This presentation will show how the life cycle assessment makes it easier for architects to incorporate environmental considerations into their building material selection. It will discuss the life cycle impacts of wood, concrete and steel and demonstrate that over its life cycle, wood is better for the environment than steel or concrete in terms of embodied energy, air and water pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. In addition, this presentation will highlight the advances each industry is making toward sustainability.

1. The design community has for many
years sought to create buildings that are
energy efficient, better for the
environment and healthier for occupants.
This has been the driving force behind
the modern green building movement,
but actually goes back to the energy
crisis of the 1970s—when (Part 1 of a 3
sharply rising oil prices provided all the
part incentive people needed to reduce
fossil fuel consumption. Materials Matter
series) Construction Materials and
Environmental Costs Today, concern
about the effects of carbon dioxide and
other greenhouse gases has given the
movement a reinvigorated sense of
urgency … and expanded the focus to
include, not only energy use, but the
resulting carbon impacts of buildings.
Materials Matter
Construction Materials
and Environmental
Costs
(Part 1 of a 3-part series)
Photo courtesy of naturallywood.com

2. ‘’Materials Matter’’ CEU Series Overview
Materials Matter (Part 1) Materials in Action (Part 2)
“Materials Matter” CEU Series Overview Materials Matter (Part 1) Materials in Action (Part 2) This presentation is part one in a three-part series, based on a
CEU, Materials Matter, first published in Architectural Record in 2011. Some of the statistics have been updated based on new information.
• “Materials Matter” (Part 1 of 3) documents the environmental footprint of wood, concrete, and steel.
• “Materials in Action” (Part 2 of 3) covers their performance during construction, operation and end-of-life, reaffirming that in the quest for carbon-neutral
buildings, materials do mat“A
• Natural Choice” (Part 3 of 3) covers how these materials factor into green design and high-performance buildings as well as how green design projects
are currently defined. This presentation will address the overt differences between three common materials—wood, steel and concrete—and their life
cycle environmental impacts. These materials will also be discussed in terms of responsible procurement, sustainability and community issues. A
Natural Choice (Part 3)
A Natural Choice (Part 3)

3. Copyright Materials
This presentation is protected by U.S. and international copyright laws.
Reproduction, distribution, display and use of the presentation without
written permission of reThink Wood is prohibited.
© 2013, reThink Wood, www.rethinkwood.com

4. Learning Objectives
 Discuss life cycle impacts of wood, concrete and steel.
 Explain recyclability vs. renewability for each.
 Describe responsible procurement.
 Explain the advances each industry is making toward sustainability.
Photo Source (in order): naturallywood.com, dreamstime, dreamstime
More specifically, this presentation will show how life cycle assessment is making it
easier for designers to incorporate environmental considerations into their decision
making. It will demonstrate that, when viewed over its life cycle, wood is better for
the environment than steel or concrete in terms of embodied energy, air and water
pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. And it will highlight other benefits of wood
such as recyclability and renewability, a light carbon footprint, third-party certification
and chain of custody.

5. Table of Contents
Section 1
Materials Matter
Section 2
Life Cycle
Assessment
Section 3
Manufacturing
Section 4
Transportation
Section 5
Renewable Versus
Recyclable
Section 6
Responsible
Procurement

6. SECTION 1
MATERIALS MATTER

7. Every design and building professional knows the
building sector has a significant impact on the
environment, but it may surprise you to know the
extent.
For example, the building industry uses more
than 3 billion tons of materials a year worldwide,
and accounts for 40 percent of the world’s raw
materials. Buildings also consume 30-40 percent
of the world’s energy.
Clearly there is a need—and an opportunity—to
construct buildings in a way that reduces their
environmental impact.
Sources:
Bullets 1 and 2 – D.M. Roodman and N. Lenssen, A
Building Revolution: How Ecology and Health
Concerns are Transforming Construction, p. 5.,
Worldwatch Paper 124, Worldwatch Institute,
Washington, D.C., March 1995
http://www.worldwatch.org/node/866
Bullet 3 – Buildings and climate change: Status,
challenges and opportunities, p.4-7, United
Nations Environment Programme, 2007.
http://www.unep.org/sbci/pdfs/BuildingsandClim
ateChange.pdf
The Building Industry
Worldwide:
 3 billion tons of materials a year
 40% of raw materials
 30-40% of total energy
Worldwatch Institute; United Nations
Environment Programme
Photo: dreamstime

