Are Traditional Materials Undervalued in Sustainable Design Compared to New Innovations?
Sustainable materials are having a moment but understanding what truly makes them “sustainable” is far more complex. In this opinion piece, Alex Abadjieva, Designer at f.r.a, unpacks the realities behind the buzzwords and what responsible material choices really look like in practice.
Durat was used in f.r.a.’s recent project for Multistory
Sustainable materials are getting everyone excited. Events like the Surface Design Shows are showcasing an ever-growing number of innovative materials. Across our wayfinding projects for the built environment, including residential, retail, workplace and hospitality, we use a blend of traditional and contemporary materials.
Our traditional materials include brass, aluminium, timber, stone, terracotta and neon. In recent years, we’ve explored sustainable materials such as Richlite, Durat, Valchromat and sustainable 3D printing filaments. As well as being excited by the credentials of these new products, we are also drawn to their intriguing appearances – with unique terrazzo effects and tactile textures.
Many of our clients share this interest in sustainable design, which encourages us to learn more about what’s possible.
During our B Corp journey, we began looking into how to better understand the sustainability of the materials we use. However, when researching, we are often overwhelmed by sustainable buzzwords and technical jargon.
Quantifying how ‘sustainable’ a material is, has been surprisingly difficult. The information can feel elusive and confusing. We want to be able to compare a multitude of factors, including embodied carbon, transportation emissions, recyclability, cost, lead times and durability.
In our projects we have been using more of the beautiful terrazzo-effect plastic, Durat. It’s completely recyclable, made using 30% industrial waste plastics and manufactured in Finland using only renewable energy. According to their website, Durat’s carbon footprint is 3.35 kg CO₂e1 – but what does this mean for us? How do we factor in the transportation of Durat to UK fabricators and project sites? We want to meaningfully measure and compare these aspects to make informed decisions.
Durat was used in f.r.a.’s recent project for Multistory
An everyday example that illustrates this complexity is the energy comparison between plastic and cloth bags. According to Greenmatch2, producing a plastic bag requires 1.5 litres of water and generates 0.04 kg CO₂. A cloth bag requires 130 litres of water and results in 5.52 kg CO₂ per bag. For cloth bags to have less impact than plastic bags, they need to be repurposed around 100 times.
While plastic takes hundreds of years to decompose, fabric waste is also a major problem but of course is more easily recyclable. This highlights that sustainability is not as simple as swapping a traditional material for a ‘sustainable’ alternative.
Time and budget restraints can also lead to innovative, sustainable solutions. For a recent student accommodation project in Paris with a tight deadline, we used a readily available regenerative material: plywood. Our wayfinding is designed using oblong panels that reveal the material’s natural texture.
This simple approach complements the earthy tones throughout the reception, amenities, and corridors whilst also adding a tactile experience. It’s a great example of using a traditional, accessible material in a way that is both striking, cost-effective and recyclable.
Looking forward, we hope to develop a system to quantify the sustainability of all the materials we use. Eventually, we would also like to include ‘end of life’ labels on our designs so that, when dismantled, the recycling process is clear. We’ve discovered that this is a complex journey, but it’s inspiring to see both designers and clients eager to learn more and make more responsible choices.
By Alex Abadjieva, Designer at f.r.a