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