I disagree. I don't think rebuilding everything every 50 years is very sustainable, especially considering the very high CO2 emissions when making cement/concrete. So of course using plain concrete is no solution, but looking for better solutions is very much needed IMHO.
They mention a couple potential alternatives in the article.
Yeah. "mud brick" and "rammed earth."
Cost reflects sustainability. These green techs are often very cute, but more often than not they drain so many resources that they will ultimately cost us more total pollution than the cheaper often. In 100 years tech advances so far that rebuiding saves more energy and time in the long run than leaving the building does.I don't think rebuilding everything every 50 years is very sustainable