zlacker

>>hrl+(OP)
An interesting read, albeit with information that is likely familiar to many. Given the issues surrounding concrete with greenhouse gases, recycling, and landfill contribution, it seems that timber (https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2012/05/wood-...) may actually be a more viable alternative. We have techniques to grow it sustainably, it can be a carbon sink within a city, and it is mostly natural wood so it can decompose.

As an economics exercise, it may also be interesting to price in the cost of dismantling/disposing of construction materials into the initial construction cost. I wonder if doing so will steer materials development away from composites that are difficult to recycle towards something new.

>>throwa+Qa
Yes, I've heard about engineered timber - https://blog.i1machines.com/four-reasons-why-engineered-timb... - I'm no expert, but it sounds like one of the better alternatives to reinforced concrete. Among its many benefits, it theoretically has a much longer lifespan than reinforced concrete.

I work right next to a seven-storey office building in Sydney, that's built almost entirely with engineered timber - https://architectureau.com/articles/australias-first-commerc... - ever bigger and taller such buildings are going up, bit by bit, around the world.