Procurement and Manufacturing Planning: Why Hardwood…?!

I’m going to preface this by giving you apologies: it’s a long one. But it needs to be.

Essentially, as manufacturers, it is our duty to make sure that our planning for the lifecycle of our furniture doesn’t just include the production and use, but also reuse and potential for recycling. Although we aim to produce furniture that is so long lasting that you may never need to worry about recycling it, we want to make sure that we are doing everything we can to assist you as a consumer, and to protect the planet as much as we can in the areas that we can control.

You want to know something fascinating that I found out during my sustainability research on this project? In this age of knowing what we need to do to protect our resources, there’s not yet any legislation in the UK forcing companies to follow any kind of set protocol. There are a multitude of reasons for this, but economic viability comes into it right at the core. However, there is a set of guidelines which have been produced by independent entities; and we are already planning for being able to follow these guidelines as responsible manufacturers. These non-legislative, self-governed guidelines include things like how to make your production more circular (reuse of waste, or responsible disposal), and how to make sure that your products are able to be disposed of correctly. Much of that disposal planning is related to the materials which we choose to use.

According to a report by Hippo waste published in 2025, a quarter of UK adults replace a piece of furniture at least once a year. Over 22 million pieces of furniture are thrown away in the UK every year. 16% of those surveyed said that the found recycling, donating or selling of furniture too much of a hassle. We understand, and that’s why for us, focussing on our material and design choices to remove at least a couple of the barriers to recycling at the end of the lifecycle to be one of our most important features.

Why am I talking about recycling when our furniture is built to last? Well, to put it simply, as long as we plan for it to last, we can’t predict the future paths that our furniture will travel on through its lifecycle. But we can mitigate against future difficulties and make it as easy as possible for our customers. Whether that customer is the original owner, a descendent of the original owner, or someone who receives our furniture as a pre-loved piece.

That same Hippo report states that, according to figures obtained from Rightgreen (removal and relocation specialists), only 17% of UK furniture is actually recycled. But we’re beating the EU on that one though, they’re currently sitting at 10% (figures correct as of 23/03/25).  

So why does so much furniture end up in landfill? As well as lack of access to transport, and lack of time or general motivation, difficulty of knowing HOW to recycle a piece seems to feature heavily according to the documents that I’m basing this blog post on.   

Mixed materials are a HUGE problem. I don’t know if you’ve ever actually tried to manually separate all of the components of a constructed piece of flatpack furniture? I have. And so has James. This is part of the same “Oliver Furniture Crisis of 2025” that started this whole shebang. Deconstruction of the furniture for easy disposal is one thing, but another is FULL separation. To elaborate a little, when a piece of furniture arrives at a recycling centre, the materials must be fully separated to ensure that the output for processing into new materials is free from contaminants that could compromise the final product. Contaminants pose several risks, such as window putty affecting wood glue adhesion in future products, glass shards causing injuries, or paint chemicals rendering the material non-compliant with fire safety or toxicity standards all pose issues in both mechanical and manual waste separation and recycling.

Even minor components like a panel pin can present some serious issues. Imagine a small nail embedded in a sheet of recycled MDF being cut by a table saw. This nail could become a dangerous projectile or damage a saw operating at 25,000 rpm. If such an incident results in substantial damages, any initial cost savings are negated. Mechanical separation of materials has its limitations, necessitating hand separation to maintain quality. This is without even mentioning what a nightmare melamine coated furniture board is. After its initial production, unlike standard thermoplastics like PET, is impossible to rework melamine because it is a thermoset plastic which cannot be reworked or remelted once it has been created. As such, bonded materials involving melamine are more often incinerated than anything else. Take a look at your average piece of flatpack furniture, it’s probably melamine.

Back to the point though, each stage of waste recovery involves a cost-benefit analysis. Considering the risks associated with inadequate separation helps explain why approximately 670,000 tonnes of furniture are sent to landfill annually in the UK. Economic viability might be improved through levies, taxes, or stricter guidelines for the public regarding furniture disposal, but these measures impose additional burdens on consumers.

As designers and manufacturers of furniture, making the more responsible choice of refusing to use mixed materials or extra components means that, although we’re significantly increasing our costs, we’re saving the consumer from future problem; and helping to protect the planet at the same time. I hate how overused this statement is, but I’ve not got a better one right now: “There is no Planet B”.

Emma - Not Richard for once!