Which is the more sustainable building material - wood or steel? MYTH #2

Photo Credit: “Turning Up the Heat: Global Warming and the Degradation of Canada’s Boreal Forest”, Greenpeace Canada, March, 2008. 

According to certain “studies,” wood claims a smaller environmental footprint than any other major building material. However, a closer look at the facts reveals some significant inconsistencies with that claim.

This is week 2 of 4 where we will feature a new myth about the sustainability of wood vs. steel. See here for last week's myth #1.

MYTH: Wood is more sustainable than steel because it is a renewable building resource. 

REALITY: Being renewable is not the same as being sustainable.

• The wood industry claims that for every tree cut down, one or more new trees are planted. However, the claim does not take into account that it will take decades before those saplings mature. In the meantime, the forest is depleted of the oxygen, water storage and filtration, wildlife habitat, global cooling, and other benefits provided by the mature tree.(1)
• Trees are often harvested by clear-cutting, leaving large gaps in the forestland that also impact the plants and animal species left behind.

If you want to learn what the other myths will be, you can download the Steel Market Development Institute's Fact Sheet to learn more.

(1) “Understanding Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs) for Wood (Current Problems and Future Possibilities),” The Sierra Club Forest Certification and Green Building Team, September 24, 2013.