8. Building Green: Driving by Need
Faced with these realities, the architecture
and construction industries have been
making significant efforts to lighten the
environmental footprint of tomorrow's
structures. This goal is particularly pressing
in light of the fact that 1.6 billion square
feet are added each year in the
commercial building sector alone. That's
nearly 110,000 buildings annually at the
mean size of 14,700 square feet or roughly
half a million buildings every five years.
Source: Energy Efficiency Trends in
Residential and Commercial Buildings, US
Department of Energy, 2008
Photo: Magnus L3D Wikipedia
United States:
 Each year, 1.6 billion sf
added to commercial
building sector:
- 110,000 buildings
(mean size of 14,700 sf)
- Half a million buildings
every five years
Source: U.S. Department of Energy
Photo Magnus L3D Wikipedia

9. Until now, the main focus of
building green has been
operational energy efficiency— and
considerable strides have been
made both in terms of improving
the building envelope and
otherwise reducing energy
consumption. So much so that
designers are now looking beyond
operational energy to the embodied
and end-of-life impacts of their
building materials. Building green
includes embodied, operational and
end-of-life impacts. Most
material choices ignore impacts of
manufacture, maintenance and
disposal. Environmental costs of
production are not fully
acknowledged.
Materials Make a Difference
Building green includes
embodied, operational and
end-of-life impacts.
 Most material choices
ignore impacts of
manufacture,
maintenance and
disposal.
 Environmental costs of
production are not fully
acknowledged.
Photo: iStock (stock)

10. SECTION 2
LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT: A SCIENTIFIC WAY
TO CALCULATE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

11. There’s been a tendency to look for simple
answers to very complex questions. There is
no perfect material, so we need to
understand trade-offs in terms of real
environmental effects.
-- Athena Sustainable Materials Institute
“
“
The information we’re looking for has layers and layers of complexity.
In the past, the green building movement has taken a prescriptive approach to choosing building materials. This approach assumes that certain “prescribed” practices are better for the environment
regardless of their manufacturing process or disposal issues. One example is recycled content: most green building rating systems reward steel with recycled content over wood products that, not only require
far less energy to produce, but result in considerably less greenhouse gas emissions, air pollution and water pollution. Locally produced materials are another example. In most green building rating systems,
materials produced within 500 miles of the job site are rewarded regardless of their manufacturing process or end-of-life disposal.
The prescriptive approach is overly simplistic and can lead designers to incorrect assumptions … which is why, increasingly, it is being replaced by the scientific evaluation of estimated impacts through life
cycle assessment, or LCA.

12. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)
 Scientific method for evaluating environmental impacts
- Products
- Materials
- Assemblies
- Whole buildings
 Internationally recognized,
defined in ISO 14040
 Allows objective comparison of alternate building designs;
encourages environmental decision making
LCA is an internationally recognized
method for evaluating the
environmental impacts of products,
materials, assemblies or even whole
buildings over their entire lives.
Defined by the International
Organization for Standardization
(ISO), it is an objective way of
quantifying and interpreting the
energy and material flows to and
from the environment. The analysis
includes emissions to air, water and
land, as well as the consumption of
energy and material resources.

13. LCA for Building Products
 Analysis covers extraction or harvest of raw materials through
eventual demolition and disposal or reuse.
In a building context, LCA considers a full range of impacts from the extraction or harvest of raw materials through manufacturing,
transportation, installation, use, maintenance and disposal or recycling.
Internationally, the United Nations Environment Programme has been promoting LCA for more than a decade. It is more common in
Europe than North America, but its use is increasing in both markets because of its holistic approach and power as an evaluative tool.
.
Source: Building Green With Wood www.naturallywood.com

14. For building professionals:
Athena Impact Estimator for Buildings
www.athenasmi.org
BEES
www.nist.gov/el/economics/BEESSoftware.cf
m
LCA Tools
For LCA practitioners:
GaBi
www.gabi-software.com
SimaPro
www.pre.nl/simapro
Because calculating life cycle impacts is complex and time consuming, tools exist to help architects judge the environmental merits of various materials and
building assemblies.
In North America, the Athena Impact Estimator is the only software tool designed to evaluate whole buildings and assemblies based on internationally
recognized LCA methodology. Developed by the Athena Sustainable Materials Institute, it allows building designers and others to easily assess and compare
the environmental implications of industrial, institutional, commercial and residential designs—both for new buildings and major renovations. The impact
estimator is available as a free download.
ENVEST
http://envestv2.bre.co.uk/
BEES is a free, U.S.-based tool for product-to-product comparisons. It was developed by the National Institute of Standards and Technology, and results are
based on proprietary, unpublished data.
Envest is a UK-based, LCA-based building design tool. It addresses only the whole building and provides results in highly summarized “ecopoints.”
The Forest Industry Carbon Assessment Tool (FICAT) calculates carbon footprints of the effects of forest-based manufacturing activities on carbon and
greenhouse gases along the value chain. It’s a joint venture of the National Council for Air and Stream Improvement and the International Finance Corporation
and is available as a free download.
Forest Industry Carbon Assessment Tool
www.ficatmodel.org/landing/index.html
Just as there are different LCA tools for building professionals, there are different tools intended for use by LCA practitioners.
GaBi is a tool from Germany, comprised of primarily European data.
SimaPro is a tool from the Netherlands. It includes a comprehensive suite of databases for building materials applicable to the United States, Japan and various
European countries.

