The study is part of a larger research package involving Plant, Sveafastigheter, IVL Swedish Environmental Research Institute and Chalmers. The results in the second part come from a method development, made by IVL Swedish Environmental Institute, of the calculation model ReCiPe.
Three questions to Fredrik Dahlgren, Head of Sustainability at Plant
Have you received any reactions to the first part of Wood vs Concrete at Plant?
Yes, absolutely! There has been a lot of interest from companies to calculate biodiversity loss and we have started such calculations in our software together with some of our customers. We have been eagerly awaiting the release of part two, which complements part one with several important insights. We have also noticed an interest from local sustainability initiatives and material producers.
If we put classical climate calculation next to ReCiPe, what do you see?
ReCiPe is a more comprehensive method, but with a high level of complexity, where we lack experience in the construction industry and where further development of the calculation methods is needed. ReCiPe includes climate impact, but the method also includes other environmental impact categories such as land use and water use. Climate calculations and climate declarations are based on a simpler calculation methodology and something we have extensive experience of in the industry.
The first part of Wood vs. Concrete contains several different LCA calculations, but the most classic is the climate calculation, which shows that the concrete frame has the highest impact, when we look at climate. This is illustrated with 100% environmental impact (see picture). Then the environmental impact decreases when we choose climate-enhanced concrete and later wood construction.
In part two, we see instead that the impact increases when choosing a wooden frame. In this result, we have used the ReCiPe method to capture more environmental aspects.
We think they should be considered side by side to take into account both climate and ecosystems. We have long practical experience with climate projections, both in terms of what inputs are needed and what kind of outputs they provide. ReCiPe calculation is more complex and captures more important aspects. I think it's a long way off before we start combining the calculations on a broad front. Partly because climate calculations are so integrated into different objectives and partly because we need to develop more comprehensive calculation models. However, it is definitely a possibility in the future. By starting to use ReCiPe or other similar models, the construction sector can take important steps towards more comprehensive environmental assessments.
If the industry asks which material to choose for the lowest environmental impact, what is your answer?
The short answer is that both materials have an important place in sustainable construction.
I think it is very good that the challenges of both materials are highlighted. For concrete, it's about climate impact. For wood, it's about land use, according to this study. This allows us to target the measures correctly - and I actually think that both concrete and wood construction benefit from this type of analysis.
The report Wood vs. Concrete - Biodiversity in life cycle assessment of building materials
.jpg)
