
recover information regarding these issues, an interview was conducted with San Diego
Environmentalist Specialist Chelsea Klaseus. She was able to provide information that was
Riley Weissenborn
9
seemingly unobtainable via the internet. Topics discussed in the interview included state waste
production, number of reuse warehouses in the state, and amount of waste produced by
construction and demolition, also known as C&D waste. Information provided by Klaseus
allowed for a better understanding as to known quantities of waste produced, as well as the
positive progress being made within the state in order to divert C&D waste from entering
landfills.
The second area of information addresses the effectiveness of waste diversion and
additional opportunities provided by reuse warehouses. With zero case studies previously done,
absolutely no information was available to analyze reuse warehouses. This study then had to rely
on performing its own case studies in order to obtain the vital information needed to look at the
ways in which different reuse warehouses operate, as well as their impact on the environment
and community. The two sites for the case studies were chosen for two main reasons. The first is
that the two sites selected are located in different states, Houston, Texas and San Diego,
California. By examining reuse warehouses in different states, it allows the study to be relevant
on a more national scale rather than focusing on a specific region or state. Second, the two reuse
warehouses selected represent very different models of operating a reuse warehouse. This will
provide the study with views of different operation styles, various forms of funding in order to
run the reuse warehouses, and the different groups that get access to these materials being
collected, and how this all affects the overall success of a reuse warehouse.
The case studies that were performed in Houston and San Diego relied on two types of
information sources: interviews and personal observations. Interviews provided a bulk of the
information for this study, while observations lent a personal and objective view of reuse
warehouses that interviews cannot provide. Observations were only performed for the San Diego
Riley Weissenborn
10
site; due to the fact that it was the only site close enough to perform such a task. Observations of
the San Diego site were performed in order to get a better understanding as to the types and
quality of materials offered, as well as the organization and size of the reuse warehouse. Such
observations provide the study with more accurate detail than an interview can provide.
One interview with the warehouse manager of each case study was performed for this
project. The first was with Michael Huesca, manager of the Habitat for Humanity ReStore in San
Diego. The second interview was with Keith Koski, manager of the ReUse Warehouse in
Houston, Texas. Interviews involving the two warehouse managers provided adequate
information as to how the warehouses were operated. Personal observations were only performed
at one site, Habitat for Humanity Restore in San Diego, solely because of the short distance of
travel. Information provided from both interviews and observations allowed for a better
understanding as to how the two different reuse warehouses operate, and also provide insight as
to the potential that reuse warehouses have in diverting C&D waste from landfills.
Research Findings
Through performing case studies, and more importantly through interviews, this study aims to
show two very different styles of reuse warehouses, and the opportunities they provide for the
environment and community, in order to serve as templates for struggling or newly acquired
reuse warehouses. Not only will these findings cover the two main types of reuse warehouses,
but findings from an interview with an environmental specialist will also shed light as to the
waste production in San Diego, as well as steps the state is making to address issues of recycling
and reusing building materials. Hopefully, these findings will provide a platform upon which
knowledge and understanding will coincide with action and teamwork, in order to tackle the
growing problems of waste that seem to plague not only the United States, but most of the world
Riley Weissenborn
11
as well. Additionally, below is a briefly synthesized table showing the study’s findings in order
to better conceptualize the analysis of the study. These findings will be discussed more
thoroughly throughout this section.
Warehouse size
Waste diverted over last
calendar year
Funding source for
operation of warehouse
Customers who can access
materials
Additional services and
opportunities provided
Habitat for Humanity
Restore: San Diego, CA
17,000 square feet
23,000 tons
Reuse Warehouse:
Houston, TX
6,000 square feet
300 tons
Revenue from sales
Start-up grant from
Houston/Galveston Area
Council
Anyone who wishes to pay for Only non-profit organizations,
and use recycled building
and they get the materials at
materials
no cost
- Certified recycling center
- Educate the public by
- 87% of sales revenue goes
holding recycling and reuse
to building affordable housing events and presentations
for low income families
- Work with other reuse and
- Cost of materials are 40recycle facilities by taking
60% of retail cost
materials off each other’s
- 85% of work done by
hands
volunteers
- Performs outreach
presentations with reuse and
deconstruction minded
architects, contractors and
deconstruction appraisers
Before diving into the two case studies, it is important to understand the state in which
California is currently in, in regards to construction and demolition (C&D) waste production, as
well as what steps the state has begun to take in order to try and divert C&D waste from entering
landfills. An interview was performed with Chelsea Klaseus, San Diego Environmental
Specialist, in order to gain further knowledge on this topic. One of the most staggering pieces of
information received from this interview was the amount of waste produced in 2009 by
California. The study showed that 30.6 million tons of waste was produced by California, with
22%, or 6.7 million tons, of that waste coming from construction and demolition (Klaseus 2011).