15. LCA and Wood
 Wood outperforms other materials in terms of embodied energy, air
and water pollution, and greenhouse gas emissions.
LCA studies consistently demonstrate wood’s environmental advantages over steel and concrete when it
comes to embodied energy, air and water pollution, global warming potential and other environmental
impact indicators.1
In this graph, three hypothetical homes (wood, steel and concrete) of identical size and configuration are
compared. Assessment results are summarized into six key measures during the first 20 years of operating
these homes. The wood home outperformed the others in terms of air pollution, embodied energy,
global warming potential (or greenhouse gases) and water pollution. It performed comparably to steel
and better than concrete in terms of solid waste and resource use.
Source: Data compiled by the Canadian Wood Council using the ATHENA EcoCalculator with a data set for
Toronto, Canada, 2004; Green Building with Wood Toolkit, LCA,
http://www.naturallywood.com/architectstoolkit/#/inspire/pdf/20
1Werner, F. and Richter, K. 2007. Wooden building products in comparative LCA: A literature
review. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 12(7): 470-479.
Source: Data compiled by the
Canadian Wood Council using the
ATHENA EcoCalculator with a
data set for Toronto, Canada

16. Comparing Wall Assemblies
(CORRIM STUDY, 2005)
Minneapolis House Wood Frame Steel Frame Difference
A landmark study conducted by the Consortium for Research on Renewable Industrial
Materials (CORRIM) also compared wood-frame and concrete homes in the hot climate of
Atlanta and wood and steel-frame homes in the cold climate of Minneapolis—the framing
types most common to each city.
Among other things, the global warming potential of the steel and concrete homes were 26
and 31 percent higher, respectively, than the wood-frame homes.
This chart focuses on the wall assemblies only and shows that the steel and concrete
assemblies had 80 percent and 38 percent higher global warming potential than the wood
assembly.
Source: Life Cycle Environmental Performance of Renewable Building Materials in the Context
of Residential Construction – Phase I, 2005 -
http://www.corrim.org/pubs/reports/2005/swst/3.pdf
Steel vs.
Wood
(% change)
Embodied energy (GJ) 250 296 46 18%
Global warming potential (CO2 kg) 13,009 17,262 4,253 33%
Air emission index (index scale) 3,820 4.222 402 11%
Water emission index (index scale) 3 29 26 867%
Solid waste (total kg) 3,496 3,181 -315 -9%
Atlanta House Wood Frame Steel Frame Difference
Steel vs.
Wood
(% change)
Embodied energy (GJ) 168 231 63 38%
Global warming potential (CO2 kg) 8,345 14,982 6,637 80%
Air emission index (index scale) 2,313 3,372 1,060 46%
Water emission index (index scale) 2 2 0 0%
Solid waste (total kg) 2,325 6,152 3,827 164%

17. The Carbon Connection
The building sector consumes more energy
than any other sector. Most of this energy
is produced from burning fossil fuels,
making this sector the largest emitter of
greenhouse gases on the planet. Many
people believe we are heading toward
irreversible climate change and, as a
result, are placing an increasing emphasis
on reducing the carbon footprint of
buildings.
Architect Michael Green believes that, to
reduce carbon footprint, we need to
consider the impacts associated with
different building materials and choose
wisely.
The building pictured here is the Prince
George Airport, an expansion of which was
designed by Mr. Green’s architectural firm,
Michael Green Architecture. Glulam and
glass were used to create a design that’s
architecturally stunning while integrating
new and existing parts of the building.
As architects, we have to ask
ourselves: Is there a material
that minimizes or eliminates
carbon in the environment?
-- Michael Green, MAIBC, AIA, MRAIC
Michael Green Architecture
“
“
Prince George Airport
British Columbia
Architect: mgb
Photo: mgb

18. SECTION 3
MANUFACTURING

19. Manufacturing Energy and CO2
The manufacturing of materials requires the greatest amount of
energy in the entire construction process.
The manufacturing of materials requires the greatest amount of energy in the entire construction process. When it comes to material
selection and carbon, embodied energy is a key part of the equation. How much energy does it take to extract, process,
manufacture, transport, construct and maintain a material or product—and what is the impact of that energy in terms of greenhouse
gas emissions? When the construction process is viewed as a whole, the manufacturing of materials is the most energy intensive.
Photos (in order): dreamstime (stock), dreamstime, naturallywood.com
Photos (in order): dreamstime (stock), dreamstime, naturallywood.com

