• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.

signal

Member
Oct 28, 2017
40,197

Our dependency on concrete and steel to build everything from homes to sports stadiums, comes at a severe environmental cost. Concrete is responsible for 4-8% of the world's carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. Second only to water, it is the most widely used substance on Earth, accounting for around 85% of all mining and linked to an alarming depletion of the world's sand. Globally, enough concrete is poured each year to cover the whole of England.
Some architects such as Waugh are therefore arguing for – and pressing ahead with – a return to wood as our primary building material. Wood from managed forestry actually stores carbon as opposed to emitting it: as trees grow, they absorb CO2 from the atmosphere. As a rule of thumb, a cubic metre of wood contains around a tonne of CO2 (more or less, depending on the species of tree) – which is similar to 350 litres of gasoline.
Not only does wood remove more CO2 from the atmosphere than it adds through manufacture, but by replacing carbon-intensive materials such as concrete or steel it doubles its contribution to lowering CO2. A recent advisory report to the UK government on the uses of "Biomass in a low-carbon economy" found that, "the greatest levels of [greenhouse gas] abatement from biomass currently occur when wood is used as a construction material… to both store carbon and displace high carbon cement, brick and steel."

Between 15% and 28% of new homes built in the UK annually use timber frame construction, capturing over one million tonnes of CO2 a year as a result. Increasing the use of timber in construction could triple that amount, the report concluded. "Savings of a similar magnitude may also be possible in the commercial and industrial sectors by utilising new engineered wood systems such as cross-laminated timber."
Cross-laminated timber, or CLT, is the primary material on the construction site Andrew Waugh shows me around in east London. Because it's described as an "engineered wood", I expect to see something similar to chipboard or plywood. But CLT just looks like ordinary 3m (10ft) planks of wood, one inch thick, replete with knot-holes and splinters. The ingenuity is that the planks are made stronger by gluing them in layers of three, with each layer perpendicular to the other. This means that the CLT "doesn't bow or bend, it has integral strength in two directions", says Waugh. "[A CLT] wall supports the floor above, with a horizontal strength to carry a load above it, acting like a long beam". That, he says, "changes architecture".


This part about trees and carbon capture is interesting.

Recently there have been calls for tree planting on a colossal scaleto capture CO2 and curb climate change. However, whilst young trees are efficient and effective carbon sinks, the same is not so true for mature trees. The Earth maintains a balanced carbon cycle – trees (along with all other plants and animals) grow using carbon, they fall and die, and release that carbon again. That balance was knocked out of kilter when humans discovered ancient stores of carbon in the form of coal and oil, which had been captured during previous carbon cycles, and began burning them, releasing the resulting CO2 into our atmosphere far faster than the current cycle can deal with.

Many pine trees in managed forests, such as the European spruce, take roughly 80 years to reach maturity, being net absorbers of carbon during those years of growth – but once they reach maturity, they shed roughly as much carbon through the decomposition of needles and fallen branches as they absorb. As was the case in Austria in the 1990s, plummeting demand for paper and wood saw huge swathes of managed forests globally fall into disuse. Rather than return to pristine wilderness, these monocrops cover forest floors in acidic pine needles and dead branches. Canada's great forests for example have actually emitted more carbon than they absorb since 2001, thanks to mature trees no longer being actively felled.

Arguably, the best form of carbon sequestration is to chop down trees: to restore our sustainable, managed forests, and use the resulting wood as a building material. Managed forests certified by the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) typically plant two to three trees for every tree felled – meaning the more demand there is for wood, the greater the growth in both forest cover and CO2-hungry young trees.
Rewilding and protecting virgin forests is essential. But unmanaged monocrops help no-one, and floors full of dry pine needles are also the primary cause of wildfires – something that North America and many parts of the world experience on a now annual basis. Managed harvesting greatly reduces that risk.

These benefits have not been lost on the US authorities. Melissa Jenkins, of the US Federal Forest Service, explained at a recent meeting of the Environmental and Energy Study Institute (EESI), that "we have a situation of overstocked forests: if a wildfire blows through, these fires burn hotter, they burn faster and they take a lot more effort to put out… If we can build markets for these wood products, landowners will be more likely to sustainably manage or sustainably thin their land." She highlights that CLT in particular as having the potential to reduce "wildfire risk [and] support rural economic development and jobs".

