While many in the construction industry are aiming for net-zero-carbon concrete by 2050, another trend in sustainable building has also grown in popularity: mass timber. Because its emissions aren’t as well calculated like those of concrete or steel construction, a number of builders and designers view it as a more eco-friendly and less carbon-intensive form of building material. What’s more, due to it being made of wood, mass timber is even able to sequester carbon.

All of which makes it seem like the most ideal building material out there with the demand for sustainable construction on the rise. However, it’s not. Like any building material, mass timber has its own downsides.

But if both mass timber and concrete have their pros and cons, how do you decide which building material is right for your project?

No matter what anyone thinks of mass timber or concrete, the cost of either will play a big role for which gets picked. Unfortunately, comparing the two is a tricky process. After all, the price for any building material will always vary depending on the region you’re in.

An example of this can be seen in one study conducted by the Oregon State University. It noted that the cost of mass timber construction could be 6.43% higher than concrete construction. The researchers attributed this excess in cost to a higher rate of change orders. But that’s not the only reason. Another study compared the total life cycle cost of mass timber to concrete and found that it had much higher front-end costs. In fact, mass timber’s front-end costs were 26% higher. The two biggest causes for this were the mass timber building’s construction and utility costs.

Keep reading this blog on kryton.com

• 
•