20. From an energy perspective, an advantage of wood is that it’s
produced naturally.
Compared to steel and concrete, wood products don’t need
much processing, so the manufacturing phase requires far less
energy and results in far less carbon dioxide emissions. This has
been demonstrated time and time again in LCA studies.
Another advantage is that more than half the energy that is
required to produce wood products comes in the form of
renewable biomass. It’s common for companies to have
cogeneration facilities, also known as combined heat and
power, which convert sawdust, bark and other residual fiber to
electrical and thermal energy. The electricity is used to power
equipment.
Photos: naturallywood.com
Sources:
Bullet 2 – Synthesis of Research on Wood Products and
Greenhouse Gas Impacts, Sarthre, R. and J. O’Connor,
2010, FPInnovations; Wooden building products in
comparative LCA: A literature review, Werner, F. and
Richter, K., 2007, International Journal of Life Cycle
Assessment, 12(7): 470-479
Bullet 3 –AF&PA Environmental, Health & Safety
Verification Program – Biennial Report and Improve
Energy Efficiency fact sheet, 2012; The State of Canada's
Forests Report – 2012
Wood Manufacturing
 Wood is produced naturally and is
renewable.
 Manufacturing requires less
energy than other materials—and
results in less CO2 emissions.
 Most of the energy comes from
residual fiber such as bark and
sawdust left over after lumber and
paper making.
Photos: naturallywood.com

21. Lumber Manufacturing
A mill for producing lumber is relatively
straightforward. Once the bark is removed,
logs are sawn and trimmed to precise lengths,
dried, and then planed, grade-stamped and
packaged.
Photos: naturallywood.com

22. Carbon Storage
In addition to LCA, another environmental aspect to consider is the
fact that trees and forest products can help to minimize our carbon
footprint over the long term.
In terms of wood’s positive impact on a building’s carbon footprint,
there are several elements to consider:
1) As trees grow, they clean the air we breathe by absorbing carbon
dioxide from the atmosphere, storing the carbon in their wood, roots,
leaves or needles, and surrounding soil, and releasing the oxygen back
into the atmosphere. Young, vigorously growing trees absorb the most
carbon dioxide, with the rate slowing as they reach maturity.
2) When trees start to decay, or when forests succumb to wildfire,
insects or disease, the stored carbon is released back into the
atmosphere. However, when trees are harvested and manufactured
into forest products, the products continue to store much of the
carbon. In the case of wood buildings, this carbon is kept out of the
atmosphere for the lifetime of the structure—or longer if the wood is
reclaimed and manufactured into other products.
3) In any of these cases, the carbon cycle begins again as the forest is
regenerated, either naturally or by planting, and young seedlings once
again begin absorbing carbon.
4) Manufacturing wood into products requires far less energy than
other materials—and very little fossil fuel energy. Most of the energy
that is used comes from converting residual bark and sawdust to
electrical and thermal energy, adding to wood’s light carbon footprint.
Photos: naturallywood.com (right), W.G. Clark Construction/Mahlum
(left)
Source for Bullet 2: FPInnovations
 Forests absorb and store carbon
 The wood in buildings is about 50%
carbon by dry weight
 Recycled and reclaimed wood
continues to store carbon
Photo: W.G. Clark Construction/Mahlum Photo: naturallywood.com

23. More Wood = Lighter Carbon Footprint
Increasing emphasis on carbon footprint is one of the reasons wood buildings are getting
taller—along with wood’s safety and performance record and innovative new products such
as cross laminated timber, or CLT, which offer exceptional strength and dimensional stability.
The Forté in Melbourne, Australia includes 10 stories of CLT and, at the time of construction,
was the world’s tallest modern wood building. Designing the structure in wood allowed the
developer to create “as close to a net zero carbon building as possible.” Between the carbon
sequestered in the wood itself and the greenhouse gas emissions avoided by not
using steel or concrete, Lend Lease estimates that Forté kept approximately 1,450
metric tons of carbon dioxide (equivalent) out of the atmosphere.
In the UK, eight-story Bridport House is the first high-rise in the UK built entirely in CLT,
including the ground floor. According to calculations by Stora Enso, each of the 41 apartment
units contain 30-40 cubic metres of timber (approximately 1,000-1,400 cubic feet), which is
equivalent to more than 30 metric tonnes (33 tons) of carbon dioxide. (Source: Stora Enso)
Likewise, a company in Austria has developed a hybrid, wood-based building system for what
it calls Life-Cycle Towers, which can be up to 30 stories high and reduce the building’s carbon
footprint by 90 percent compared to typical structures. (More information:
http://www.creebyrhomberg.com/files/CREE_Standard_english.pdf )
In British Columbia reducing carbon footprint was one of the reasons the building code was
changed to increase the number of permitted stories in residential wood buildings from four
to six.
 AU – Forté, 10 stories of
wood
 UK – Bridport House, 8
stories of wood
 Austria – Life-Cycle
Tower, hybrid wood-based
system up to 30 stories
Photo: Forté, Lend Lease

