Unsupported browser

For a better experience please update your browser to its latest version.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

Report this comment to a moderator

Please fill in the form below if you think a comment is unsuitable. Your comments will be sent to our moderator for review.
By submitting your information you agree to our Privacy & Cookie Policy.

Report comment to moderator

Required fields.


Concrete: do architects have their heads in the sand?


To demand stop using concrete is almost as if asking someone to stop eating. There's currently no material able to replace concrete to building necessary infrastructure. In addition, any other material replacing concrete is likely to contain an even larger carbon footprint per tonne than concrete. Concrete's CO2 emissions per tonne sit near 100 kg. That of LVL, MDF, CLT and plywood sits at values larger than 350 kg/t according to the Univeristy of Bath's 'Inventory of Carbon & Energy' www.carbonsolutions.com/resources/ice%20v2.0%20-%20jan%202011.xls. Furthermore do the most common concrete's of today contain cement supplements such as fly ash and slag, reducing concrete's CO2 footprint substantially. Canada and the US have commenced using concretes commercially, where CO2 (captured from other industries) is injected and transformed into limestone. www.carboncure.com. I personally would not want to live in a timber building for health & safety reasons. Timber buildings could burn, rot and are hard to maintain. Sound absorption might be an issue. Only a concrete building provides that peace of mind I'm looking for in my home.

Posted date

24 January, 2019

Posted time

1:52 am