In recent years, sustainability in construction has increasingly been framed through certification systems such as LEED and similar international standards. These frameworks have played an important role in improving energy efficiency, water use, and indoor environmental quality. But they also raise a deeper question that is often overlooked:
Are today’s “green” buildings actually sustainable over centuries — or only over decades?
Most contemporary green standards focus primarily on operational performance: how much energy a building consumes once it is occupied, how efficiently it is cooled, lit, and ventilated. On those terms, a glass-and-steel building can perform well — at least on paper.
What these systems tend to underweight is embodied carbon: the environmental cost of extracting, manufacturing, transporting, and assembling the materials themselves. Concrete, steel, aluminum, and architectural glass are among the most carbon-intensive materials used in construction today. Their emissions are largely “locked in” before the building ever opens its doors.
Across Israel — from large towers to lower-rise developments in places like Harish and Beit Shemesh — the dominant construction logic is the same: reinforced concrete frames, steel reinforcement, and extensive glazing. These buildings are typically designed for a 50-year lifespan, sometimes less.
When they reach the end of that cycle, they are demolished. In practice, much of the material does not return to meaningful reuse. Crushed concrete, contaminated composites, sealants, insulation, and façade systems often end up in landfills or low-grade fill. This is not a circular system — it is a linear one, repeated every generation.
Ironically, many of the buildings now being demolished across Israel were themselves marketed as “modern” and “durable” just a few decades ago.
Contrast this with traditional stone or brick construction. Quarrying stone or firing brick certainly has an environmental cost — but the materials themselves are fundamentally different:
- They are structural, not layered systems
- They age well, rather than degrade
- They can be reused, repaired, or reassembled
- They retain value over centuries, not decades
Stone buildings can stand for hundreds — even thousands — of years with minimal intervention. Their materials do not become waste; they become heritage, structure, and sometimes the literal foundation for future buildings.
Israel is full of examples. The King David Hotel, built in 1931, continues to function not as a relic but as a living, adaptable structure. Throughout Jerusalem and other historic cities, stone buildings have already lasted more than a century — many far longer — and there is no reason they will not still be standing in another 500 years.
This raises a critical point:
A building that lasts 300 years may be more sustainable than one that is “high-performance” for 30.
True sustainability is not only about reducing energy bills or earning certification points. It is about material honesty, durability, repairability, and cultural continuity. A building that must be demolished and rebuilt every few decades — no matter how efficient its air-conditioning — carries a heavy environmental and urban cost.
At Michya, we believe that the most sustainable urban future for Israel lies not in chasing ever more complex technological systems, but in relearning how to build simply, solidly, and for the long term: with materials that age gracefully, forms that suit our climate, and buildings that our great-grandchildren will still recognize — and use.
Sustainability, in the deepest sense, is measured not in certificates, but in centuries.