The world population has been growing at a dizzying rate in recent centuries. And this accelerated population gain brings with it numerous consequences, among them, the need to produce more food, housing and infrastructure. This all leads us to consume more and more natural resources and also increases the generation of waste and waste. The so-called carrying capacity of the planet (condition of sustaining a population), has not evolved in the last centuries in the same index of population growth, that is, humanity is consuming natural resources and generating waste at a speed higher than that which the planet is capable of. produce and absorb. To continue supporting the growing population of the planet, it is necessary to experiment with new technologies, methodologies and processes so that this growth is supported by the tripod of sustainability. The term sustainable development has the most common, and accepted, meaning that points to a tripod of economic growth, environmental preservation and social development. Civil construction is an essential economic sector in the development of any country and society, being responsible for a large fraction of the quality of life of human beings, since they alter the natural environment for better use of space. Understanding the environmental cost of correcting a construction failure is the objective of this work. There are countless studies that point to the financial cost of the so-called rework, but few look at this phenomenon under the environmental lens. The entire life cycle of an enterprise, from its design to its ruin, through its construction and use, causes environmental marks. To correct flaws in works already completed, or in use, there is a need to consume new materials, involving an entire production chain and generating new waste. To produce a certain input that will be used in the correction of a pathology, the following are required: consumption of raw materials to conceive it, energy consumption to manufacture it, waste to produce it, expenses with transportation to take it from the factory to the point of use. All of these steps in the process consume environmental resources. At the other end of the error correction, for the pathology to be eliminated, it must be removed from the site (demolition of a crooked wall, for example) using energy and producing residues from this removal. This waste will be transported to a suitable disposal site, that is, using more energy in this process. In addition, it is still necessary to transform a harmful waste into something less aggressive to the environment. Given the above, the purpose of this research is to understand the size of the impact that a constructive failure can cause to the environment depending on its severity and the moment it is detected. In order to carry out this work, a project was followed up with a short time of use, but which needed major interventions due to the flaws found. With the analysis of the presented pathologies it was possible to measure how much they weighed, and will weigh, to the environment. In addition, analyzing the origin and the correction method implemented will allow to index each of the flaws found environmentally, measuring how much the planet s carrying capacity could have been preserved had these defects not occurred. The useful life of a building can be understood as the time interval from its birth, marked by its design concept, until its death with its demolition and / or disuse. Project useful life (VUP) must be defined by the developer and the project designer. VUP, despite being a temporal measure, has an economic character, being defined as the best relation between global cost versus time to enjoy the good. Preventive maintenance takes place constantly and aims to increase the life of the project, whereas corrective maintenance must occur in a timely manner and correcting failures in points that are already performing below the desired level. Adaptive maintenance has the objective of adjusting the enterprise to receive new technologies, new equipment and to comply with the new legislation The economic character of the useful life of a good is characterized by its global cost, which must be defined as the sum of the cost of acquisition, or construction, of the good and the cost of maintenance throughout its life. The total cost of a construction during its life includes the costs of planning, design, construction, operation, maintenance and demolition. These construction costs represent between 15 percent and 20 percent of the total cost; 80 percent of the amount is spent on operation and maintenance and only 2 percent to 5 percent of the amount is spent on planning and design (conceptual and detailed). The total cost of a construction during its life includes the costs of planning, design, construction, operation, maintenance and demolition. These construction costs represent between 15 percent and 20 percent of the total cost; 80 percent of the amount is spent on operation and maintenance and only 2 percent to 5 percent of the amount is spent on planning and design (conceptual and detailed). The useful life of a building, for example, goes through the useful life of its components such as its foundations, superstructures, hydro-sanitary installations, electrical installations, facades, internal cladding, paintings and waterproofing. Studies show that corrective maintenance costs up to five times more than preventive maintenance. Corrective maintenance is often required in shorter time cycles than initially imagined (and desired) by those responsible for the enterprise. Currently, numerous failures in new construction (or with little use) are verified, such as buildings, bridges, roads, streets and public supply networks, which range from faults of all kinds, from simple to catastrophic. The service life can be extended with preventive, corrective and adaptive maintenance interventions. The extension of useful life is directly impacted on the overall cost of construction. The lowest global cost system is usually not the lowest initial cost nor the longest lasting. Seeking to optimize the cost-benefit ratio is the best option for society. The useful life of a building must be supported by the tripod of socio-environmental importance, cost of implementation and cost of maintenance over the years. When investors seek to save money by building buildings with low quality standards, and with low maintenance ease, they increase the cost of future maintenance. At the other end of the real estate market, users do not carry out preventive maintenance because they consider its cost to be high, often allowing certain components of the project to come close to the level of unacceptable performance and only then carry out the maintenance that has now become corrective, costing financially more than the preventive maintenance previously denied. The Sitter rule, or Law of 5, determines that the relative cost of an intervention grows in a geometric progression of ratio 5 over time in the project and its maintenance. The sooner a problem is perceived, the lower its cost. Sustainability, despite not having a unanimous definition, is a concept that must integrate aspects of social-ecological dimensions, economic factors, and the short, medium and long term advantages. Putting together all the concepts expressed by several authors, sustainability can be defined as the attempt to achieve economic and social growth while preserving the finite resources of the environment. For more than 40 years, humanity s demand for nature has exceeded the planet s replacement capacity. Currently 1.5 Earth planets would be needed to provide the ecological services that were used in the 1980s. Trees are cut faster than they can ripen, more fish are caught than the oceans can replenish and more carbon is emitted than forests and oceans can absorb. The carrying capacity of the planet has been compromised in a way never before experienced by humanity, to meet the current lifestyle of the population. Consumerism is seen as a behavior that leads to an increase in production and, consequently, to economic progress, but this equation is limited by resources that cannot sustain unlimited growth. Finite spaces cannot absorb waste that grows indefinitely. The carrying capacity of a system is obviously influenced by factors such as average income, material expectations and level of technology, that is, energy and material efficiency. There are few systems of indicators that analyze sustainable development in a generic way. The most commonly used indicators globally are as follows: (1) Sustainability Panel, (2) Sustainability Barometer and (3) Ecological Footprint. The indicator called Ecological Footprint has the advantage of being easily visualized, since the Ecological Footprint represents the ecological space necessary to sustain a given system, or community. It is a simple tool that counts the flows of matter and energy that enter and leave an economic system, converting them into areas of land, or water, necessary to sustain such a system. The Ecological Footprint is a method that transforms the consumption of raw materials and the assimilation of waste from an economic system, or from a human population, into an area corresponding to productive land or water. Using this method, it is possible to calculate the area of the ecosystem needed to ensure the eternal survival of a given population or system. Once this equivalent area of the ecosystem has been determined, it is possible to visualize how much it appropriates the carrying capacity of the planet as a whole. In fact, the size of the Footprint can change depending on the new technologies developed, which can be more or less resource-consuming and wastegenerating. The calculation method for measuring the Ecological Footprint, although easily intuitive, is difficult to carry out with regard to data collection.