TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

Building future cities out of timber could save 100B tons of CO2 emissions

149 pointsby cheinyeanlimover 2 years ago

26 comments

credit_guyover 2 years ago
For context, humanity produces about 50 billion tons of CO2 emissions per year. This estimate of 100 billion tons is between now and 2100, so about 1.2 billion tons per year savings. That's not nothing, but it's not that impressive either. And if it turns out the assumptions in the estimate are a bit optimistic, then it becomes more or less a rounding error.
评论 #32746491 未加载
评论 #32746338 未加载
评论 #32746650 未加载
评论 #32746906 未加载
评论 #32748405 未加载
renewiltordover 2 years ago
Had a relative who was an executive at a timber-only structural design firm and I visited them a few times so I know a little bit more than a layman. Comments here are kinda low-brow, honestly. A little disappointed by that.<p>Anyway, there are all sorts of timber-based products these days. I&#x27;ll pick one, cross-laminated timber, and just link a bunch of basic stuff:<p>- fire resistance, measured by the Forestry Service <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=HuVTCOmRGd0" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=HuVTCOmRGd0</a><p>- structural integrity code <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;shop.iccsafe.org&#x2F;mass-timber-buildings-and-the-ibcr.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;shop.iccsafe.org&#x2F;mass-timber-buildings-and-the-ibcr....</a> (high-rises approved in the International Building Code)<p>- structural integrity example <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.ascentmke.com&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.ascentmke.com&#x2F;</a> 25 story building in Milwaukee (strictly uses both CLT and glulam, but well, give me a little slack)
评论 #32745414 未加载
评论 #32745355 未加载
评论 #32745391 未加载
评论 #32745327 未加载
deepdriverover 2 years ago
Rammed earth is more abundant, potentially cheaper, and has far better sound and thermal insulation properties:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.bbc.com&#x2F;future&#x2F;article&#x2F;20220705-the-sustainable-cities-made-from-mud" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.bbc.com&#x2F;future&#x2F;article&#x2F;20220705-the-sustainable-...</a><p>It is more labor-intensive but easily automated, at least one start-up has worked&#x2F;is working on this:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=4TXj5IIkUIY" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=4TXj5IIkUIY</a><p>Rammed earth panels can also be prefabricated and delivered to build site via truck:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=WFddMSRel4A" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=WFddMSRel4A</a><p>The city of Shibam in Yemen shows how a high-rise rammed earth&#x2F;adobe city might look. It&#x27;s possible to adapt this technique to wet climates with appropriate plasters and maintenance:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=zm8OGIZ7tag" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=zm8OGIZ7tag</a>
评论 #32749138 未加载
donatjover 2 years ago
My sister lived in a very new timber apartment building on the 3rd floor.<p>I&#x27;m not sure if there had been a water leak or what but the whole floor of her apartments main living area notably drooped in the middle and was kind of bouncy.<p>She claimed she couldn&#x27;t notice it but I found it really unnerving.
评论 #32746449 未加载
评论 #32748905 未加载
评论 #32746165 未加载
评论 #32745466 未加载
ACV001over 2 years ago
Cut the trees to save CO2 emissions. Somebody forgot that trees consume CO2 themselves and if this type of housing gets adopted widely, some companies will not wait for 10-20 years for the planted trees to grow, but will look for less ethical sources like existing wild forests.
评论 #32749432 未加载
评论 #32750169 未加载
评论 #32749562 未加载
评论 #32749171 未加载
skybrianover 2 years ago
They mention mass timber, but lots of buildings in the US already use wood framing, and 5+1 apartment blocks (with the top 5 floors using wood framing) are going up everywhere.
评论 #32746419 未加载
评论 #32748851 未加载
jschveibinzover 2 years ago
Some parameters to consider in the discussion:<p>1. We need buildings to live in<p>2. It takes materials to make buildings. What are the potential materials?<p><pre><code> A. Wood B. Metal C. Concrete D. Soil E. Rock F. Plastic G. Ceramics (brick) H. Others? </code></pre> 3. It takes energy to process materials for construction.<p>4. It takes energy to construct buildings.<p>5. Energy sources:<p><pre><code> A. Sun B. Wind C. Water&#x2F;Ocean D. Nuclear E. Fossil fuels F. Others? </code></pre> 6. Other parameters? e.g. cost, speed, labor, quality, durability, aesthetics, etc.<p>If one takes all of the parameters into consideration, a model (with weighting) can be developed and one can attempt to optimize the model for either net CO2, or convenience, or whatever. It&#x27;s a decision problem.<p>Calling all math&#x2F;physics&#x2F;engineering folks in this forum: please propose a way to help figure this out. And thank you.