The market seems to agree. Less than five years after its arrival on US shores, there are now CLT projects underway in almost every mainland US state. More importantly, unlike the UK – which currently imports all of its CLT – the US is investing in domestic CLT manufacturing, with factories in Montana and Oregon, and more planned in Maine, Utah, Illinoi, Texas, Washington State, Alabama and Arkansas. Amazon's new "tech-hub" building in Minneapolis is made from nail laminated timber (like CLT, but using nails rather than glue). The 2018 Timber Innovation Act also included provisions for research and development into mass timber.

Not everyone believes that the future is CLT, however. When I ask Chris Cheeseman, professor of materials resources engineering at Imperial College London, whether wood could usurp concrete as our primary building material, his response is blunt. "No. That isn't going to happen. It might happen locally with some small schemes. But you've got to appreciate the massive use of concrete, and the massive importance of concrete to infrastructure and society. It is an exceptionally good material because of its functionality and its robustness."

There is also the "end of life" question. Carbon only remains trapped in the wood for as long as the building remains standing or is reused in another building – if it rots or is burned for energy, then all the stored carbon is released. Doug King, a chartered engineer and building sustainability advisor, tells me, "unless we attend to the disposal of timber materials at their end of life there is no guarantee that the overall cycle is making a positive benefit to society." Previous research work by Arup in 2014 estimated that half of all construction timber ends up in landfill, 36% is recycled and the remaining 14% burnt for biomass energy.
Despite these issues, Waugh remains ambitious. The average lifetime of a building is 50-60 years – that, he believes, is more than enough time for architects and engineers to work out the re-use and recycling issues. Turning it into biochar could be one possibility. Waugh's buildings are made to be easy to take apart for re-use by future generations.

Fundamentally he – along with a growing group of international architects – is convinced that mass adoption of CLT is an important weapon in the fight against climate change. "It's not a fad or a fashion," he tells me as we finish the tour of his east London build, and I take my final, incongruous breath of the forest air. "The largest commercial developer in the UK have just bought this building. For me, that's where you want to be… I want this to be mainstream. Everybody should be building with this."
 

dc3k

Member
Feb 10, 2018
692
not america
I dunno, it feels like it's trading one bad thing for another. You can't get nearly as much housing density out of wood, right? I don't think you can build a 50 story building out of wood. Urban sprawl means more roads and more cars and all the terrible stuff that comes with that.
 

Septimus Prime

EA
Verified
Oct 25, 2017
8,500
I don't know if the article addresses it, but how is the structural integrity of wood compared to concrete and rebar?
 

Fritz

Member
Oct 26, 2017
2,719
Our woods are under extreme pressure due to the climate change. It's not a limitless source of building material. And we need lots of buildings.
 
OP
OP
signal

signal

Member
Oct 28, 2017
40,197
So uh, you ever hear of the concept of fire
Not sure about the total pros and cons of each but:
Counterintuitively, CLT also performs well in fires. It is designed to withstand heats of up to 270C before it begins to char – the charring on the outside then acts as a protective layer for the structural density of the wood behind it. By contrast, at similar temperatures concrete can spall and crack, and steel loses its strength.

yeah, i feel cutting down trees would be good for the environment
Not sure if sarcasm but in conjunction with planting new ones it apparently would be.
 
OP
OP
signal

signal

Member
Oct 28, 2017
40,197
I dunno, it feels like it's trading one bad thing for another. You can't get nearly as much housing density out of wood, right? I don't think you can build a 50 story building out of wood. Urban sprawl means more roads and more cars and all the terrible stuff that comes with that.
Don't think it's being proposed as a total replacement so yeah skyscrapers won't be wooden. The photo in the article is of a 10 storey building though, so that's not bad.