Riley Weissenborn
12
With California tending to lead the country in recycling and environmental efforts, it is
astonishing to see that little emphasis is being put on reuse warehouses and the possibilities they
can offer.
Although there are over forty reuse warehouse in California and another eighty or so
businesses that handle recycling of cement, gravel and metal, there is still an extremely large
amount of C&D waste entering landfills that can potentially be diverted (Klaseues 2011).
Klaseus argues that this happens because we as a society, and more importantly construction and
demolition companies, have not fully grasped the importance and necessity of recycling and
reusing materials. Before institutions such as reuse warehouse and concrete recycling centers can
truly take off and make an impact in reducing C&D waste from entering landfills, we must fully
comprehend the extreme benefit of recycling. Once we achieve this level of understanding, then
reuse warehouses and recycling centers will play a pivotal role in our daily lives.
Even with such a low recycling rate of C&D waste, California, as well as the United
States, is making a conscious effort to try and change the direction in their current recycling
practices. The United States Green Building Council is putting pressure on states to regulate
building and recycling practices within the construction and demolition industries. This pressure
has caused California to enact C&D Ordinances, with the main ordinance stating that all
construction and demolition sites must recycle 50% of their waste from each project (Klaseus
2011). Another key point of progress is occurring via environmental non-profits spreading the
word about the many benefits that occur through recycling and reusing of materials and
resources (Klaseus 2011). As small of steps as they may seem, these are important and vital steps
needed to continue in the direction of education and implementation of healthy recycling and
reuse practices. Now that there is an understanding as to the steps and progress California has
Riley Weissenborn
13
made in the realm of recycling and reusing C&D waste, we can now explore the two case studies
of reuse warehouses, and analyze the importance and impact that derive from two very different
models.
Habitat for Humanity Restore, San Diego, CA
The first reuse warehouse this study will look at will be that of the Habitat for Humanity
Restore in San Diego, California. On January 7, 2011, an interview of Restore manager Michael
Huesca was performed on site. Not only did this onsite interview provide ample information as
to the operations of this warehouse, but it also provided first hand observations as to the set up of
the warehouse as well as the types of products they offered.
The Habitat for Humanity (HFH) Restore is one of only two reuse warehouses in San
Diego; however it is one of 798 Habitat for Humanity Restores across the country. The Habitat
for Humanity Restores makes up more than half of the reuse warehouses in the country, making
them the most successful and sought after reuse warehouses in the United States (Huesca, 2011).
The San Diego Restore sits right in the middle of all the HFH warehouses as far as size and
materials sold. Standing at a modest 17,000 square feet, the San Diego Restore marks the
minimum size that a newly constructed or renovated warehouse will start at, because it has
proven to be the most efficient starting size as far as housing, sorting, and distributing materials
is concerned (Huesca 2011). This is not to say that already existing warehouses that are smaller
than 17,000 square feet are not efficient, but that the fact that they are smaller inhibits the
amount of materials they can obtain and store at any given time.
The main reason for the success of HFH Restores stems from two key aspects of their
daily operation: 1) the way in which they obtain, sort, and manage recycled building materials
and 2) how they handle and distribute profits made from sales of materials. By mastering these
Riley Weissenborn
14
two areas, HFH Restores have managed to become the most efficient and copied system in the
United States. Although amounts percentages may vary between each restore, this overview of
how the San Diego Restore operates mirrors the same technique and system that every HFH
restore uses in the country.
The first step to the success of HFH Restores is how and where they get their materials
for resale. Almost 80% of all their materials come from donation (Huesca 2011). Many sources
of donation include hotels that renovate their rooms, reusable materials from the deconstruction
and demolition of houses, small donations from residents of the community, and unused
materials for construction sites. These materials either get donated directly from the user or get
picked up by Restore workers personally. The remaining 20% of their materials come from the
restore purchasing new materials from wholesale retailers that are trying to get rid of last year’s
inventory (Huesca 2011). This not only provides customers with the opportunity to buy brand
new materials at a fraction of the cost, but it also provides the Restore with another avenue to
make a profit. Although the Restore takes in a large amount of materials daily, not everything
can be sold, largely based on the condition the materials are in. In order to deal with the unusable
materials they receive, the San Diego Restore has a green bin to handle all the “waste” they
produce. This waste is not actually waste however, and consists primarily of materials that
cannot be used or sold by the public or Restore, but can still be recycled and reused in other
ways. The waste produced by the Restore then gets sent to a recycling plant where it is sorted,
recycled and reused, thus continuing the prevention of recyclable materials ending up in
landfills. Between July 2009 and June 2010, the San Diego Restore managed to divert over 3,000
tons of “waste” from landfills via the green bin (Huesca 2011). Not only do they recycle their
own waste, but the City of San Diego has licensed them as a certified recycler, which allows
Riley Weissenborn
15
residents to come directly to their site and dispose of recyclable materials in their green bin,
materials that may not necessarily be eligible in the blue bins they have at home, but materials
that can still be recycled nonetheless (Huesca 2011). The green bin on site provides yet another
example as to how the San Diego Restore, and many other HFH Restores across the U.S., help
manage and divert recyclable materials from entering landfills, as well as continue the process of
reusing perfectly good materials.