评论 #32750091 未加载
评论 #32750317 未加载
vidarhover 2 years ago
And it doesn&#x27;t need to mean low density housing.<p>This is a ~80 meter, 18 storey hotel built out of wood:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;prismpub.com&#x2F;mjosa-tower-brumunddal-take-title-worlds-tallest-wooden-building&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;prismpub.com&#x2F;mjosa-tower-brumunddal-take-title-world...</a><p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;thetravelbook.world&#x2F;2020&#x2F;10&#x2F;17&#x2F;wood-hotel-brumunddal&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;thetravelbook.world&#x2F;2020&#x2F;10&#x2F;17&#x2F;wood-hotel-brumunddal...</a><p>(It&#x27;s also on booking.com; search for the location &quot;Brumunddal&quot; and&#x2F;or &quot;Wood Hotel&quot;)
jannwover 2 years ago
Many cities were originally built mostly in wood (e.g. London, Amsterdam). There&#x27;s a good reason that they aren&#x27;t any more. They burnt down - quickly and spectacularly. Typically laws were then made to require only re-building in stone e.g. After the great fire of London &quot;The Rebuilding of London Act 1666 banned wood from the exterior of buildings&quot;
评论 #32750354 未加载
jacknewsover 2 years ago
I think the new processes for smelting steel are carbon neutral, and steel is highly recyclable. I think it would make sense to have hybrid steel-wood buildings, using a steel superstructure. And also use MgO cement where something mineral is needed or desired, as I think that is also carbon neutral.
评论 #32745585 未加载
评论 #32746871 未加载
pelasacoover 2 years ago
Sure, 2020&#x2F;2021 the prices of Timber exploded due higher demand. This variable is simply not taken into account.<p>&quot;And there are also big question marks over the safety implications of shifting to predominantly wood-based construction. While the paper states that engineered wood is “associated with fire resistance,” the jury is still out on whether it is truly as safe as traditional building materials.&quot;<p>Not just that. Aging and Maintenance, warping, pest infection and other benefits from concrete like durability, energy efficiency...<p>I guess the authors never read the 3 little pigs. You just need a Wolf with some Howitzer trying to free your country from the West, to you understand the advantage of Concrete vs Timber..
评论 #32752251 未加载
评论 #32749778 未加载
JoeAltmaierover 2 years ago
Has the sand issue been resolved? It&#x27;d been reported that we&#x27;re running out of sand suitable for concrete.<p>Yes, I know, &quot;Sand? Are you crazy? The world is full of sand!&quot;. But river-polished coarse sand is no good for concrete. It has to be of a particular size and roughness to be any use. And the easy sources had run out.<p>Sure, you could find a process to &#x27;make sand&#x27;. But it by definition is more expensive than &#x27;drive a truck to where the right kind is lying on the ground and load it up&#x27;. So the price of concrete went through the roof.<p>The &#x27;age of concrete&#x27; may be over. So this issue may be moot.
评论 #32749917 未加载
theptipover 2 years ago
&gt; Nonetheless, the researchers admit that there is still likely to be some impact on biodiversity due to the replacement of virgin woodland with timber monocultures.”<p>Is there something preventing us from replenishing the natural woodland after harvesting wood without making it monocrop? Presumably it’s more expensive to thin out an area vs. just clearcutting. But even then if you just cut blocks inside a larger area and replant the trees, won’t everything else come back too?
rsecoraover 2 years ago
Not enough timber in the world. There is a risk of deforestation and ending as Easter Island inhabitants.
评论 #32749278 未加载
egberts1over 2 years ago
Sounds great except for that marginal gain and perhaps a pending doom by “Great Fire of London”.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Great_Fire_of_London" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Great_Fire_of_London</a>
devX3over 2 years ago
I&#x27;ll take the massive concrete bunker in my concrete house over any wooden structure as I&#x27;m way to close to Russia.
enviclashover 2 years ago
I have heard a lot of propaganda against this, without a clear or solid basis, from professionals in the industry.
BiteCode_devover 2 years ago
Provided we grow as much as we cut, and let the ecosystem regenerate where we cut. Which is a huge if.
blippageover 2 years ago
Great Fire of London 2.0
评论 #32747927 未加载
aaasss333over 2 years ago
How about bamboo?
