From this article I gleaned the following important parts.
Particularly developers have to weigh the environmental costs of building as a matter of hard cash, engineered timber will start to look particularly appealing.
Furthermore : At the moment, assessments of the construction cost of a building do not generally take carbon emissions into account.
Forest products as professed trees being lumber pillars, given their earlier incarnation as trees, retain carbon dioxide captured from the atmosphere.
One cubic metre of glulam timber stores about seven hundred kilograms of carbon dioxide.
Needless to say and while we well onto the next century , & as they are leaders so far Norway’s nineteenth-century experience demonstrated the dangers of deforestation, and a related objection is sometimes mounted against using timber in large-scale construction projects: why cut down a healthy tree to sequester carbon in a building when the tree is doing a perfectly good job of sequestering carbon in the forest? Advocates of timber-based architecture also construction stress that the industry’s viability depends on sustainable forestry methods, and argue that, given the environmental damage caused by conventional construction methods, we have no choice but to explore alternative materials, including wood and other bio-based products.
or spelt I-joist
According to it would become more of a norm and will be assisted too by The
In Scandinavia, ecologically minded architects are building towers with pillars of pine and spruce.