I don't know if the article addresses it, but how is the structural integrity of wood compared to concrete and rebar?
In general not sure, but the article has this:
There are even advantages that make the material particularly attractive to countries like Japan, since it has been found to perform well in earthquake tests. A joint Italian-Japanese research team built a seven-storey CLT building and tested it on a "shake table" (a cool but eerie video of this exists on Youtube). They found that it could withstand shaking at the level of the 1995 earthquake in Kobe, Japan, which destroyed more than 50,000 buildings. With serendipitous timing, says Waugh, "the Americans planted lots of trees in Japan as part of the Marshall Plan – that was over 60 years ago, and they are reaching maturity now".
 

Dilly

Member
Oct 26, 2017
591
This thread is a prime example of how many people don't bother to even read the quotes provided by the OP before spewing their hot takes.

No wonder politics have turned into a shitshow if the electorate has the attention span of a goldfish.
 

16bits

Member
Apr 26, 2019
2,862
yeah, i feel cutting down trees would be good for the environment

This is absolutely correct, trees store carbon having removed it from the atmosphere. When they are mature, it's time to cut them down and replant.

The problem is, what you do with the tree after it's cut.

The very worst thing to do, is just to let it rot. This returns the carbon back into the atmosphere and you gain no net benefit from it.

If you burn it, it does the same but at least you have obtained useful energy from it in doing so, and probably prevented that energy being gained elsewhere ( assuming non green energy methods).

But the best thing to do, is lock the carbon in the wood by using it for building and construction, quality furniture, anything that's going to last hundreds of years.

Cut, store, replant is the future.
 

Chaosblade

Resettlement Advisor
Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,596
That's pretty fascinating. Curious how well that CLT would do replacing other materials. If all that in the OP is true, it sounds like something to put effort into.

I wonder how much species and growth rate affects the amount of carbon absorbed.
 

Westbahnhof

The Fallen
Oct 27, 2017
10,106
Austria
Well good, that's actually not a huge issue when it comes to using wood as a building material these days.
As you can read earlier in the thread,
Counterintuitively, CLT also performs well in fires. It is designed to withstand heats of up to 270C before it begins to char – the charring on the outside then acts as a protective layer for the structural density of the wood behind it. By contrast, at similar temperatures concrete can spall and crack, and steel loses its strength.
 
OP
OP
signal

signal

Member
Oct 28, 2017
40,197
"However, whilst young trees are efficient and effective carbon sinks, the same is not so true for mature trees."


So get rid of all of the old trees cause they emit carbon and plant all new ones.
This isn't targeting rainforests though. Even with the ideas in the article being debatable, monocrop planting (at least in the pine example) seem to be the bigger issue. Using forests that were previously used for building materials is probably the intent, not destroy previously unused forests and ecosystems for their wood (provided they have large amounts of types of wood you'd want to build with)

I think a more natural mature forest is probably closer to carbon neutral with the balance of mature trees and dying ones and growing ones. An actively harvested and replanted forest might have a net negative carbon impact, but you'd need to solve the problem of how to recycle the used lumber after its life.
 

MikeHattsu

Member
Oct 25, 2017
8,929
They built an 18 storey building here in Norway:
JTULzif.jpg


 

Deleted member 48434

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 8, 2018
5,230
Sydney
Plant fuck tonnes of trees, cut them down and compress the wood, build with them, then plant another fuck tonne of trees.
Bit by bit more and more carbon from our atmosphere will become stored in buildings. Wooden buildings will essentially become a way to store carbon from our atmosphere.
 

Xiao Hu

Chicken Chaser
Banned
Oct 26, 2017
1,497
How are the temperatures in wooden buildings? I would prefer materials that reduce cooling/heating costs in the context that our seasons will get more extreme. My best friend is studying urban planning and he said that the greening of building facades with plants already reduces the rate of heat trapping within the respective building as well as the temperature around it. It's something I would love to see implemented in big cities (especially in Asia) because they're nothing more than concrete and asphalt.
 

MistaTwo

SNK Gaming Division Studio 1
Verified
Oct 24, 2017
2,456
A lot of new house builds (including my own!) in Japan use CLT or similar engineered lumber in their construction.
 

Steel

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
18,220
Let's go with more deforestation than we're currently doing to help the environment!

