In recent years Embodied Carbon experts have pushed architects, designers, and builders to reuse existing buildings in an effort to reduce carbon emissions. We know that our ability to reach carbon reductions will benefit from this exploration and provide examples for how we as an industry can accomplish our collective goal. The idea seems simple and straightforward, reuse buildings and reduce carbon. However, the way in which we reuse buildings is critical to addressing the impact we have on embodied carbon. We were in the unique position to design two buildings that had essentially the same program: one was new construction, the other preserved and renovated an existing building. Our case study compares the two and explores the relative impacts of the decisions during the design process. The two-building comparative life-cycle assessment will help provide real numbers to continue an embodied carbon debate: build new or renovate? We will share the successes and shortcomings of our designs to help future projects balance the collective need to reduce the impact materials have on embodied carbon and reduce operational energy.