A non-toxic circular economy—an economic system where materials are continuously reused and recycled as inputs rather than discarded as waste—fundamentally depends on non-toxic materials. This is because the circular economy is in continuous circulation, meaning toxic chemicals will remain in the system and contaminate non-toxic materials. It’s not only the circular economy that gets contaminated by toxic materials, we do too.
Not everything should be recirculated within the circular economy. There are materials (toxic ones!) that are not good candidates for circularity. Toxic products harm those involved at every stage of the supply chain and throughout the product’s entire life cycle– from workers who manufacture and install toxic products to the occupants of buildings where the toxins persist in the indoor environment. Known carcinogens, such as radon and benzene, can pollute indoor environments– Americans are estimated to spend upwards of 90% of their time indoors and are likely exposed to these chemicals daily.
Even before these toxic chemicals leach into the indoor environment, they can cause health issues to communities tasked with manufacturing. There is research detailing that People of Color, low-wage communities, and children are disproportionately affected, both in terms of health and economic burden. Our building product supply chain is very much an issue of equity.
Creating a “business as usual” that prioritizes healthy material inputs is the only way to have a successful circular economy that protects human health and regenerates nature. What sustains us should not also harm us. Lucky for us, there are solutions. But first, let’s take a look at some toxic materials.
While there are many toxic materials, for the purposes of this blog we will only be discussing a few. There are databases and resources available to help consumers better understand which materials are toxic, and which may be better options.
Plastics:
While fossil-fuel based plastics have been revolutionary, they are also a point of particular concern. Plastics made from fossil fuels are the poster children of pollution in the linear economy. Single-use plastics, such as plastic bags and food wrappers, account for 40% of annual plastic production, and every year around 20-25 tons of plastic waste enters aquatic ecosystems– lakes, rivers, and seas– globally. In 2019, plastics generated 3.4% of the world’s total greenhouse gas emissions, a number that is expected to triple by 2060.
Researchers are beginning to uncover the true health risks associated with plastics, including endocrine disruption and metabolic disorders. Microplastics– very small plastic particles– can accumulate in the body through contaminated food, water, and air, causing detrimental health effects. Synthetic fabrics, such as polyester and nylon, are actually the leading source of microplastic pollution, releasing microplastics during washing. Natural textiles like cotton and linen do not shed microplastics– they’re made out of natural fibers!
Click here to learn about how the Ellen MacArthur Foundation is redesigning the future of fashion!
Plastics can take hundreds of years to break down, meaning a single-use plastic product often persists as waste far longer than it was ever used. Less than 30% of plastic bottles are recycled in the US, and the ones that are generally are “downcycled,” meaning they are recycled into a lower quality product which is more difficult to recycle again. In the circular economy, the aim is to keep products at their highest use for as long as possible.
The building and construction sector is the second highest-use plastic consumer in the world– surpassed only by the packaging sector– and accounts for 17% of total global plastic production. Flooring, insulation, paint, pipes, and sliding are all common plastic uses in our built environment. Utilizing plastic alternatives in the packaging industry and built environment that are biodegradable, or reusable/recyclable (remember, not “downcyclable”), will be key. Bioplastics (keep an eye out for ReImagine Appalachia’s report on bioplastics) and natural materials, such as timber, hemp, clay, mycelium, algae, underutilized biomass, and wool, can be utilized in both the built environment and packaging industry.
“Red List” Chemicals:
Living Future, a nonprofit organization dedicated to creating regenerative buildings and materials, has a variety of certifications, one of which is called the Living Building Challenge. Through this program, Living Future has created an intuitive tool known as the Red List, which details the “worst in class” chemicals posing a serious risk to human and environmental health. The Red List is the gold standard for non-toxic building products. There are safer alternatives to these chemicals, many of which are unnecessary to begin with. There is also a “Watch List” to signal that certain chemicals and compound groups will potentially be included in future iterations of the Red List, and graduate to “Priority List” if they are intended to be added to the “Red List.”
The Red List is organized by Chemical Class. Individual chemicals are identified by Chemical Abstract Registry Number (CASRN).
