Wood Construction vs Deforestation
by Lloyd Alter, Toronto 
on 10.29.07
After reading our quotes from Prince Charles- "The simple fact is that combatting deforestation is likely to be one of the quickest and most cost-effective means of reducing carbon dioxide emissions" and our post on construction-"Wood can be the perfect sustainable material; it sucks up CO2 and once cut, it holds it for the life of the building." a reader writes: " I was going through the feed today and noticed a story that made me think about the other. the wood construction story is almost a contradiction of the Prince Charles story. How do both of these stories fit together at the site?...they both make sense...and yet they are at odds."
I don't believe that there is any contradiction here. HRH is talking about the burning of forests, particularly the rainforest, to clear land for agriculture (including palm oil plantations) or to use as fuel. There is also rainforest habitat loss due to illegal logging of exotic woods for architectural uses.
The architecture and construction we show on TreeHugger (and the wood construction we promote) is built from sustainably harvested forests, usually close to the location of construction. Our favorite woods are certified by the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC)
who say
"In many forests around the world, logging still contributes to habitat destruction, water pollution, displacement of indigenous peoples, and violence against people who work in the forest and the wildlife that dwells there. Many consumers of wood and paper, and many forest products companies believe that the link between logging and these negative impacts can be broken, and that forests can be managed and protected at the same time. Forest Stewardship Council certification is one way to improve the practice of forestry."
TreeHugger suggests that one should Choose their wood wisely, and avoid phony industry-run certification schemes.
Pick the right wood and use it wisely and there are few better, greener building materials.
Follow @TreeHugger on Twitter & get our headlines with @TH_rss!
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
- Surf Green with Eco-Friendly Surf Gear
- Trust Stella McCartney: Meat-Free Mondays are Hip, not Hippie!
- Green Glossary: Carbon Sink
- Don't Let Palm Oil Destroy the Rainforest
- Take it from a Beatle: Cut Your Carbon Footprint by Making Mondays Meat-Free
- Your Old Cutting Board = Perfect Country-esque Wall Art
That is a problem we face in Oregon. Some of our environmental groups are incorrectly teaching new citizens that harvesting = deforestation. When in fact, far more trees are planted in Oregon each year than are harvested. Forest sustainability is as much about keeping them economicaly viable as they are preserving the ecological benefits.
HOW you harvest matters as much as the choice to use wood or other materials (brick, concrete). Don't forget that if you aren't using wood, you have to MINE your raw materials, then fire them to high temperature (steel, brick, etc) for refining or finishing.
Wood is by far the least energy-intensive building material, BUT - simply clear-cutting a forest and letting it erode and not replanting it is terrible and unsustainable policy.
The cool thing about trees is they naturally grow! To take advantage of that, forests should be THINNED using FSC guidelines to maintain their viability and sustainability.
HOW you harvest matters as much as the choice to use wood or other materials (brick, concrete). Don't forget that if you aren't using wood, you have to MINE your raw materials, then fire them to high temperature (steel, brick, etc) for refining or finishing.
Wood is by far the least energy-intensive building material, BUT - simply clear-cutting a forest and letting it erode and not replanting it is terrible and unsustainable policy.
The cool thing about trees is they naturally grow! To take advantage of that, forests should be THINNED using FSC guidelines to maintain their viability and sustainability.
I would think that for an equivalent amount of man hours, trees can be planted as quick as they can be cut, if not faster.
I really like steel frame houses for the fire resistance and the improved energy efficiency however. I suppose it makes the house recyclable if necessary.
fsc only allows cleacuts when you turn a monoculture plantation into a mixed forest.
fsc also protects old-growth forests, which seriously shouldn´t be logged for anything, not even buildings.
The fact is that the overwhelming majority of wood cut down throughout the world - in the north and south, poor and rich worlds - is NOT sustainably harvested. FSC currently certifies a ridiculously small percentage of wood harvested. The overwhelming majority of wooden homes built do NOT use FSC certified wood or wood harvested sustainably. Wooden construction of homes IS a significant part of deforestation and of habitat destruction. It doesn't have to be. And it shouldn't be. FSC certified methods of wood harvesting could and should be applied everywhere. But that currently isn't the reality. I'd say that over 95% of individuals in the West building a new wooden home today are contributing, directly or indirectly, to deforestation and/or habitat destruction.
The point about states or countries that grow more trees than they cut down are somehow 'sustainable' is inaccurate. The fact that more trees are planted than have been cut does not mean the wood is being sustainably harvested - AT ALL. It is completely possible to clear cut away an ENTIRE large state park of absolutely each and every tree - thereby completely eliminating that whole eco-system forever - and still plant enough trees to say: 'We have planted more trees this year than we have harvested, so people, things are honky-dory green here.' Not so. Sustainable harvesting is not about planting more trees than are cut. That is an important consideration. But it is nowhere near enough.
Most of you are dealing in abstractions with no firsthand knowledge of your subject. I've planted several hundred thousand trees. You can't replant a forest,after it's cut it's replaced with a tree farm.Forests are not comprised of stands of trees all the same species, all the same age in equally spaced formations. What do you ssuppose the forest inhabitants do duing the 20+ years it takes for the replants to start looking like trees instead of brush?
Want to make an impact on the health of forests? Stop using virgin paper,if it isn't 100% recycled,it still comes form clearcutting. Convince your local /state/provincal.national Gov't to ban throwing wood in the dump,and turn wood waste to pulp,for paper making.
trees form a distinguishable role in the construction industry world wide. am a final student at the university of Nairobi Kenya, as part of partial fulfillment of my degree in Quantity Surveying i have decide to carry out aresearch on the impacts of defforestation to the construction industry, i would therefore request you to send any comments on the topic through my email adress dankagaca@yahoo.com