Is there actually a standard understanding of what circular economy is?
On the one hand, there is the natural cycle that already exists from nature - in other words, a renewable raw material is used, weathers, and a new one grows out of it. From a technical point of view, it is more complex: A raw material that does not grow again must be recovered at the end of its life cycle and then reintroduced into the cycle. Many companies have already developed initial solutions here. But the big question for many is how to recover the raw material. This is a complex matter.
But what is particularly important to me in this context is that, since everyone brings expertise to the table, we have to pull together here. None of us has done this before and we learn together by doing. We have to make experiences together, both positive and negative, and then we can also optimize together.
A frequent argument in this context is often affordability. How can the cost factor be reduced, or are these additional costs at all?
Since buildings can become very old, we are actually building for eternity. In the end, it's also a question of consideration: Where does the calculation start if you assume that these products will last a lifetime? A building can also be seen as a kind of material store. We are talking about planetary boundaries - we have to deal with what we find. And the things that have been built are already won. When these are reused, the question of costs arises in a whole new way when you factor in the fact that energy and resource costs are tending to rise further in the coming years. In other words, the materials that are used are not only raw materials, but also energy sources. This offers enormous potential for companies and planners.
Some companies and experts are calling for legal requirements. Do you think that will make a difference?
To get change going, you need support from all sides. We are running out of time. We all have to get moving. There are already many options - at least in Germany - for example, in terms of taxation. Why do I have to tax a material I've already taxed at the same rate again?
In the matter of recovery, too, the argument is repeatedly put forward that this is not worthwhile at all, that it is just an expense. The new raw material is still the cheaper one. In my view, something has to happen here. This will bring about a rapid development and release innovative power among companies and planners. At the moment, we don't have to do that at all. It never ceases to amaze me how calmly the industry behaves. My advice: We need to shift up a gear and also support the politicians in finding regulations and specifications.
Watch the expert video below (German with auto-translated subtitles)