Embodied Carbon: Timber vs Concrete vs Steel

Why Embodied Carbon Data Matters for B2B Timber Building Dealers

Embodied carbon — the total greenhouse gas emissions associated with manufacturing, transporting and installing a building material — has become a decisive factor in commercial construction decisions. For B2B timber building dealers, having accurate embodied carbon comparison data is no longer a marketing advantage; it is a prerequisite for tender submissions, planning approvals and corporate procurement processes.

This guide provides verified embodied carbon figures comparing timber, concrete and steel construction, formatted for use in B2B sales presentations, environmental impact assessments and ESG reporting.

Embodied Carbon Comparison: Timber vs Concrete vs Steel

The following figures represent typical embodied carbon values per cubic metre of material, based on published Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs) and academic research from European sources:

Material	Embodied Carbon (kgCO2e/m³)	Carbon Storage	Net Impact
Nordic Spruce (kiln-dried)	+45 to +65	-900 (biogenic)	-835 to -855
Glulam (GL24h/GL28h)	+80 to +120	-700 to -750 (biogenic)	-580 to -670
Reinforced Concrete	+250 to +400	0	+250 to +400
Structural Steel	+1,500 to +2,500	0	+1,500 to +2,500

Sources: University of Bath ICE Database, Wood for Good, European Commission JRC Technical Reports. Biogenic carbon storage calculated per EN 16449 standard.

Understanding Carbon Storage in Timber Buildings

Unlike concrete and steel, timber actively stores carbon throughout its service life. Each cubic metre of Nordic spruce sequesters approximately 0.9 tonnes of CO2 equivalent through the natural process of photosynthesis during tree growth. This stored carbon remains locked in the timber for the entire lifespan of the building.

For a typical 40 m² log cabin with 44mm wall thickness, the carbon storage in the structural timber alone is approximately 3.5–4.5 tonnes of CO2e. For a 100 m² glulam house with 135mm walls, carbon storage increases to 15–20 tonnes of CO2e. These figures do not include additional timber in roofing, flooring and internal structures.

This carbon storage effect means timber buildings are not merely low-carbon — they are carbon-negative when biogenic carbon is accounted for according to EN 16449 methodology.

How B2B Dealers Can Use This Data

Tender Submissions and Planning Applications

Public sector procurement and planning authorities increasingly require whole-life carbon assessments. Timber building dealers can present embodied carbon data showing that their products deliver:

75–90% lower embodied carbon compared to concrete equivalents
95–98% lower embodied carbon compared to steel alternatives
Net-negative carbon impact when biogenic storage is included
Compliance with emerging regulations on operational and embodied carbon limits

Sales Presentations for Commercial Clients

B2B clients purchasing timber buildings for holiday parks, garden office developments, educational facilities or residential projects need quantified environmental data for their own ESG reporting. Dealers should include:

Material-specific embodied carbon values with cited sources
Carbon storage calculations for the specific products being quoted
Comparison tables showing timber vs conventional alternatives
Reference to manufacturer EPDs and certification documentation

ESG Reporting Support for End Clients

Corporate clients purchasing timber buildings often need to report the carbon impact through CSRD (Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive) or voluntary frameworks such as TCFD. Dealers who supply carbon data alongside their products create significant value and differentiation.

Production Emissions and Manufacturing Efficiency

The embodied carbon of timber products depends significantly on manufacturing processes. Key factors that reduce embodied carbon in manufactured timber buildings:

Kiln drying with biomass fuel: Kilns powered by production offcuts (sawdust, wood chips) rather than fossil fuels significantly reduce processing emissions. Nardi kilns used in modern manufacturing achieve 16–18% moisture content using biomass energy
CNC precision machining: Computer-controlled cutting (Hundegger CNC systems) minimises material waste to under 5%, compared to 15–25% in manual processing
Flat-pack transport efficiency: Disassembled timber buildings achieve approximately 3x higher transport density than assembled structures, reducing per-unit transport emissions
Offcut repurposing: Modern manufacturing facilities collect and repurpose all sawdust, wood chips and offcuts for biomass energy or secondary products, achieving near-zero production waste

Regulatory Context: Where Embodied Carbon Requirements Are Heading

Several regulatory developments are making embodied carbon data essential for timber building dealers across European markets:

France RE2020: Already mandates maximum embodied carbon thresholds for new buildings, with limits tightening every three years
Netherlands MPG: Environmental Performance of Buildings regulation requires whole-life carbon assessment for all new buildings over 100 m²
UK Part Z (proposed): Would require embodied carbon reporting and maximum thresholds for all new buildings in England
EU Energy Performance of Buildings Directive (recast): From 2030, whole-life carbon assessment required for all new buildings over 1,000 m², with thresholds expanding to smaller buildings by 2035

Dealers who build embodied carbon data into their standard sales process now will be prepared when these regulations become mandatory across all European markets.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the difference between embodied carbon and operational carbon?

Embodied carbon covers emissions from manufacturing, transport and installation of building materials. Operational carbon covers emissions from heating, cooling and powering the building during use. Timber buildings typically perform well on both measures — low embodied carbon from manufacturing plus good thermal performance from wood fibre insulation properties.

Can timber building dealers claim their products are carbon negative?

When biogenic carbon storage is calculated according to EN 16449 methodology, timber buildings typically store more carbon than is emitted during their manufacture and transport. Dealers can accurately state that their products have a net-negative carbon footprint, provided they use verified data and cite the methodology. This claim applies to the building materials themselves, not to the total project lifecycle.

How do glulam buildings compare to solid log on embodied carbon?

Glulam manufacturing involves additional processing (finger-jointing, laminating, pressing) which increases embodied carbon by approximately 30–60% compared to solid log. However, glulam allows thinner wall sections for equivalent structural performance, which can partially offset this difference. Both remain dramatically lower than concrete or steel alternatives.

Do transport distances significantly affect the embodied carbon of timber buildings?

Transport typically contributes 5–15% of total embodied carbon for timber products shipped within Europe. Flat-pack timber buildings transported by road from the Baltic region to Western European markets add approximately 10–30 kgCO2e per m³ — a fraction of the 900+ kgCO2e stored in each cubic metre of timber. Short supply chains from Baltic manufacturers to European dealers remain highly carbon-efficient.

What documentation should dealers request from manufacturers for carbon claims?

Dealers should request Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs) conforming to EN 15804 standard, FSC or PEFC chain-of-custody certificates confirming sustainable sourcing, and production process documentation showing energy sources (biomass vs fossil) and waste management. These documents provide the evidence base for defensible carbon claims in sales materials and tender submissions.