Wood versus Concrete and Steel in House Construction: A Life Cycle Assessment

Abstract

The environmental friendliness of building materials can be measured in life cycle assessments of the total energy inputs for the product, from cradle to grave. How do the environmental costs of wood compare with concrete and steel in housing construction? First we compare energy values for each material and for house components. Taking the viewpoint of a consumer, we then compare three typical houses in which steel, concrete, or wood is the dominant component. It appears that wood, wood components, and houses built primarily of wood require lesser amounts of energy in their manufacture, assembly, and operation. The robustness of the conclusions is shown by the degree of agreement among researchers and through an assessment of the impact of uncertainties in the analysis.

Improvement in Airborne Sound Insulation of Cross-Laminated Timber (Clt) Walls

“…China included "carbon peaking and carbon neutrality" as a strategic aim for the construction industry. The high energy consumption in the engineering construction field and the global need for significant carbon reduction has prompted the widespread adoption of modern timber structures as a key structural form in assembled buildings as a critical step toward a more sustainable and carbon-efficient construction industry that can achieve dual carbon goals (Glover et al, 2002;Nepal et al, 2022;Sathre and O'Connor, 2010).…”