Once the materials have been sorted and deemed worthy for resale, they are put out for
all of the public to purchase. These products encompass any and every household material,
ranging from products such as roofing, tile floors, cabinets, couches, doors, windows, and
kitchen appliances. In order to be successful and attract customers, the cost must be cheap
enough to make it worthwhile for customers to buy used materials. All HFH Restores sell their
products at 40-60% of retail price, making slightly used materials in good condition a steal for
prospective buyers (Huesca 2011). Not only is the price of the materials much cheaper than
brand new materials and saves customers money, but by buying used products we are decreasing
the consumption of new products which puts a strain on an already limited supply of virgin
resources. Between July 2009 and June 2010, The San Diego Restore sold $956,000 in building
materials, which equates to diverting over 20,000 tons of materials from entering landfills
(Huesca 2011). What really makes the HFH Restores a great establishment for the community is
how and where they allocate their profits from sales of recycled materials.
Not only do HFH Restores greatly improve the environment through the prevention of
reusable materials entering landfills as well as the decreased use of new products, but they also
give back by funneling their profits back into the community in which they reside. HFH Restores
take 87% of their profits and put them directly into building low income affordable housing for
Riley Weissenborn
16
the community (Huesca 2011). By doing so, HFH is able to provide cheap safe housing for those
who need it most. This process makes HFH one of the largest organizations that provide low
income housing in the United States (Huesca 2011). The way HFH is able to provide so much
money for building homes is because of a low operation costs. With 85% of all work done by
volunteers, HFH only has to spend 13% of its profit on operation costs, providing an ample
amount of spending to be allocated solely for the building of low income homes (Huesca 2011).
This system of low operations costs and high donation rates is one to be looked at as a model for
all independent reuse warehouses throughout the country.
Not only did was a tremendous amount of information gathered from the interview with
San Diego Restore Manager Michael Huesca, but by conducting the interview on site also
allowed for personal observations as well. It is important for the success of a reuse warehouse to
appear clean and organized, because the common misconception is that reused and recycled
materials products are unclean and not as good in quality compared to new materials. In order to
dispel this misconception, reuse warehouses must be visually presentable and organized; so that
customers are assured that they are not walking into a garage sale type atmosphere. Through my
observations of the Restore in San Diego, I found that it presented its products in a manner so
that it is easy to navigate through the store without feeling congested or dirty. All materials
appeared to be clean and of good quality, making it easier for customers to feel comfortable and
confident when searching for specific products. By being able to see firsthand how the Restore
was set up as well as the quality and quantity of products offered, it is easy to see why HFH
Restores have been so successful in selling used and recycled products.
This case study of one of the most successful and efficient models of reuse warehouses
allow anyone to realize how important they are to the environment as well as the community.
Riley Weissenborn
17
Not only do they divert an enormous amount of waste from entering landfills per year as well as
a decrease in usage of virgin materials, but they also provide a much needed service in building
low income housing for a vastly underrepresented and overlooked portion of the community.
Through environmental and communal consciousness, HFH Restores are doing more than their
share of taking care of the places in which we live.
City of Houston Reuse Warehouse, Houston, TX
The second reuse warehouse this study will analyze is the Reuse Warehouse of Houston,
Texas. This reuse warehouse differs quite significantly compared to that of the Habitat for
Humanity Restore previously mentioned. Information for this case study was gathered via phone
interview with warehouse manager Keith Koski, on January 18, 2011. Due to the extreme
distance from San Diego, a site visit and personal observations are not available, however videos
provided by the reuse warehouse are available online to get an idea as to how the warehouse is
set up and organized. The interview with Koski provides knowledge as to a completely different
way reuse warehouses can be managed and utilized, yet just as effective at diverting C&D waste
and providing services to the community around them.