24. The process to manufacture steel on the
other hand is fossil fuel-intensive. Iron
smelted from ore contains more carbon
than is desirable. To become steel, the iron
must be melted at extremely high
temperatures and reprocessed to reduce
the carbon and to remove silica,
phosphorous and sulfur, which weaken
steel Energy intensive Iron ore is
extracted through open pit mining and
heated to extremely high temperatures
using fossil fuel energy, usually charcoal or
coke. Manufacturing involves reducing
carbon in the iron, which also results in
CO2 emissions.
Sources: Photo: Trinec Iron and Steel
Works (Trinecké zelezárny)
Steel Manufacturing
 Energy intensive
 Iron ore is extracted
through open pit mining
and heated to extremely
high temperatures using
fossil fuel energy, usually
charcoal or coke.
 Manufacturing involves
reducing carbon in the
iron, which also results in
CO2 emissions.
Photo: Trinec Iron and Steel Works

25. Steel Manufacturing Process
Most modern steel plants use a basic
oxygen furnace in which high-purity oxygen
blows through the molten pig iron, lowering
carbon levels and those of other impurities.
Alloys are added at this time to create the
desired properties of the steel product.
Liquid steel is then cooled as bars or rods
and later rolled and flattened into sheets.
Source: World Coal Association,
www.worldcoal.org
Source: World Coal Association
www.worldcoal.org

26. Concrete Manufacturing
Typically, a concrete mix is about 10 to 15 percent cement,1 though the
amount changes based on required strength and flexibility. While most of
concrete’s ingredients are manufactured products themselves or mined
materials, it’s the cement that has the highest embodied energy.
Source: 1Portland Cement Association
Photo: dreamstime (stock) – no commercial use permitted
 Cement (made from
limestone and sand) is the
main ingredient in
concrete and has the
highest embodied energy.
 Usual process involves
blasting limestone from
surface mines, mixing it
with other materials and
heating the mixture to
extremely high
temperatures with coal or
natural gas.
Concrete plant
Vancouver, British Columbia
Photo: dreamstime

27. Cement Production
The major ingredient needed for cement is limestone. In most cases, limestone is blasted
from surface mines and removed in large blocks to a crusher where it’s mixed with other raw
materials. From there, it’s transferred to a rotating furnace and heated to about 2,700 degrees
Fahrenheit, powered by coal or natural gas, in order for the materials to coalesce. The mixture
is cooled and ground to fine gray powder (cement), which is then transported to its
destination by truck, rail or ship. To reduce the carbon footprint of the end product, fly ash,
volcanic ash or magnesium oxide are sometimes substituted for a portion of the cement.
However, cement manufacturing is still a carbon-intensive endeavour.
In Canada, for example, producing one metric tonne of cement (1.1 tons) results in the
emission of approximately one metric tonne (1.1 tons) of carbon dioxide and cement
manufacturing accounts for 5 percent of anthropogenic global carbon dioxide emissions.
Sources of data: EcoSmart Concrete: www.ecosmart.ca; SOS: An Optimization System for the
Sustainable Use of Supplementary Cementing Materials in Concrete, 2006,
http://www.ecosmart.ca/Docs/SOS-CSCEPaper.pdf; International Energy Agency, Technology
Roadmap – Cement,
http://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/name,3861,en.html

28. As the movement to carbon-neutral buildings takes hold,
makers of building materials are well aware of the need to
improve the environmental footprint of their products.
For its part, the steel industry has exceeded Kyoto accords
for energy-efficiency improvement by more than 240
percent and made sizeable reductions in GHG emissions.
According to the American Iron and Steel Institute, the
industry has reduced its energy consumption by 33 percent
since 1990.1 Coal figures heavily in energy consumption,
but as steel scrap is increasingly used to make new steel,
natural resources are being conserved and energy
consumption reduced, with manufacturers reducing annual
energy consumption by an amount that would power 18
million households for one year. While significant
amounts of energy are required to convert iron ore and
scrap to steel, the US EPA reports that the sector's
energy use per ton of steel shipped improved over the
last decade, with corresponding reductions in actual
energy used.
At the same time, the EPA states, "Release of CO2 is
inherent to the chemical reactions through which iron
ore is chemically reduced to make iron, and from the
carbon content of iron when reduced to make steel.
These emissions cannot be reduced except by
changing the process by which iron and steel are made
or by capturing and storing the CO2 after it is created.
Research into new methods of steelmaking, is also
targeting low-carbon processes."
The steel industry has also established the carbon dioxide
Breakthrough Program to fund the development of new
steelmaking technologies.
Source: 1 http://consumerenergyalliance.org/american-iron-
and-steel-institute-wins-energy-efficiency-award/-
wins-energy-efficiency-award/
Photo: dreamstime (stock)
Impact Mitigation: Steel
 Increased recycling
 Energy consumption reduced
by 33% since 1990
 Kyoto energy efficiency
standards exceeded by more
than 240%; GHG emission
reductions
 Program to develop low-carbon
technologies
Photo: dreamstime