ETH_startover 2 years ago
This seems like a bad idea..
Iwan-Zotowover 2 years ago
that would make some spectacular burnings
评论 #32745361 未加载
评论 #32746422 未加载
评论 #32745313 未加载
jjallenover 2 years ago
This would be a great solution, if we could reliably prevent them from going up in flames, for two obvious reasons.<p>How many times have we heard about [old-town] burned in [year]? This would happen again negating any environmental benefits and obviously costing a ton of money to rebuild.<p>Maybe if we could get the burn rate down to 1% a year it would be a benefit?
评论 #32747125 未加载
评论 #32747222 未加载
评论 #32747250 未加载
idiotsecantover 2 years ago
Timber high rises seem somewhat dangerous from a fire perspective, surely
评论 #32745184 未加载
评论 #32745124 未加载
评论 #32745204 未加载
评论 #32745140 未加载
throwaway787544over 2 years ago
Timber isn&#x27;t the answer. The system is complex, and we need holistic solutions, not single-factor ones.<p>I think the answer is to stop building so dense, reduce our population, and reintroduce more nature to our deforested, inefficiently farmed, overly-paved modern world.<p>The more we have 12-story buildings, the harder they are to build and maintain. 3 and 4-story buildings are much easier, can be made with timber easily, etc. But we need to spread them out more. This would be good, as we could create more small businesses to service the people, less dense areas would require less intense civil management, communities would be smaller and more familiar.<p>The more people we have, the worse things get. You need more homes, cities get more dense, you require more resources &#x2F; food &#x2F; consumer goods &#x2F; land, create more CO2. Quite simply, we have a shitload of people, and that causes us all kinds of headaches. If we just had fewer people, we&#x27;d have fewer headaches. We don&#x27;t need to live like bunnies&#x2F;rats&#x2F;cockroaches constantly multiplying. And quite frankly, the planet would do much better with fewer of us.<p>We would also thrive more in a world closer to nature. You notice how there&#x27;s fewer insects, fish are mostly disappeared, invasive species are rampant, and cities are increasingly hot and polluted? Most of that changes if we undo most of our &quot;developing&quot; and let nature come back. Replace concrete sidewalks with forest trails, grass lawns with trees and weeds and bushes. Remove [at least] half the roads and replace them with canopy and gardens. Grow only sustainable multicultures of foods on a quarter of the existing farmland (and stop growing so much fucking corn!) and pay a decent wage to work the land. Bring rivers and streams back. You will notice cities get cooler, biodiversity increase, CO2 emissions decrease, and our health will improve. Not to mention fewer car accidents, less noise pollution.
评论 #32750612 未加载
robomartinover 2 years ago
&gt; if at least 90 percent of the world’s new urban population is housed in buildings made from wood<p>I put this in the category of my favorite joke with regards to physics in the classroom vs. real-world physics. It goes something like this:<p>&quot;Assume a cow is a uniform sphere of milk, one meter in diameter&quot;<p>Anyone who has studied physics to a reasonable depth understands the great disparity between the &quot;assume...&quot; constraints of classroom teaching (which are necessary to be able to learn) and what happens with real-world problems.<p>This is at that level. At least NINETY PERCENT? C&#x27;mon. I thought Disney was where fantasies are made for entertainment, not in scientific research.<p>We&#x27;ve just experienced several very large fires in California. Just one of these probably emits more CO2 than all internal combustion vehicles in the state in a day. I remember reading vegetation fires in California, in one year, emit the equivalent of 25% of the CO2 emitted by the entire transportation sector in the state during the same year. In other words, if internal combustion engine cars went away tomorrow, we would still produce so much CO2 from fires it would almost be pointless.<p>Now add to this the additional fires we would have to contend with if we plant millions&#x2F;billions of trees. The fires would be larger and likely more frequent. They would probably destroy more property and wild life. And now, add to this entire cities built out of timber, rather than concrete. In other words, in a sense, storing the CO2 containing wood in a structure full of electrical wiring, gas lines, and other fire hazards.<p>Yes, that would be intelligent. Instead of creating <i>less</i> fire danger, increase it. Exponentially.<p>Like a I said, assume a cow is a uniform sphere of milk one meter in diameter and everything is possible.<p>EDIT:<p>The irony, of course, is that massive reforestation around the world is likely the only realistic way to capture CO2 at scale.
评论 #32745156 未加载
评论 #32745362 未加载
评论 #32745189 未加载