Most of the problems facing the new deconstruction industry derive from the green paradigms radically different treatment of resources, labour and knowledge. Taking buildings apart requires far more subtlety, ingenuity, knowledge and time than brute-force demolition. Workers require more training, and greater precautions are necessary to guarantee worker health and safety. Deconstruction contractors need to know more about materials, how to safely handle them, and how to gracefully get them to markets for reuse or recycling. Dealing with materials for reuse adds additional complexities to simple recyclingfor storage, inventory, handling, transport and markets. Guy and Shell (2002) point out that deconstruction means that demolition and building contractors become materials suppliers, with all the managerial complexity this involves. Deconstruction companies exhibit the retailer-like flexibility that Murray argues is the hallmark of new forms of intensive recycling. Some firms employ sale-from-site marketing strategies for their salvage, where saleable items are inventoried and displayed for tours of potential buyers. Other firms are vertically integrated, making use of the salvaged materials in their own construction projects or salvage yards (Yost, 2000). Many of the new deconstruction firms feel that they can be competitive with conventional demolition even on an unlevel playing field. Some companies are handling time pressures for site dismantling by panelizing deconstructioncutting away large subsections of the building for detailed separation away from the job site (Yost, 2000). Other companies, like Portlands DeConstruction Services, simply assign more workers to the job in question. According to manager Jim Primdahl, If the time line is a big issue to the contractor, then we will get in there with a big enough crew to get it done. At a