Like a friendly tsunami

Mr. Braungart, cradle-to-cradle promotes a consistent circular economy by stipulating that products should only consist of materials that are biodegradable or disassembled separately by type after their use and can thereby be recycled. Is that your solution for climate change?

Braungart: First of all, the climate targets are deeply mistaken. The 1.5°C target will not save our planet but rather destroy it only two generations later. The polar ice is melting now, the glaciers are vanishing now, and the permafrost is melting now. Right now I am working with people in Chile where only a fifth of the glacier from 20 years ago is still there. We need completely different climate targets. By 2100 we have to have the same atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases, that we had in 1900. We have to actively remove them from the atmosphere. That’s why it’s sad when cities like Stuttgart want to be climate neutral. One tree also isn’t climate-neutral; one tree is climate-positive. We have to be just as climate-positive. We have to learn to be useful, to be good, and not just to be less damaging. That is the basic message of cradle-to-cradle: Less bad is not good. I’m not protecting the environment by destroying it somewhat more slowly. That would be like if I would say that I’m protecting my child by hitting them only five times instead of ten.

Is there someplace else where it works better than in Germany and Europe?

Braungart: True circular thinking exists only in Asia. One simple example is Demeter, founded in southern Germany, for organic agriculture. But there is no organic certification that allows the reuse of one’s own nutrients. This causes Demeter agriculture to lose up to two tons of soil per hectare per year. In China, where I worked for two years, there is a prevailing expectation in rural areas today, that someone remains until they have used the bathroom when invited to a meal. It is considered impolite to leave and take the nutrients with you.  

This means that the solution lies in Asia?

Braungart: We need to bring together the knowledge and attitudes of the entire planet. We need Asian circular thinking, the southern zest for life, European problem awareness, and the American will to act. In Europe, we feel we have already done something when we have discussed it. Should I tell you my favorite joke? Two psychologists meet. One asks, “Can you tell me how to get to the train station?” The other responds, “I’m sorry, I don’t know. But it’s a good thing we talked about it.” Problem awareness is widespread in Europe, but not so much the interest in solutions. They do research at universities and think that in doing so they have already done something. Take a look at the Polarstern expedition. For 140 million euros, they’re sending an icebreaker to the polar ice, where it should at some point freeze into place in order to examine the greenhouse gas effect. This could be done with a couple of drones and markings much more elegantly, quickly, and precisely. The devastating message is that we don’t have to do anything, we still have to do research first.

At trade shows for the construction and real estate sector, you often hear that building circularly is not sufficient. We have to consider the issue holistically.

Braungart: Circular thinking is linear thinking in a circle. The effect is often disastrous. In Germany, people mix the most toxic flue ashes into construction materials and get funding for circular building as a result. They make recycled concrete from concrete that was never developed for recycling. It contains additives, air entrainment agents, retarders, and damping additives, which make the whole thing toxic. Circularity in and of itself is not a value. If I make the wrong thing perfect, then it is only perfectly wrong. That is what the question is about, what is right. And the answer is effectivity as opposed to efficiency. For me, it’s about innovation, quality, and beauty. A Mercedes has not yet been recycled into a Mercedes. It is only being turned into crude rebar. Chrome, nickel, cobalt, manganese, tungsten, antimony, bismuth, molybdenum, and titanium are all lost afterward in the rebar. And we call that circular construction? Great! It’s circular mumbo jumbo. We are lying to ourselves.

How can the construction and real estate sector commit to sustainability instead?

Braungart: It shouldn’t be sustainable at all. Sustainability is the wrong concept for the technosphere. It is important for forest management and biology. I want there to still be lions and tigers and elephants and giraffes and rhinos in 100 years. That is sustainability. What I don’t want is to still have the same washing machine or the same office chair in 100 years. Innovation is never sustainable. The cell phone wasn’t sustainable for the producers of stationary phones.  

If it’s not supposed to be about sustainability, then what is it about?   