With the Houston Reuse Warehouse (HRW) coming in at a much smaller 6,000 square
feet compared to the 17,000 square foot warehouse of the HFH Restore, it is easy to assume that
they would divert much less C&D waste. Although this is true, with the HRW diverting 300 tons
over the last calendar year, this is not the main aspect that separates them from the HFH Restore.
The two main aspects of the HRW that make them so different, yet so unique and successful,
reside in the way the warehouse is funded and who gets to access the materials the warehouse
collects (Koski 2011). This case study will focus on these two defining aspects and why they
Riley Weissenborn
18
make the warehouse so successful, as well as the many different opportunities and partnerships
they provide for the city of Houston.
Unlike the Habitat for Humanity Restore, the Houston Reuse Warehouse does not rely on
profit from sales in order to maintain and run the warehouse itself. In fact, the HRW does not sell
any of its materials at all. Every single piece of material that leaves the HRW is provided free of
charge to non-profit organizations in Houston, allowing any non-profit to take as little or as
much material as they want (Koski 2011). Koski explained that the reason behind this method of
distribution is that non-profits have a much harder time funding projects and obtaining enough
materials for what they want to accomplish. They are currently managing to give away 79% of
everything they take in, with that percentage increasing slowly. The remaining 21% of materials
not given away just since in the warehouse until someone finds a use or need for it. Since they do
not sell or give material to the general public, they have to be selective about the materials they
take in, or else they will get stuck with unwanted materials (Koski 2011). Koski states that, “One
advantage of giving material to non-profit organizations exclusively is the attention paid by artist
organizations, both performing and visual. We make artists aware of materials difficult for us to
get rid of; with many artists doing their best to reuse these materials in imaginative ways in their
projects”. With the HRW being one of a handful of reuse warehouses in the country that
provides its materials for free solely to non-profits, it not only creates a unique and innovative
way to handle used and recycled building materials, but it also makes it a lot easier for the reuse
warehouse to ensure that materials get reused rather then enter landfills.
With the Houston Reuse Warehouse giving away all of their materials for free to nonprofits, they cannot rely on a profit stream to support and maintain the production of their
warehouse. Instead, the HRW received a start up grant from the Houston/Galveston Area
Riley Weissenborn
19
Council to fund the operation and management of the warehouse. The grant was given to HRW
because the city of Houston, and neighboring Galveston, do not own a landfill and must pay
tipping fees for every container it dumps (Koski 2011). For this reason, private citizens help save
themselves and the city an expense by bringing material to warehouse. Koski also added, “We
live by using a building that was abandoned, by being thrifty, by providing services that
significantly benefit the public economically and environmentally, and by deriving revenue
through recycling when possible (metal, cardboard, paper)”. Through city grants, money saving
practices and low budget costs, the Houston Reuse Warehouse is able to operate effectively,
despite being without any sales revenue stream.
Even though the Houston Reuse Warehouse’s crowning achievements are that they are
able to operate without any sales revenue to speak of, and that 100% of their materials goes
straight to non-profits, they have still managed to set quite the precedent when it comes to
working with their community. In order to continue educating the public on methods of
recycling, the HRW allows non-profit organizations to hold recycling and reuse events, as well
as have HRW representatives give presentations to groups (Koski 2011). Not only do they
provide educational opportunities, but they also collaborate with other reuse facilities and
recycling centers in an effort to take materials of each other’s hands that tend to be more difficult
than other materials to get rid of. Some of these additional facilities include sorted broken glass
recycling, Habitat for Humanity Restores, and Houston Environmental Service Centers (Koski
2011). Lastly, and one of the more important functions when attempting to reuse and recycle
building materials, HRW also does outreach presentations with reuse and deconstruction minded
architects, contractors, and deconstruction appraisers (Koski 2011). This is very important
because in order to save and reuse building materials, the deconstruction process must be
Riley Weissenborn
20
implemented so that perfectly usable materials do not get destroyed via demolition. All of these
additional services and opportunities provided by the HRW shows that this group is dedicated to
educating and serving the community, in an economically and environmentally conscious way.
This case study of a very unique but very successful reuse warehouse shows that different
sizes of facilities and methods of operation can still make a significant impact in the diversion of
construction and demolition waste. This reuse warehouse however is not only defined by the
amount of waste diverted from landfills, but is also defined by the many additional services and
opportunities it provides to the community. Through the cooperation with the residents of
Houston, as well as with many other organizations and recycling facilities, the Houston Reuse
Warehouse shows us that a small facility can make just as big of an impact on the community
compared to any other reuse warehouse in the country.
