By Jenn Taranto, Vice President, Sustainability, STO Building Group
As the construction and design industries continue to exert their influence in driving climate change, material circularity has emerged as one of the most promising strategies for reducing embodied carbon and waste. Yet despite growing interest, myths and misconceptions about circularity continue to hold back adoption, especially in commercial interiors, where short buildout cycles and complex logistics make it seem like a distant ideal.
The truth is that circularity is not only possible, but it’s already happening. From furniture reuse to carpet take-back programs to creative deconstruction efforts, our project teams are finding smart, scalable ways to keep materials in use longer. But to accelerate change, we need to bust a few persistent myths. Here are five of the most common and why they don’t hold up.
Myth #1: Circular materials are more expensive.
This is one of the most common misconceptions and it’s not entirely unfounded. Circularity can come with upfront costs like the labor to deconstruct or sort materials and fees for hauling to donation partners, but that’s only part of the picture.
Circular strategies often reduce overall project costs. Reuse programs eliminate the need for new material procurement. Deconstruction avoids dumpster and hauling fees. And many clients are more than willing to invest in high-quality reused materials if they support sustainability goals or sustainability reporting metrics.
In practice, successful circularity efforts align financial and environmental value. Take Teknion, whose Divert program often nets clients substantial savings compared to new procurement. Or DIRTT, whose modular wall systems can be relocated and reused without costly demolition. In both cases, the “expensive” assumption vanishes when you look at lifecycle cost.
The Takeaway: Circularity doesn’t always save money, but it doesn’t always cost more either. With enough time and planning, it can be cost-neutral or even cost-saving.
Myth #2: We don’t have the space or logistics for reuse.
Space constraints are real on active construction sites. So are tight timelines. Reuse often requires temporary storage for salvaged goods, coordination between trades, and a lot of proactive planning—but these are problems of execution, not feasibility.
Creative logistics make circularity possible, even on fast-paced interiors jobs. We’ve seen project teams stagger demo schedules to allow for salvage, use off-site storage containers for temporarily housed materials, or partner with local reuse organizations coordinate donation pickups.
In many cases, it’s not about having more space, it’s about better communication, careful logistics, and education. When owners, contractors, and design teams align early on what can be reused, when, and by whom, circularity becomes far easier to pull off, even in Class A office towers with limited loading dock time and no laydown area.
The Takeaway: The challenge isn’t space, it’s mindset.
Myth #3: All take-back programs are created equal.
It’s tempting to check a box when you see that a manufacturer offers a take-back program. But not all programs are truly circular. Some only offer downcycling. Others are so geographically limited that the emissions from hauling outweigh any benefit. And some, frankly, are more about marketing than meaningful impact.
We need to get better at asking hard questions:
- Is the take-back program actively used, or just theoretical?
- What happens to the material once it’s returned?
- Is it remanufactured, reused, or landfilled?
- Are there carbon savings, or just diversion stats?
The best programs provide transparency, third-party verification, and data clients can use in GHG (Greenhouse Gas) reporting. Interface’s ReEntry program, for example, not only reclaims carpet tile for recycling but also tracks volumes and outcomes. Others, like Shaw’s re[TURN] program have reclaimed and recycled nearly 1 billion pounds of post-consumer carpet, and not just new products. We recently piloted their scrap cut-off return program on a large campus project in Arkansas.
The Takeaway: If you want to be circular, don’t stop at the spec. Ask what happens next.
Myth #4: Nobody wants used stuff.
There’s a perception, especially among clients in high-end sectors like finance, law, and tech, that used materials are lower quality or incompatible with brand image. But today’s reuse ecosystem tells a different story.
Architects are incorporating reclaimed wood, salvaged stone, and vintage lighting as standout design features. Designers are creating sleek modern spaces from remanufactured furniture and repurposed millwork. Major corporations are publishing case studies on the carbon savings from circular fit-outs. Reuse is being rebranded from secondhand to circular.
More importantly, clients increasingly do want used materials, especially if it aligns with their sustainability goals. Circular fit-outs are a powerful way to
demonstrate climate leadership, reduce carbon, and tell a compelling story. When a project team delivers a space that diverts 90% of furniture from landfill, it becomes a reputational asset, not a compromise. Let’s stop calling it “used.” Let’s call it “already proven.”
The Takeaway: Reclaimed materials aren’t a downgrade. They can enhance design and signal sustainable leadership.
Myth #5: Circularity is someone else’s responsibility.
Here’s the myth hiding in plain sight: “Circularity is a design problem,” or “It’s up to the manufacturer,” or “We’d love to be circular, but the client didn’t ask for it.” The truth is that circularity requires collaboration, and we all have a role to play.
Designers can specify demountable systems and reusable products. Contractors can deconstruct instead of demolish. Owners can prioritize salvaged materials in RFPs. Brokers can guide clients toward reuse-friendly layouts. Manufacturers can make disassembly easier and offer credible take-back programs. When those parties work together circularity becomes far more achievable.
In our work across STO Building Group, we’ve seen how early integration makes all the difference. The most successful reuse efforts start in preconstruction, with coordinated pre-demo salvage assessments and stakeholder buy-in. By the time demolition begins, the team already knows what’s staying in circulation.
The Takeaway: Circularity isn’t a job title. It’s a team sport.
What’s next?
Material circularity isn’t a silver bullet, but it is a practical, impactful tool we have for reducing embodied carbon and construction waste. The built environment consumes half of all extracted materials globally and we can’t afford to treat those materials as disposable.
There was a time where these were real obstacles, but it’s time to stop letting outdated myths hold us back. Circularity doesn’t have to be expensive. It doesn’t require ideal conditions. It’s not the responsibility of just one stakeholder. It’s about rethinking what’s possible and remembering that the most sustainable material is often the one we already have.
We’re on the precipice of a future where “used” is celebrated, logistics are solved, and the question isn’t whether circularity works but how far we can take it.
About Jennifer Taranto
Jennifer Taranto is the Vice President of Sustainability at STO Building Group and a leading voice in sustainable construction practices. She is dedicated to helping clients and professionals alike achieve their sustainability goals.