Beyond Net Zero: MEP designs and circular economy
For a building to be truly sustainable, it must be considered in the whole - the whole design and construction of the building, throughout its whole life - including its demolition. All parts of a building have individual value that often extends beyond the building's lifespan - which is where circular economy and reuse strategies come in.
Global material consumption is expected to double in the next 35 years, and 10% of global resource extraction (i.e. 9.6 billion tonnes) accounts for iron, aluminium, copper and other non-ferrous metals. Responsible use of resources that have already been mined and are currently in use is critical to sustainable development.
This is an extended version of an article originally published in our Beyond Net Zero whitepaper in April 2025. To read the full whitepaper, click here.
A resource-hungry industry
MEP systems and equipment rely fundamentally on an increasingly stretched global supply chain for metals and minerals, typically accounting for up to a third of a building’s embodied carbon, so we collaborated with the University of Cambridge’s Centre for Sustainable Development to conduct a deep dive into the resilience of the building services industry supply chain, with a particular focus on the circular economy.
Using a market survey of major manufacturers’ circular approach to production, raw materials sourcing, product design, and end of life options, we asked:
- Is it possible to reduce the upfront carbon impact of MEP systems through the retention, repair, or reuse of existing systems?
- Which MEP elements offer realistic potential for refurbishment/reuse, with higher rates of technological development and shorter replacement cycles in a building’s lifespan?
- What is the circular offering from the supply chain?
Research findings: lots of room for improvement
Among the mainstream manufacturers contacted for the study, we found none that actively offered repair, refurbishment, or guidance on extending the service life of equipment. The primary route available to clients is to recycle equipment at its end-of-life. If components are to be re-used, the responsibility for testing compliance and performance risk is passed to main contractors or installers. Unsurprisingly, the supply chain is reluctant to engage with the warrantying process, citing unknown product lifecycles and condition exposure.
The research highlighted the following electrical elements where the supply chain is actively engaged in offering circular solutions:
- Electrical cabling (usually recycled for copper): modular cabling systems offer opportunities for repair
- Cable trays (usually recycled for steel): establishing the quality of installation and fixing details enables opportunities for re-use. Our Skyscanner project provides an example
- Lighting: certain models of LEDs and illuminated escape signs lend themselves to circular principles with a component-based design. This allows for replacement of parts and facilitates refurbishment
Our project experience
Our project experience shows that circular economy repair and re-use principles can be readily embraced. However, it requires active management of product data throughout its use as well as commitment from the project team at early design stages to establish suitable procurement pathways.
The Passivhaus EnerPHit certified deep retrofit of The Entopia Building in Cambridge championed efficiency of resource use, as well as operational energy performance. Through rigorous testing, surveys and acceptance of risk by the main contractor, the scheme reused generators, electrical sub-mains, principal drainage stacks, lightning protection, and refurbished the existing lift cars.
Image Carousel
Total of 2 images
As part of our circular economy strategy for the Entopia Building in Cambridge, we found ways to reuse original MEP equipment from the building. These included elements of the generator systems, shown above.
On one of our major retrofit schemes, the Rylands Building in Manchester, over 600 existing LED spotlights were disassembled, cleaned, and re-assembled as per BS8887-221, with new electrical components including new LED, CASAMBI drivers and track adapters for reuse. Organisations such as Recolight are offering a service to match donors with recipients for LED luminaires. We have used these services in a retrofit project to recover more than 60 LED lamps for reuse elsewhere.
Our manifesto for change
For us, the path is obvious. We need to:
- Question the current default position to scrap and recycle all MEP equipment, and instead engage with the supply chain to enable reuse on-site/off-site. The current scale of primary production of aluminium is extremely high to meet demand, and aluminium is already a highly recycled product, a process which contributes to carbon emissions, albeit lower than primary production
- Design leaner services, specify longer service-life products, and select products that lend themselves to deconstruction, for example clip-on cable trays and lighting where components can be upgraded or replaced
- Encourage the insurance sector to engage with manufacturers and create mechanisms for robust extended warranties, allowing the recovery of equipment at end-of-life
- Collaborate with manufacturers to offer improved product designs for repair and refurbishment
To assist a meaningful shift in the industry, the insurance sector must work with manufacturers to provide robust extended warranty mechanisms to allow end-of-life equipment recovery efforts. By creating mechanisms to refurbish products for a longer service life, manufacturers would not only minimise the carbon impact of their products, but more importantly the wider socio-environmental impacts from material extraction and manufacturing.
Our experience on projects has shown that it is possible to bring MEP repair and re-use into the mainstream. The more we question, design, and encourage, the more this will become a standard approach that is better for our industry and for the planet.