29. Impact Mitigation: Concrete
Mining, particularly open pit mining, is harsh on the environment. According to the Portland
Cement Association, the cement industry is minimizing the disruption with "new
technologies and a concerted effort to work closely with the communities in which
quarries reside." Careful practices during operations minimize the impact, as does
restoration of the sites to beneficial use. Sand, gravel, and crushed stone are typically mined
in close proximity to their use, which gives quarry operators a strong incentive to be
environmentally responsible and to maintain good relationships with the host community.
Often, quarries are reclaimed for development, agriculture, or recreational uses.
The Association says that, since 1972, the cement industry has reduced the energy it takes to
make a ton of cement by over 37 percent, along with associated combustion emissions. In
1990, U.S. cement manufacturers set performance improvement goals—among them, a
means for continuous improvement through Environmental Management Systems that track,
report and improve environmental performance. Specific goals per unit of production
were set for 2020 and include reducing carbon dioxide by 10 percent, energy use by
20 percent, and cement kiln dust by 60 percent.
Recognising the need to reduce the CO2 intensity of cement production, the International
Energy Agency has worked with the World Business Council for Sustainable Development
(WBCSD) Cement Sustainability Initiative (CSI) to develop a technology roadmap for cement.
This document outlines a possible transition path for the industry to make continued
contributions towards a halving of global CO2 emissions by 2050. The roadmap estimates that
the cement industry could reduce emissions b 18% from current levels by 2050.
Sources: Portland Cement Association,
http://www.cement.org/smreport09/sec_page2_3.htm; Concrete Joint Sustainability
Initiative, http://www.sustainableconcrete.org/?q=node/42; International Energy Agency,
Technology Roadmap – Cement,
http://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/name,3861,en.html
 Reduced emissions through
improved manufacturing
 Cement substitutes
 Kiln fuel alternatives
 Industrial heat recovery and
carbon capture systems
 Reuse of waste materials- blocks,
recycled aggregate, etc.
 On-board truck wash systems
Photo: dreamstime

30. Maximizing resource use: the term
“waste” is largely obsolete in the
context of forest product
manufacturing. The term 'waste' is
largely obsolete in the context of
today’s North American forest
products industry. Logs brought to
U.S. and Canadian sawmills and other
wood product manufacturing centers
are converted almost totally to useful
products, leaving little to no waste.
This is attributable to state-of-the-art
sawmilling that maximizes the quality
and quantity of boards that can be cut
from a tree, combined with further
processing fiber that is unsuitable for
lumber production into composite
products such as OSB or fiber boards
and paper. It is also common for
companies to have cogeneration
facilities, also known as combined
heat and power, which convert
sawdust, bark and other residual fiber
to electrical and thermal energy. In a
carbon-focused world, this integration
is especially important.
Source: Utilization of Harvested Wood
by the North American Forest
Products Industry, Dovetail Partners
Inc.
Photos: naturallywood.com
Impact Mitigation: Wood
 Maximizing resource use: the
term “waste” is largely obsolete
in the context of forest product
manufacturing.
Photos: naturallywood.com

31. SECTION 4
TRANSPORTATION

32. Minneapolis Energy-Efficient Home
% Fossil Fuel Use by Life Cycle Stage
Compared to manufacturing, which requires
the greatest amount of energy in the
construction process, transportation of
building materials represents only a fraction of
total fossil fuel consumption. For a typical
wood-frame house in Minnesota, construction
transportation constitutes only 3.6 percent of
total fossil fuel consumption. That said, the
impacts will be greater or less depending on
the distance, mode of transportation, and
material being transported.
Source: This data was calculated by
FPInnovations using the Athena Impact
Estimator for Buildings, 2011
Transportation Effects
 Represent a fraction of
fossil fuel consumption in
the construction process.
 Impacts vary based on:
- Distance
- Mode of transport
- Material transported
Source: Athena Impact Estimator for Buildings, version 4.1.13

33. Transportation Impacts
While distance may seem like the most
significant element for determining
transportation effects, a product
travelling a long distance in a highly
efficient mode will actually have a
smaller environmental footprint than a
product with fewer miles to travel in an
inefficient manner. Road transport is by
far the most carbon-intensive option,
and is about six times more energy-intensive
than rail transport and 15
times more energy-intensive than sea
transport.
Source: Brentwood Consulting, based
on Leadership in Energy and
Environmental Design values for energy
use
 Environmental impacts are a
function of method as well as
distance.
 Values for energy use in the US
LCI Database are:
- Truck(2,127KJ/tonne-km)
- Rail(373KJ/tonne-km)
- Ship (138 KJ/tonne-km)
Photo: naturallywood.com

