In this interview, ASBP’s Debbie Ward and David Hughes from ASBP Patron Member Blackstone Stripout discuss Blackstone’s approach to sustainable strip-out and demolition. They explore the growing importance of material reclamation and reuse, the systemic challenges holding back in-situ reuse, and what policy and industry changes are needed to make circular construction the norm.
Understanding the urgent need to reduce environmental impact, Blackstone has been founded on the vision of being an environmentally aware people-powered business within the demolition industry, that enables its clients to achieve their goals and objectives, more safely, more sustainably, and on budget.
With over 35 years’ worth of experience in the construction, demolition, deconstruction and strip out sectors, Darren Elkin, Managing Director and Founder of Blackstone has worked with many of the country’s leading construction and development companies. Darren and the team, including David Hughes Operations Director work closely together to deliver peace of mind to their clients through their exceptional knowledge, insightful approach and hands-on management.
Debbie:
Thank you for your time this morning, David. We’re going to discuss a few different aspects of material reuse today, first off, why is the reclamation and reuse of materials important to Blackstone?
David:
It’s important for two main reasons. Firstly, it’s simply the right thing to do. As a strip-out and demolition contractor, we’re at the forefront of generating a lot of construction waste. If companies like ours don’t take the lead and demonstrate what’s possible in terms of deconstruction and reuse, then who will? Secondly, we want to position ourselves as a leader in offering sustainable solutions in the strip-out and demolition space. The market is heading in that direction, and we want to be ahead of the curve, ready to offer clients effective and sustainable answers.
Debbie:
That’s great that Blackstone is driving this agenda. Considering the momentum around sustainability — like the London Plan and the Circular Economy Task Force — how many of the projects you tender for specifically request reclamation and reuse? And how is that framed?
David:
Most projects include sustainability as a key part of the tender process, though not necessarily with fixed parameters. It’s rare to see hard targets set in contract documents. However, we’ve definitely won work because we’ve proposed solutions that go beyond what others offer, even if those solutions weren’t explicitly requested. We’re typically asked for recycling rates, and we aim to exceed 98%, excluding hazardous materials like asbestos. But it’s often more about a broad aspiration rather than detailed requirements.
Debbie:
Who typically drives the reuse aspect in your projects — the client, architect, designer, or yourselves?
David:
Ideally, it should come from everyone. But it really starts with the client. They need to be willing to compromise on things like cost or design flexibility if materials are to be reused. That said, we are increasingly being asked what we can deconstruct and reuse. We’re investing in improving our expertise and building networks — like with Urban Miners — to support that.
Debbie:
When you deconstruct instead of demolish, what percentage of materials are reused on-site versus sent into the wider supply chain? Could you give a couple of examples?
David:
About 80–90% of reusable items are taken off-site and re-enter the supply chain elsewhere. In-situ reuse is still quite rare for us. One example is a project on Oxford Street, where we reused some deconstructed partitioning and raised access floors on other levels. Another example is the Crown Estate job on Air Street, where we dismantled about 10,000 sqm of suspended ceiling, a portion of which was reused.
But more often than not, we’re called in early by developers who want to strip a building purely to avoid paying business rates. At that point, no design team is involved, so reuse isn’t even considered. There’s a financial incentive to strip buildings down to their concrete shells, which directly conflicts with reuse principles.
Debbie:
That’s a significant barrier. Do dilapidations create similar problems?
David:
Absolutely. Outgoing tenants might spend a lot of money stripping out a space, only for the next tenant to install something nearly identical. It’s wasteful and highlights a clear opportunity for more creative, cost-effective approaches — if only the system better allowed for it.
Debbie:
Definitely an area that needs some fundamental changes to support a more resource efficient process. What three changes — in policy or behaviour — could help increase reuse in the industry do you think?
David:
Direct legislation around reuse is tricky because of the unpredictable nature of what’s in a building. But there are some practical steps. First, addressing warranties and insurance issues — reused components need to carry guarantees. Second, reforming business rate laws that currently incentivise stripping buildings prematurely. And third, yes, rethinking dilapidations rules to avoid unnecessary removal of usable materials. There’s a big disconnect between market practices and sustainability goals.
Debbie:
Before we wrap up, have you heard about “white boxing” — using temporary storage in vacant buildings as a way to reduce business rates?
David:
I’ve heard bits about it, though I’m not too familiar. But I can see how it would work as a workaround. It’s another example of the strange incentives in the system.
Debbie:
It came up in discussions about material reuse hubs. Developers might be open to deconstruction but often don’t want to reuse the materials directly or store them for future projects, which makes it more difficult to facilitate reuse for commercial projects rather than passing it through to the charity and community sectors. Though JLL, for instance, is trying to lead by example with specifying reused materials where possible at their new HQ at 1 Broadgate.
David:
Yeah, there’s just no flexibility in construction timelines and budgets. It’s a hyper-competitive market, and any perceived risk can shut things down quickly. Until there’s legislation or commercial value placed on reuse — like planning credits for reused materials — uptake will stay limited.
Debbie:
An interesting conversation, thank you. Deconstruction, reclamation and reuse at scale is definitely still a work in progress but an agenda we are prepared to keep plugging away at! Thanks again, David.
For more information about Blackstone Stripout, please visit their website: https://blackstonestripout.co.uk/