Braungart: The main concern is that we build healthy buildings. We spend 80 percent of our time indoors where there is currently an air quality that is three to eight times worse than the poor-quality urban air outside. I tested the air quality of several kindergartens in a small city; the air inside them exceeded the limits for particulate pollution outside. And drastically at that. Asthma is the most common childhood illness. Buildings have to be suitable for breast milk. That sounds weird, but a third of the over 2800 chemicals found in breast milk arise from the construction sector. Construction is the single most important factor in the destruction of the planet and it can also be the single most important factor for its preservation. Buildings should create a habitat for other living beings and not take space away from them. I want there to be useful buildings that clean the air and water, buildings like trees, in a sense from Bauhaus to the tree house. For example, we developed a carpet flooring with a Dutch company that is not only non-toxic but rather actively binds particulates.

Which materials are needed in the future so that they both meet quality design aspects and have the positive effect you wish for?  

Braungart: Let’s start with what we don’t want at all: everything that is hazardous to health. PVC, for example, it is also the wrong plastic for packaging. Just because some packaging contains four percent PVC, oil can’t be made from it and it can’t even be burned without releasing toxic emissions. Rare materials should also not be used where they are not absolutely necessary, such as copper in electromobility. Instead we should use useful materials. Power lines in buildings also work when made from aluminum. It is also important to use materials as mono-materials to be able to recover them later, either in a biological or a technical cycle. We are the only living being that produces garbage. The biomass of ants is much greater than that of humans. But ants don’t create environment problems. They are useful.

You also emphasize the importance of modular, i.e., changeable construction. Are there already buildings, that implement all this?

Braungart: But yes, several. And the pioneers have to be celebrated, especially the Venlo city hall in the Netherlands. Furthermore, it is also a renovation—this needs to be emphasized because it is important to place the focus predominantly on renovating buildings. In the Venlo city hall, the air is considerably better than outside, the light is healthy, and noise pollution does not cause a constant strain on the people working there. In Germany, noise pollution decreases life expectancy by nearly two years and particulate pollution decreases it by four-and-a-half years. The sick leave of the 1200 employees in the Venlo city hall is over 20 percent lower than elsewhere. That is statistically relevant; it saves money directly.

Is the construction and real estate sector solely responsible or do you think politics will be forced to act?   

Braungart: We don’t have to talk about duty and responsibility at all. Young people are my role model. For them, recognition in their social network is just as important as money. They don’t want to get down into the mud, they want to be proud of themselves. Exactly like the real estate developer Groß & Partner from Frankfurt, for example, that works a lot with the cradle-to-cradle concept. The company does so also to persuade young people to work for it. That succession is coming up in many family companies gives me hope. This gives those a chance who say, why should I double the revenue when the world is being destroyed? That’s even what Bettina Würth said when she completely restructured Würth according to the cradle-to-cradle principle. And not only does it need a new mindset; it also needs a new business model. If Schüco no longer sells windows but rather the service of a “view for 30 years”, they will be richer every year. It’s because they haven’t sold 70,000 tons of aluminum but rather only its use. Novo-Tech from Aschersleben no longer sells terrace tiles; it sells the right of use. And thanks to Drees & Sommer, it is now possible to omit the facades from the calculation of the building value. This means a facade can also be a 30-year service.

Are you really that confident? We have the impression that there is still a lot that is wrong with the sector and society. Affordable is often still more attractive than good.

Braungart: We are still pretty much at the beginning and changing mindsets is difficult because Germans have worshiped at the altar of property ownership for so long. The environmental discussion has also helped make people greedy and antagonistic. It achieved the opposite of what it wanted to achieve. When overpopulation is constantly being talked about, the conclusion can be drawn that it would be better if you weren’t there at all. Then people say, before someone else takes it, I’d better take it. 95 percent of people act barbarically when they are afraid, but if given the chance, 95 percent of people want to be good. The young generation makes me completely optimistic. All of the world’s leading design schools now teach the concept of cradle-to-cradle: Schwäbisch Gmünd, Eindhoven, Milan. That’s impressive because beautifiers are turned into true designers. Architects love cradle-to-cradle because it makes architecture much more important and not just about an investment with certain spatial boundaries. Cradle-to-cradle is like a friendly tsunami.