zlacker

>>hrl+(OP)
This should be an economics piece, not an environmental piece. The author states that "one of iron’s unalterable properties is that it rusts" yet further on acknowledges the existence of stainless steel.

There's nothing wrong with reinforced concrete, but the incentives to produce long lasting buildings are not there. The cheapest bidder will generally win and their building will last the "design life" of the building, but often not much more. The simplest way to change this is to extend the design life, which would result in stainless steels or another more expensive material being used in this application.

>>brutus+J5
Stainless steel rebar is quite real, and becoming more common for bridges. It's essential for concrete exposed to salt water, which includes bridged de-iced with sale. Order now.[1][2]

There's epoxy-coated rebar, but that's on the way out. Quebec has already banned it. One scratch, water gets in, and corrosion starts. Also, the epoxy can be damaged by UV, like when there's a stack of rebar out in the sun.

[1] https://www.outokumpu.com/en/products/long-products/rebar

[2] https://stainlessrebar.com/

>>Animat+8y
To build on your very important last point. Material handling procedure is something that I haven't seen mentioned here that is a very real issue too. Similar to agriculture or pharma where entire stocks can be thrown out if stored incorrectly, in many construction and manufacturing contexts your steel can be thrown out for not being stored correctly too (i.e. left at the port in the open for extended periods, or mixed with other metals). Not just steel, but lots of building products (like membranes) will usually be specd with how they should be stored before use.