[ropable]

A lot of basic structural building materials (bricks, framing timber, roof tiles, etc.) are already fairly reusable to an extent. It's just labour-intensive to do so, therefore we often don't. I'm not optimistic that prefabbed structural components would be much better.

[ocdtrekkie]

Yeah as soon as someone gets a demolition bill as high as the construction bill, the desire to reuse everything will disappear quick.

This also presumes in 40-100 years when a house presumably makes sense to demolish, the same standard design is still considered good and the new owner has heard of your weird bespoke construction style.

Consider that currently the age of a house maybe worthy of demolition is 1978 and earlier at this point, and many many people refurbish and renovate houses significantly older than that.

[tadfisher]

Reclaimed building materials are in high demand. Homes from the 1970s and older usually have excellent lumber, more often than not sourced from old-growth timber. My former home from 1949 sat on a 40-foot 12x12 solid cedar beam, for instance.

The only other stuff in the walls is either in demand (copper, plumbing metals) or we just throw it out (drywall, insulation).

So if these engineered materials are sturdy enough, I would give favorable odds to them being reclaimed.

[ocdtrekkie]

A big reason reclaimed lumber is interesting is because it's generally plain straight high quality boards and can be used in things with an intentional weathered look. Wooden LEGOs will not have that sort of value, because unlike your 12x12 solid beam, these will be hacked up pieces of plywood.

[alkonaut]

Houses are already built from prefab modules (Wall panels, roof trusses, floor beams or even floor cassettes) in many markets, especially in Europe. The US lags somewhat but it's definitely the trend that a house arrives on a truck as a set of components that are lifted in place, rather than stick built.