34. Transportation Effects
 Wood – Light compared to other materials;
transported by road from the forest to a mill
and usually further by rail and ship
 Concrete – Heavy; usually produced locally
and transported short distances by truck
 Steel – Heaviest; most iron ore is
transported first by rail then ship
Photo: dreamstime

35. Total Embodied Energy
Embodied environmental impacts of various exterior wall assemblies
When viewed overall, the embodied energy in wood
products is significantly lower than the embodied energy
in concrete or steel—either virgin or recycled. But there
are other considerations when evaluating the choice of
building materials ...
Source: Data compiled by the Canadian Wood
Council using the ATHENA EcoCalculator with a
data set for Vancouver, British Columbia
Source: Data compiled by the Canadian Wood Council using the ATHENA EcoCalculator
with a data set for Vancouver, British Columbia

36. SECTION 5
RENEWABLE VERSUS RECYLCABLE

37. Is it Renewable? Concrete – NO Steel
– NO Wood – YES ... such as
renewability. A natural resource is
renewable if it can be naturally replaced at
the rate at which it is consumed. When the
sand and gravel in concrete are mined
from an area, they will not be replenished
naturally in a reasonable time. Likewise,
iron ore, the primary ingredient in steel, will
not be replaced in a timely manner. Of the
three building materials, wood is the only
renewable resource.
Is it Renewable?
Concrete – NO
Steel – NO
Wood – YES
Photos: naturallywood.com

38. Is it Recyclable?
Steel – YES
Wood – YES
Concrete / Cement – YES
Recyclability, which also factors into environmental decision making, is another consideration. All three materials are recyclable.
In the U.S., more than 80 million tons of steel are recycled each year and the overall recycling rate for 2011 was 92 percent. When one ton of steel is recycled,
2,500 pounds of iron ore, 1,400 pounds of coal and 120 pounds of limestone are conserved. However, there are still two considerations. First, the worldwide
demand for steel outstrips the supply from demolished or scrap steel. Second, even though recycled steel requires about half the energy to produce as virgin
steel, it is still considerably more than wood. Steel can also be reused. The industry says that steel frames with bolted connections can be easily
dismantled. Entire structures are demountable and can be reconstructed in a different location in a matter of days.
Concrete, too, can be recycled … and this is becoming an accepted way of disposing concrete structures that were once routinely shipped to landfills. Typically,
concrete is collected and put through a crushing machine, often along with asphalt, bricks, and rocks. In reinforced concrete, the rebar is removed with
magnets, and the remaining concrete chunks are sorted by size. Smaller pieces of concrete can be used for gravel for new construction projects, in shoreline
protection, or as a road base.
Recycled or reclaimed wood has the added cachet of architectural quality and character. Older beams and timbers are dense with a high ring count, and are
praised by builders for their low moisture content. This makes them extremely stable, particularly in exterior situations. Antique wood has a striking patina that
comes from oxidation that occurs on its surface. The color of old wood used in interior applications is generally mellower than the original, and history may also
shine through, with the scuffs and scrapes of warehouse flooring still visible after sanding. Seasoned old growth lumber from demolition of historic structures
has found new life as beams, exposed trusses, millwork, flooring, and furniture. Still, recycling timber is time-consuming and labor intensive—demolition must
be careful to preserve as much of the timber as possible, wall studs must be trimmed off, nails pulled out and the lumber refinished. Recycled wood may not
always fit in a new project, either from a size or a building code perspective, and there is not a well-established supply in many areas.
Photo Source (in order): dreamstime, dreamstime, iStock

39. SECTION 6
RESPONSIBLE PROCUREMENT

40. Sustainable Forest Certification
 Verifies that a forest
meets the requirements
of the certification
standard
While all three materials can be recycled, wood is the only material that has third-party
certification programs in place to confirm that products have come from a
sustainably managed resource.
While life cycle assessment evaluates the environmental aspects of products or
materials, forest certification verifies the sustainability of forest management. More
than 50 independent forest certification programs exist worldwide, reflecting the
diversity of forest types, ecosystems, and ownership.
 Two international
umbrella organizations –
FSC and PEFC
The two largest umbrella certification programs are the Forest Stewardship Council
(FSC) and the Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification schemes
(PEFC). PEFC endorses the Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI), the Canadian
Standards Association (CSA), and the American Tree Farm System (ATFS). All of these
standards are used in North America and recognized internationally.
 More than 50 certification
standards
worldwide

