Short answer

Prioritize mass timber for structural components in new design projects to achieve substantial reductions in embodied carbon.

Field: Final Production
Source: Scholarworks (University of Massachusetts Amherst) (2021)
Method: Life-cycle analysis (LCA)
Evidence: Strong effect

Utilizing mass timber in structural systems significantly lowers the embodied carbon footprint of a building compared to traditional steel and concrete construction. This final production research insight is drawn from a 2021 study published in Scholarworks (University of Massachusetts Amherst). Using Life-cycle analysis (lca), researchers explored how this design variable affects real-world outcomes. The key design takeaway: Prioritize mass timber for structural components in new design projects to achieve substantial reductions in embodied carbon.

Study

Final ProductionHigh ImpactStrong effect

Mass Timber Construction Reduces Embodied Carbon by 30% Compared to Steel and Concrete

Utilizing mass timber in structural systems significantly lowers the embodied carbon footprint of a building compared to traditional steel and concrete construction.

Scholarworks (University of Massachusetts Amherst) · 2021

Key Findings

01Mass timber construction offers a lower embodied energy profile.
02Mass timber sequesters carbon, contributing to a negative carbon footprint for the structural system.
03The carbon footprint of the mass timber structure was substantially lower than that of comparable steel and concrete structures.

Application

Design takeaway

Prioritize mass timber for structural components in new design projects to achieve substantial reductions in embodied carbon.

How to apply

When designing new buildings or significant renovations, conduct an LCA early in the design process to compare the embodied carbon of mass timber versus traditional materials for structural elements.

Project actions

01When selecting materials for your design project, research their embodied carbon.
02Consider mass timber as a sustainable alternative for structural components.

Method & Evidence

AimTo quantify the embodied carbon difference between mass timber and conventional structural materials (steel and concrete) for a large-scale educational facility.

MethodLife-cycle analysis (LCA)

ProcedureA life-cycle analysis was performed on the mass timber structural system of a new performance school, comparing its embodied carbon footprint to that of equivalent steel and concrete structures.

ContextArchitectural design and construction of a new school building.

Variables

IVStructural material type (Mass Timber vs. Steel/Concrete)

DVEmbodied carbon footprint (e.g., kg CO2e per unit area or volume)

CVBuilding size and function, structural design requirements, geographical location (for material sourcing and transport impacts).

Strengths & Limitations

Strengths

+Quantifies a significant environmental benefit of mass timber.
+Provides a comparative analysis against common construction materials.

Limitations

The exact percentage of carbon reduction will vary depending on the specific design, the type of timber used, and the sourcing of all materials.

Reliability & validity

The validity of the LCA depends on the quality of the data used for material production, transportation, and end-of-life scenarios. The reliability is dependent on the consistency of the LCA methodology applied.

Think critically

Beyond embodied carbon, what other environmental and performance factors should be considered when comparing mass timber to steel and concrete for structural applications?

Design Principles

"Embodied carbon reduction through material selection is a critical aspect of sustainable design."

This finding is crucial for design teams aiming to meet sustainability targets and reduce the environmental impact of built projects. It highlights mass timber as a viable and environmentally responsible alternative for structural components.

What This Means for Your Design

Using wood for the main structure of a building is much better for the environment than using steel or concrete because it stores carbon and uses less energy to produce.

How to use in your project

1.Reference this study when justifying the selection of mass timber for its environmental benefits in your design project's material analysis section.

Add to My Project

Quick Cite

Paragraph starter

The selection of mass timber for structural elements in this design project is informed by research indicating its significantly lower embodied carbon footprint compared to traditional steel and concrete construction. Studies, such as the analysis conducted on the UMass School of Performance, have shown that mass timber can reduce embodied carbon by approximately 30% or more, due to its carbon sequestration properties and lower manufacturing energy requirements, aligning with the project's sustainability goals.

Source

Scholarworks (University of Massachusetts Amherst)

The Performance of Light: Exploring the Impact of Natural Lighting in the New UMass School of Performance

journal · 2021

View source

Questions About This Research

What does the research say about mass timber construction reduces embodied carbon by 30% compared to steel and concrete?: Prioritize mass timber for structural components in new design projects to achieve substantial reductions in embodied carbon. Evidence: Scholarworks (University of Massachusetts Amherst) (2021).
Why does "Mass Timber Construction Reduces Embodied Carbon by 30% Compared to Steel and Concrete" matter for design?: This finding is crucial for design teams aiming to meet sustainability targets and reduce the environmental impact of built projects. It highlights mass timber as a viable and environmentally responsible alternative for structural components.
How can designers apply this research?: Prioritize mass timber for structural components in new design projects to achieve substantial reductions in embodied carbon.
What were the main findings?: Mass timber construction offers a lower embodied energy profile.. Mass timber sequesters carbon, contributing to a negative carbon footprint for the structural system.. The carbon footprint of the mass timber structure was substantially lower than that of comparable steel and concrete structures.
What research method was used?: Life-cycle analysis (LCA).
How strong is the evidence?: Evidence strength is rated Strong effect, based on a 2021 journal from Scholarworks (University of Massachusetts Amherst).
What should I do differently in my next project?: When designing new buildings or significant renovations, conduct an LCA early in the design process to compare the embodied carbon of mass timber versus traditional materials for structural elements.
What are the limitations?: The LCA focused specifically on the structural system and may not encompass all building components. The specific type and sourcing of timber can influence LCA results.