The potential use of mass timber in mid-to high-rise construction and the associated carbon benefits in the United States

PLoS One. 2024 Mar 20;19(3):e0298379. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0298379. eCollection 2024.

Abstract

Nonresidential and mid- to high-rise multifamily residential structures in the United States currently use little wood per unit floor area installed, because earlier building codes lacked provisions for structural wood use in those types of buildings. However, revisions to the International Building Code allow for increased wood use in the form of mass timber, as structural and fire safety concerns have been addressed through new science-based design standards and through newly specified construction materials and measures. This study used multiple models to describe alternative futures for new construction, mass timber adoption rates, and the associated carbon benefits in higher than three-story buildings in the United States. The use of mass timber, in place of traditional constructions (i.e., structures dominated by concrete and steel), in projected new higher than three-story buildings was shown to provide combined carbon benefits (i.e., global warming mitigation benefits), including avoided embodied carbon emissions due to the substitution of non-wood alternatives and additional biogenic carbon storage in mass timber materials, of between 9.9 and 16.5 million t CO2e/yr spanning 50 years, 2020 to 2070. These carbon benefits equate to 12% to 20% of the total U.S. harvested wood products carbon storage for 2020. Future research is needed to understand how greater mass timber adoption leads to changes in forest product markets, land use, and total forest sector carbon.

MeSH terms

  • Carbon*
  • Conservation of Natural Resources*
  • Construction Materials
  • Forests
  • United States
  • Wood

Substances

  • Carbon

Grants and funding

The funding for this study was provided by the USDA Forest Service Resources Planning Act Assessment Program through a joint venture agreement between the Forest Products Laboratory and the University of Tennessee Institute of Agriculture (19-JV-11330143-023). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.