Incessant growth is set to place intense pressure on our cities existing infrastructural systems and resources, drive increased carbon emissions, and have an enormous impact on world climate. Buildings consume water and electricity and leave a significant carbon footprint— <rt-red> so do the acts of construction and extraction of construction materials. In fact, buildings account for one-third of global energy consumption. The construction industry needs to rise to the occasion and embrace frameworks that can endure the test of time. <rt-red>

We are at a point of time where sustainable growth is not just an idea. We need concerted and urgent action. But how do we ensure that our cities grow sustainably and our buildings reduce their carbon footprint incrementally ? Is 'building green' the solution, or are there credible alternatives?

There is a realization that the act of building a new, though undoubtedly a driver, is not a prerequisite for socio-economic development. A building's life-cycle is conventionally viewed as being linear. Most buildings are demolished after 80-100 years of use, sometimes even sooner, to pave the way for newer developments; construction materials and components are hardly ever recycled or reused. <rt-red> If we begin to understand the building life-cycle as a closed loop where the building itself and all its parts lend themselves to being traded in cycles—being recycled, refurbished, and reused—there is a potential for a new urban framework to emerge that would be regenerative by design and resilient to the instability of the real estate market. This would also save capital and embodied energy directed towards new construction, reduce the amount of construction refuse, and significantly lower the industry's carbon footprint. <rt-red>