41. Leadership in Forest Certification
Certified Forest Area in Canada & US
100 250
North America is internationally recognized for its supply of quality
wood products from well-managed forests. As of August 2012, more
than 500 million acres of forest in Canada and the U.S. were
certified under one of the four internationally recognized
programs used in North America: the Sustainable Forestry
Initiative (SFI), Canadian Standards Association’s Sustainable
Forest Management Standard (CSA), Forest Stewardship
Council (FSC), and American Tree Farm System.
Sources: www.pefc.org, www.fscus.org, www.fsccanada.org,
www.fsc.org, www.certificationcanada.org, www.mtc.com.my
80
60
40
200
150
100
50
millions of hectares
millions of acres
SFI FSC CSA ATFS
248
100
174
71
99
40
24
10
millions of acres
millions of hectares

42. Leadership in Forest
Certification This
represents more than
half of the world’s
certified forests.
Leadership in Forest Certification
Sources: www.pefc.org,
www.fscus.org,
www.fsccanada.org,
www.fsc.org,
www.certificationcanada.
org, www.mtc.com.my
 50 years of forest
growth that exceeds
harvest
 More certified forests
than anywhere else in
the world
As of August 2013
Sources: www.pefc.org, www.fscus.org, www.fsccanada.org,
www.fsc.org, www.certificationcanada.org, www.mtc.com.my

43. Responsible Procurement: Tracking
Certified wood is the only product that can carry the added value of chain-of-custody
certification—which confirms that it came from sustainably managed, certified  forests. Similar to tracking packages, chain-of-custody 
third-party
tracks forest products
through all phases of ownership, processing and transportation, from the forest of
origin to the end consumer. The chain-of-custody system is verified through an
independent third-party audit. The result is that buyers know their building materials
are coming from forests managed in accordance with strict sustainable forest
management certification standards—and not from controversial sources such as
illegal logging.
The concrete and steel industries have no third-party sustainability certification or
chain-of-custody certification. However, progress is being made in responsible
procurement. In particular, some steel companies are reportedly encouraging
suppliers to adopt responsible practices and/or management systems certified to ISO
standards. In certain cases, companies dedicate online resources to screening
potential suppliers and to promoting and monitoring the performance of existing
vendors. Steel is often imported from developing countries and the absence of a
third-party certification program makes it impossible to accurately assess the
environmental and social impacts of steel products.
 
Photos: naturallywood.com
Chain of Custody certificate
Sources: Photos: naturallywood.com Manufacturing Timber importer Chain of
Custody certificate Chain of Custody certificate Chain of Custody certificate
Certified Forest
Forest Management certificate
Certified Logs
Chain of Custody certificate
Manufacturing
Chain of Custody certificate
Timber importer
Sawmill
Chain of Custody certificate Chain of Custody certificate

44. Environmental product declarations (EPDs) are the next
wave in the world of environmental labeling. An EPD is
designed to provide accurate, accessible and comparable
information about the environmental impacts associated
with goods or services. Much like nutritional food labels
on products, EPDs are about making sure the data is
transparent and leaving judgment up to the audience.
Based on LCA data, EPDs are standardized (ISO 14025) and
applicable worldwide for all interested companies and
organizations. EPDs are voluntarily developed and include
information about the environmental impacts of a
product or service, such as raw material acquisition,
energy use and efficiency, emissions to air, soil and water,
and waste. They also include product and company
information.
The wood industry is taking a leadership role by adopting
EPDs in advance of regulatory requirements. This will help
to advance the sustainability cause in the building
construction sector and demonstrate its strong
environmental values.
Examples of EPDs can be found at:
American Wood Council,
www.awc.org/greenbuilding/epd.php
Canadian Wood Council,
www.cwc.ca/index.php/en/design-with-wood/
sustainability/life-cycle
FPInnovations, www.fpinnovations.ca
naturallywood.com
Environmental
Product Declaration
 LCA-based tool for
communicating the
environmental performance of a
product or system
 Internationally defined in ISO
14025/TR
 Applicable worldwide
Photo: naturallywood.com

45. In Summary: Materials Matter
In reducing the environmental footprint
of tomorrow’s structures, wood is a
sustainable building choice. LCA studies
repeatedly show that it outperforms
steel and concrete in terms of embodied
energy, air and water pollution and
global warming potential. It stores
carbon. Certified wood that has a chain-of-
custody provides documentation of
responsible procurement. And the forest
industry creates jobs and well being for
millions of people worldwide.
Photo: W.G. Clark Construction, Ankrom
Moisan Architects
 LCA makes it easier to
incorporate environmental
considerations.
 LCA studies show that
wood outperforms steel
and concrete in terms of
embodied energy, air and
water pollution, and
greenhouse gas
emissions.
 Other benefits of wood
include carbon storage,
renewability, third-party
certification and chain of
custody.
W.G. Clark Construction,
Ankrom Moisan Architects

46. THANK YOU!
For more information on building with wood, visit
rethinkwood.com, or email info@rethinkwood.com
with any questions.