2

One of the advantages of timber buildings is regularly said to be their ability to effectively remove carbon from the atmosphere, through long term carbon storage.

Wouldn't this require the timber used in the building to not decay, or at least to decay slower than the life cycle of a living tree?

But when the timber building decays it releases the carbon back into the atmosphere. Doesn't this then close the circle, leading to a net effect of zero in the long run?

2
  • 1
    Wooden buildings are an option to "store" CO2 for a while. Not indefinitely, since wood, not matter how well taken care of it is, will decay. In fact, with all the transportation and other stuff built into the bouse, the net effect will not even be zero, but above. Still, compared to a building made from concrete the CO2 footprint will be way better.
    – Erik
    Jul 20 '20 at 9:44
  • 2
    How many years is the "long run" to you? The answer will vary depending on whether you're asking about 10, 100, or 1000 years (or more).
    – Nic
    Jan 13 at 2:52

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.