How does transport impact the comparison?

Transport typically accounts for 5–15% of total embodied carbon for both materials. Steel is denser (7,850 kg/m³ vs 420–500 kg/m³ for timber) but requires less volume per unit of structural capacity.

Transport typically accounts for 5–15% of total embodied carbon for both materials. Steel is denser (7,850 kg/m³ vs 420–500 kg/m³ for timber) but requires less volume per unit of structural capacity. Timber is lighter but bulkier, requiring more truck movements for equivalent structural performance. For European projects, both materials are typically sourced within 500–1500 km. The transport impact is generally similar for both materials and does not significantly change the overall comparison. Local sourcing benefits both materials equally.

Why this matters

This question relates to Timber vs Steel: Full Lifecycle Environmental Comparison, which covers the broader topic in detail. Understanding this specific aspect helps architects, builders, and timber dealers make informed specification decisions.

For full context and additional technical detail, see our comprehensive guide:

→ Timber vs Steel: Full Lifecycle Environmental Comparison

Related questions

• Which has lower embodied carbon — timber or steel?
• Is steel more recyclable than timber?
• How do timber and steel compare for operational energy?

About this answer

This answer is part of the PuurModulair Knowledge Base — comprehensive timber specification guidance for architects, builders, and dealers across the UK, EU, and Scandinavia.