What is the building material of the future? Jean-Marc Casu, an expert from our “Technical Marketing” team, took a closer look at the question.
A topic that has been discussed again and again by planners as part of the implementation of construction projects is the question of whether timber construction or solid construction is the appropriate construction method of the present time or will be of the future. This is where two camps come together, both of which provide convincing arguments for the respective construction method. In German-speaking countries, the proportion of successfully implemented solid construction projects has historically prevailed, if only because of the total costs of a building that was constructed with reinforced concrete components or supporting masonry elements.
However, due to the material used, concrete or reinforced concrete also provides a higher load capacity against static effects. Especially in the case of multi-storey buildings, this is a criterion that should not be neglected. Sound and Fire Protection are also topics that advocates of solid construction are happy to raise. However, there are differences within the various types of timber construction in terms of resistance to fire and even allows one or the other timber construction to do relatively surprisingly well.
Comparison of construction methods
However, recent developments as a result of political measures in the fight against climate change and the resulting increased efforts to make resource-efficient planning by municipalities and specialist planners take the analysis to a wider level when comparing the two construction methods. Society's changing environmental awareness is also contributing to this. In addition to the pleasant indoor climate or the appealing, characteristic filigree of timber construction, the emerging environmental image of timber or timber hybrid buildings is of growing importance due to their lower CO2 footprint. But the shorter construction time associated with timber construction due to simple assembly of prefabricated, lightweight elements also has a clear advantage on the timeline of construction planning. In addition, building owners are often confronted by the typical challenges of solid construction.
In addition to the assembly of massive reinforced concrete components, this includes, for example, various preparation processes on the construction site or in the precast plant, such as, in particular, the assembly of reinforcement by skilled workers, which is becoming increasingly scarce. Such differences in the various construction methods often play an important role in deciding whether the house will be built of wood or concrete for the next generations of families.
According to recent studies, a construction made of pure wood enables a reduced CO2 emissions balance of around 50% compared to reinforced concrete components. This consideration should usefully be substantiated by taking foundations or finishing materials, such as insulation, into account.
Durability or cost effectiveness
The fact that trees initially absorb CO2 from the atmosphere over their lifetime and then release it again motivates many advocates of timber construction to want to use the wood in good time before the CO2 is released. In addition to reduced CO2 emissions, this also significantly delays the release of highly climate-damaging methane as a result of the postponed rotting process. This means that this equivalent amount of CO2 in the building material can be saved by installing wood. Such approaches could probably become more and more important in the future.
However, this does not mean that concrete has been written off as the world's most-used building material with all its advantages, such as its durability or cost efficiency. However, it shows that the lever appears to be in the material and this insight must be used while exploiting all other advantages that include less climate-friendly building materials. The key to better sustainability in construction is therefore minimizing the overall material requirement while simultaneously using the relevant advantages of the corresponding construction method in the right place.
The right mix of materials
From our point of view, the following conclusion can therefore be drawn: The right mix of materials provides the best solution, generally consisting of steel, concrete and wood. It is the responsibility of builders and planners to make the right choice of material in order to implement an aesthetic, cost-effective and sustainable construction method, which also has a positive effect on the ecological balance of the entire building.
Just as in the case of the JKU - Johannes Kepler University construction project in Linz, Austria. It was precisely this approach, the ideal mix of materials, which took into account both cost efficiency and the aspect of sustainability, in particular resource efficiency — and this without sacrificing the architectural requirements of planners and builders.