Conclusion
With rising rates of waste within the construction and demolition industries, a greater demand on
landfill space and virgin resources occur as a result. Not only is construction and demolition
waste filling up landfills when a majority of its contents can be reused and recycled, but through
this process we are encouraging the cradle to grave mentality, when in reality we should be
encouraging a thought process of reuse, reduce, and recycle. Many small recycling programs rise
and fall with limited success, however the continual successes of reuse warehouses remains the
most promising system or reuse and recycle. Through partnerships with construction and
demolition companies, other recycling organizations, and the public, reuse warehouses have
begun to put a significant dent in diverting C&D waste, all the while encouraging the reuse of
materials and the saving of virgin resources.
Riley Weissenborn
21
Through this study, we are able to take a glimpse at two very different reuse warehouses
and the way in which they operate their facility and cooperate with their community. Although
no system is perfect, and few negative effects of reuse warehouse will occur, many more positive
effects will result that enhance and enrich both the community and the environment in contact
with reuse warehouses. Case studies of both reuse warehouses shows that an exact equation of
size, operation technique, and revenue stream is not pertinent to the success of a reuse
warehouse, and that any combination of the three will most likely result in a successful facility.
Results from this study, as well as further research on the topic of reuse warehouses and
their benefits, can be applied to a broader, more global level as well. With a significant amount
of influence the United States has on the world in regards to starting trends and standards, setting
the bar with having one of the most efficient and successful recycling programs through the use
of reuse warehouses could pay huge environmental dividends for the world as a whole. Not only
would greatly improving the United States’ environmental and physical health be a huge benefit
and selling point for other countries, but stimulating the economy through reuse warehouses
would be a result as well. By reducing waste and dependency on virgin resources, other countries
could then be less dependent on outside resources, and more focused on resources and business
within their own boundaries.
Although this study shows the wondrous possibilities that reuse warehouses can offer,
they are still not being used enough, nor at maximum capacity. In order for widespread use of
reuse warehouses, both in the donation of materials as well as the reuse of materials donated, to
occur, stark awareness and policies regarding recycling and reusing of C&D materials must
come into effect. Before reuse warehouses can operate at their maximum potential, C&D
companies as well as the public must fully grasp the importance and necessity that recycling and
Riley Weissenborn
reusing means to the overall economic and environmental health of our country. This study is
just one example as to the pivotal role reuse warehouses can play in the revitalization of our
nation’s economic and environmental well being, only if given the proper opportunity and
patience that it deserves.
22
Riley Weissenborn
23
Bibliography
Benedict, Mark A. and Edward T. McMahon. “Green Infrastructure: Smart Conservation
for the 21st Century.” Renewable Resources Journal 20 (2000) 12-17.
Brown. M.T. and Voransun Buranakarn. “Emergy Indices and Ratios for Sustainable
Material Cycles and Recycle Options.” Resources, Conservation and Recycling
38 (2003) 1-22.
Cal Recycle. “Reuse, The Heart of Waste Prevention.” Site accessed November 8, 2010.
http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/Reuse/.
Calkins, Meg. Materials for Sustainable Sites - A Complete Guide to the Evaluation,
Selection, and Use of Sustainable Construction Materials. New Jersey: John
Wiley & Sons, 2009.
Hamin, Elisabeth, Priscilla Geigis, Linda Silka. Preserving and Enhancing Communities:
A Guide for Citizens, Planners, and Policymakers. United States of America:
University of Massachusetts Press, 2007.
Huesca, Michael. Interview by author. San Diego, CA, 7 January 2011.
Integrated Waste Management Board. Deconstruction Training Manual Waste
Management Reuse and Recycling at Mather Field. Sacramento, Publications
Clearinghouse, 2001.
Klaseus, Chelsea. Interview by author. San Diego, CA, 24 January 2011.
Koski, Keith. Interview by author. Phone interview. 18 January 2011.
Poon, C.S., Ann T.W. Yu, L.H. Ng. “On-Site Sorting of Construction and Demolition Waste in
Hong Kong.” Resources, Conservation and Recycling 32 (2001) 157-172.
Strasser, Susan. Waste and Want: A Social History of Trash. New York: Henry Holt &
Riley Weissenborn
Company, 1999.
Tam, Vivian Y.M. and C.M. Tam. “Evaluations of Existing Waste Recycling Methods: A
Hong Kong Study.” Building and Environment 41 (2006) 1649-1660.
Thormark, C. “Conservation of Energy and Natural Resources by Recycling Building
Waste.” Conservation and Recycling 33 (2001) 113-130.
Thormark, C. “Environmental Analysis of a Building With Reused Building Materials.”
International Journal of Low Energy and Sustainable Buildings 1 (2000).
Yudelson, Jerry. Green Building Through Integrated Design. New York: McGraw-Hill,
2009.
24