Reclaimed Brick vs. New Brick: A Deep Dive

What’s the difference—and what does it mean for the future of housing materials?

Reclaimed Brick

Brick salvaged from demolition or refurbishment projects, cleaned, and reused for new construction.

✅ Pros:

• Low embodied carbon: No new raw extraction or firing—carbon savings of up to 95% vs. newly manufactured clay brick.

• Rich aesthetic: Aged patina, colour variation, and textural depth that creates more characterful façades, especially in historic or retrofit contexts.

• Circular economy aligned: Reduces landfill waste and promotes reuse across building lifecycles.

• Contextual sensitivity: Matches or complements the existing urban grain, especially in heritage zones or conservation areas.

❌ Cons:

• Labour intensive: Must be hand-cleaned and quality checked, which increases costs and lead times.

• Limited supply: Only available from selective sources and demolition projects; availability is unpredictable.

• Variable performance: Not always up to modern strength or frost resistance standards (requires careful testing and grading).

• Non-standard dimensions: May not conform to modern bonding patterns, slowing down construction on large-scale projects.

🌍 Best Used For:

• Retrofit or extension projects where blending with existing materials is crucial

• Low- to mid-rise schemes where façade richness is prioritised over efficiency

• Pilot sustainability projects or one-off buildings aiming for circular material targets

• Visible street-facing façades in dense urban heritage contexts

New Brick

Factory-manufactured brick made from clay, shale, or concrete—fired at high temperatures and produced at scale.

✅ Pros:

• Standardisation: Perfect dimensions, consistent quality, and predictable performance—ideal for fast build times and modular systems.

• Structural reliability: Meets current load, fire, and frost-resistance standards.

• Wider variety: Can be made in a range of colours, textures, and bond patterns to replicate older styles (faux heritage).

• Availability: Ready supply from domestic and international manufacturers.

❌ Cons:

• High embodied carbon: Traditional kiln-fired bricks generate significant CO₂ during production, one of the most energy-intensive materials per unit.

• Energy use & resource extraction: Requires mining clay and high-temperature firing, often using fossil fuels.

• Aesthetic flatness: Uniformity can feel sterile or generic, especially in residential areas with rich material histories.

• Perceived greenwashing: Even "eco bricks" can mask unsustainable production methods.

🌍 Best Used For:

• Large-scale new-build housing projects where consistency and speed are essential

• High-rise façades with modular construction systems

• Mixed-use urban regeneration schemes where brick is used as a finish, not structure

• Non-heritage or infill areas where integration with existing textures is less critical

🌿 Sustainability Summary: Which Brick is Greener?

Criteria	Reclaimed Brick 🧱♻️	New Brick 🧱
Embodied Carbon	✅ Very Low (salvaged)	❌ High (kiln-fired)
Energy Use	✅ Minimal (manual cleaning)	❌ Intensive (high-temp)
Lifecycle Circularity	✅ Closed-loop potential	❌ Linear (unless reused)
Waste Impact	✅ Diverts demolition waste	❌ Generates new waste
Performance Consistency	❌ Variable	✅ High
Aesthetic Depth	✅ Organic, textured	❌ Often too uniform

🧠 Final Takeaway

In dense urban contexts like London, reclaimed brick tells a deeper story of reuse, embedded history, and material honesty. But scaling it remains a challenge. New bricks offer speed and standardisation, making them a practical choice for high-rise housing, but often at a greater environmental cost.

For architects designing mass housing, the question isn’t just “which brick looks better?” 

It’s: Which one serves the building’s purpose, honours its context, and supports its climate goals?