A Few Examples of Red List Chemical Classes or Lists:
- Chlorofluorcarbons (CFCs) and hydrochlorofluorcarbons (HCFCs) commonly used as refrigerants and foam blowing agents– 171 chemicals on the Red List; 2 chemicals on the Priority List; zero on the Watch List
- Formaldehyde commonly used as a resin to adhere pressed-wood products like plywood and particleboard– 33 chemicals on the Red List; 1,121 chemicals on the Priority List; 1 chemical on the Watch List
- Per- and Polyfluorinated Alkyl Substances (PFAS) commonly found in a wide range of products due to their heat, water, and stain resistance– 10,785 chemicals on the Red List; 31 chemicals on the Priority List; 0 on the Watch List
- Toxic Heavy Metals can be found in paints, plumbing, and insulation, especially in older buildings– 353 chemicals on the Red List; 0 on the Priority List; 3 on the Watch List
To review the entire Red List, click here to download the tool.
PFAS (aka “Forever Chemicals”):
Learn more here: https://kingcounty.gov/en/dept/dnrp/waste-services/hazardous-waste-program/news-events/news/2024-12-12-pfas-explained
Notice that the Red List has over 10,500 PFAS listed– that’s a lot! These are synthetic, manufactured chemicals used in numerous building and consumer products such as paints and coatings, carpets, furniture, nonstick cookware, waterproof clothing, and much more. PFAS are used for their durable properties, and because they are resistant to a range of substances, including water, and can resist heat and grease. PFAS are dubbed “forever chemicals” because they don’t break down very easily, meaning they can hang around environment for a very long time.
The good news is that there are alternatives to PFAS and research continuing to find new ways forward. By breaking PFAS use down into three main categories – nonessential, substitutable, and essential– we can systematically address the PFAS problem.
What can we do?
A truly regenerative circular economy must be toxic-free by design; we cannot begin thinking about circularity when a product is at the end-of-life– we must design for circularity from the start. For instance, articles of clothing with a blend of natural and synthetic materials are nearly impossible to recycle because the different fabrics become difficult to separate. However, designers can avoid this challenge by designing clothing with 100% natural fibers instead of synthetic blends. Thinking critically about the entire lifecycle of a product during the design process is key to a successful circular economy.
This concept, along with other circular choices, can be applied to all sorts of scenarios–
- Opting for mycelium packaging products (like this one) instead of plastics made from fossil fuels.
- Using connections like bolts, screws, or nails in construction instead of non-removable chemical connections like glues or welding to more easily facilitate deconstruction.
- Designing modular electronic devices with replaceable parts so that when something breaks it can be easily fixed
- Creating durable products, bolstering the second hand and/or reuse market (Patagonia Worn Wear is an example of this in the fashion industry)
Upcycling and repurposing—while often applied to products not originally designed for reuse—can be effective ways to extend the life of materials and keep them in use. The ReUse Corridor is launching a space designed for upcycling, creativity, and community collaboration in Huntington, WV: the Community Re-Makerspace. By 2027, the Community Re-Makerspace will allow users to transform would-be waste materials into new products through woodworking, plastic upcycling, 3D printing, sewing, and crafting.
In the built environment, designing for circularity is often referred to as designing for deconstruction. Designing for deconstruction is a circular, closed-loop concept that calls for products to be designed in such a way that they can be easily taken apart and reused.
Certifications like Cradle to Cradle Certified®, the Living Building Challenge and the Living Product Challenge– both of which come out of Living Future and utilize the Red List– and LEED v.5 all encourage circularity. The International Organization for Standardization (ISO), an international nonprofit organization developing “best practices” guidance and standards, has ISO 59004:2024 specifically designed to foster a shift towards a circular economy.
Habitable, formerly Healthy Building Network, has been working since 2000 to reimagine the materials economy through three focus pillars: pollution reduction; climate change mitigation; equity and justice. Habitable offers product guidance through the Informed™ Tool and chemical guidance through Pharos to help consumers choose healthier building products.
Health Product Declarations (HPDs) are transparency documents that evaluate and report building materials’ product chemistry. Through the HPD Open Standard, product manufacturers can communicate the content and health impacts of building products through the standard’s rigorously defined specifications. This creates accurate, reliable, and consistent reporting throughout the industry.
If you find this interesting, I highly recommend checking out the book Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the Way We Make Things by William McDonough and Michael Braungart.