... Oh wait.
 

Deleted member 2625

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
4,596
This thread is a prime example of how many people don't bother to even read the quotes provided by the OP before spewing their hot takes.

No wonder politics have turned into a shitshow if the electorate has the attention span of a goldfish.
Good highlight this thread of how many people even bother to read before posting
Reading comprehension and critical thinking really on display in this thread.

NO KIDDING.

What a shitshow. This fuckin place sometimes.

Some of the wood based engineering I've read about is really intriguing but the last skeptical guy has a point re: concrete and things like highways, bridges and piers.

Does "average building lifetime" being supposedly 50-60 years strike anyone else as weirdly short? I mean maybe averaged across all "buildings" that number somehow makes sense, but still
 

Copper

Banned
Nov 13, 2017
666
Been advocating for it a long time, if you read the science behind it It really seems a no brainer, except for things like bridges and skyscrapers of course . Just watch the "green" lobbies be misteriously against it.
 

Deffers

Banned
Mar 4, 2018
2,402
I'm a big advocate for engineered wood. You can make cellulose do some wacky shit if you put your mind to it. I'd say this could be interesting, particularly with stuff like X-Lam. I think we're gonna need just a bit more tech to get behind a major lumber revolution, and it'd face the same sorts of stigmas that nuclear would face in that it'd be an industry that's been an enemy of green movements for years... but there's a possibility there.

In the lumber industry's case there's been enough corruption to justify skepticism though.
 

Steel

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
18,220
Let's read the OP and/or the article!

... Oh wait.

I read it. It basically advocates for getting rid of old forests, plant nothing but saplings, constantly harvest them and create a monoculture ecosystem. Europe is unique at the moment in that it is slowly reforesting, however:

For most of the past 250 years, surprisingly it seems that Europe's managed forests have been a net source of carbon, contributing to climate warming rather than mitigating it. Naudts et al.reconstructed the history of forest management in Europe in the context of a land-atmosphere model. The release of carbon otherwise stored in litter, dead wood, and soil carbon pools in managed forests was one key factor contributing to climate warming. Second, the conversion of broadleaved forests to coniferous forests has changed the albedo and evapotranspiration of those forests, also leading to warming. Thus, climate change mitigation policies in Europe and elsewhere may need to consider changes in forest management.
Afforestation and forest management are considered to be key instruments in mitigating climate change. Here we show that since 1750, in spite of considerable afforestation, wood extraction has led to Europe's forests accumulating a carbon debt of 3.1 petagrams of carbon. We found that afforestation is responsible for an increase of 0.12 watts per square meter in the radiative imbalance at the top of the atmosphere, whereas an increase of 0.12 kelvin in summertime atmospheric boundary layer temperature was mainly caused by species conversion. Thus, two and a half centuries of forest management in Europe have not cooled the climate. The political imperative to mitigate climate change through afforestation and forest management therefore risks failure, unless it is recognized that not all forestry contributes to climate change mitigation.

Managed monoculture forests have a net warming effect even if they store carbon.

Addtionally:
Europe's contribution to global deforestation may rise by more than a quarter by 2030, despite a pledge to halt such practices by the end of this decade, according to a leaked draft EU analysis.

An estimated 13m hectares (Mha) of the world's forestland is lost each year, a figure projected to spiral in the next 30 years with the Amazon, Greater Mekong and Borneo bearing the brunt of tree clearances.

But despite signing several international pledges to end deforestation by this decade's end, more than 5Mha of extra forest land will be needed annually by 2030 to meet EU demand for agricultural products, a draft EU feasibility study predicts.

"The EU pledged to stop deforestation by 2020, not to increase it," said Sebastian Risso, a spokesman for Greenpeace. "Deforestation is a conveyor belt to devastating climate change and species loss that the world must stop, and fast.

According to the draft EU feasibility study, which is meant to provide officials with policy options, the "embodied" deforestation rate – which is directly linked to EU consumption – will increase from between 250,000-500,000ha in 2015 to 340,000-590,000ha in 2030.

The figures do not encompass forest degradation or the impacts of lending by EU financial institutions.


Edit:

And since it's been discussed, I will note that wooden pressure treated skyscrapers are entirely doable and can be totally fire proof, not my point, though.
 

Mik2121

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,943
Japan
I'm all for wooden structures, and when deemed dangerous, at least wooden furniture or other things that would be built with metals or plastics.
It gives things and earthy and warm feel. It's more expensive to use, but I'm all for it.
 
OP
OP
signal

signal

Member
Oct 28, 2017
40,197
I read it. It basically advocates for getting rid of old forests, plant nothing but saplings, constantly harvest them and create a monoculture ecosystem. Europe is unique at the moment in that it is slowly reforesting, however:
Europe's forest management did not mitigate climate warming | Science
Managed monoculture forests have a net warming effect even if they store carbon.
It's a discussion on how those monocrop forests have gone into disuse and suggesting they be used again. The points you just brought up are addressed and half the purpose of the article. It's not calling for "deforestation"
 

Giant Panda

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,689
It would certainly be useful for rural and suburban buildings, but I think cities should be encouraged to get denser, which I dont think wooden buildings would allow.
 

Dyle

One Winged Slayer
The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
29,938
Yeah CLT is the future in the same way that plywood was in the early 20th century.
It would certainly be useful for rural and suburban buildings, but I think cities should be encouraged to get denser, which I dont think wooden buildings would allow.
The level of density that can't be done with this kind of material is generally less energy efficient anyways. Cities that are built around 10ish story buildings, as in most of Europe, are better in almost every way compared to high rise cities. The cost of that kind of density isn't really worthwhile and has significant ecological problems and health issues
 
Oct 25, 2017
5,846
"However, whilst young trees are efficient and effective carbon sinks, the same is not so true for mature trees."


So get rid of all of the old trees cause they emit carbon and plant all new ones.
You're hopefully just being deliberately obtuse, but rainforests and specifically the Amazon provide different benefits than common forests in other parts of the world.

Yeah CLT is the future in the same way that plywood was in the early 20th century.

The level of density that can't be done with this kind of material is generally less energy efficient anyways. Cities that are built around 10ish story buildings, as in most of Europe, are better in almost every way compared to high rise cities. The cost of that kind of density isn't really worthwhile and has significant ecological problems and health issues

Yeah even if you look at a city like New York, there's a ton more average density you'd get out of making more buildings higher than three to six stories* than you do by various skyscrapers.

*Historically the cap for many buildings due to fire codes. Not sure if it's still the case, but germane to this topic six stories was the max threshold for timber buildings—higher than that you had to go completely fireproof for the structure.
 

Deleted member 135

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
11,682
Sustainable forestry has been a thing for decades in the United States. By the turn of the last century we decimated our forests and thanks to some key people (go Teddy!) we realized we fucked up, replanted, and then started carefully regulating the lumber industry so that there is in fact a net gain in forested areas even with continued and growing logging.
 

bawjaws

Member
Oct 28, 2017
3,583
NO KIDDING.

What a shitshow. This fuckin place sometimes.
Yep. So many in this thread just desperate to chime in with their totally uninformed hot takes despite not actually bothering to read the OP. I mean, it's par for the course here but sometimes it really makes you despair. It's as if people are lining up to flaunt their ignorance as some sort of badge of honour.
 

Deleted member 984

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
5,203
Mix this with agroforestry and some of our basic societal structures are starting to look a lot better.
 

Molecule

Member
Nov 2, 2017
1,691
Wood won't hold against a hurricane. There's a lot of trade offs but I guess a mix would be good.
 

Deleted member 2625

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
4,596
Yep. So many in this thread just desperate to chime in with their totally uninformed hot takes despite not actually bothering to read the OP. I mean, it's par for the course here but sometimes it really makes you despair. It's as if people are lining up to flaunt their ignorance as some sort of badge of honour.

They won't see any follow up either. It's a bummer.
 

Aztechnology

Community Resettler
Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
14,139
Like did half the thread not read anything about older trees not being as carbon absorbent? God damn coming in after reading a few paragraphs was embarrassing.