The construction industry in the European Union is at a crossroads: in its transition to a climate-neutral ecosystem, the existing industry is concerned that organic alternatives receive disproportionate support, notes the European Commission.

Bilateral Challenges

Construction is a big business. According to data from the European Commission, the sector employs around 25 million people and generates an added value of 1,158 billion euros per year.

On the other hand, construction is responsible for 50% of material use and approximately 35% of waste, and it emits about one-third of the EU's total CO2 emissions—both during the construction phase and when buildings are occupied.

Addressing this bilateral challenge in construction and buildings is at the forefront of decision-makers' minds in Brussels.

In March, the Commission presented its "transition pathway for the construction ecosystem," laying the groundwork for the potential digital and ecological transformation of the sector. The momentum from Brussels is accompanied by initiatives such as the European New Bauhaus.

No one knows what this transformed sector will look like, the homes of the future. Some experts say that houses will become material depots similar to Lego, while traditional environmentalists envision a future where wood plays a more significant role.

The prospect of being replaced by bio-based materials is quite concerning for the traditional industry of mineral construction products—think concrete, ceramics, cement, and mortar.

Such products account for about 5% of global greenhouse gas emissions, more than double the emissions of the global fleet of 6,000 huge container ships, the backbone of international trade.

Cement, the second-ranked

Today, cement is said to be the second most consumed product, second only to water. But cement production is detrimental to the climate, as it involves pulverized limestone and clay heated to temperatures of up to 1450 °C.

Generating that heat to force carbon out of the raw materials produces additional carbon while profoundly altering their chemical bonds, creating "clinker."

The changes leave the clinker ready to form strong structures when properly mixed, resulting in widely used concrete in construction.

Can wood solve the problem?

Could wood and other bio-based materials help solve the sector's climate issues?

The Intelligent Cities Challenge initiative, supported by the EU, aims to spread best construction practices throughout the EU, with an example being Amsterdam's local mandate that all new housing projects must contain 20% wood.

Similarly, an ongoing development study, funded by the European Commission and aiming to "highlight how all building-related emissions can be mitigated by 2050," explores "complete wood structures in new buildings" and other roles for wood.

However, to counter the common narrative that "increased use of bio-based products is the simple solution, a shortcut to transforming the construction sector," six EU industrial associations have commissioned a separate study.

The study, supported by Cerame-Unie, the voice of the European ceramic industry, and various concrete associations united in Concrete Europe, as well as the European Mortar Industry Organization and the European Clay Brickmakers Association, casts doubt on another touted benefit of wood-based construction, namely its ability to act as a safe carbon store.

"To benefit from temporary carbon storage in wood, carbon neutrality through sustainable forestry and parallel active reforestation are unequivocal prerequisites," the study found. These are not yet consistently achieved.

The culprits

Their findings are supported by nature advocates, who typically condemn the unsustainability of logging activities. Green lawmakers blame forestry-oriented EU countries for blocking reforms to enhance the sustainability of logging.

Katharina Blümke, a researcher in sustainable construction at the Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, said, "Building with wood is a possibility, but it's not a panacea. We can't just say we'll build everything with wood, and then we'll have solved all the problems."

Blümke's research colleague Elena Boerman added, "We will never be able to do without concrete, at least not in the way things are today."

One way to enhance the ecological credentials of concrete is through "actual concrete recycling," emphasized Boerman, but added that it is a challenging process, largely considered unsuitable for real-world application.

In contrast, the cement industry promotes carbonation—a process where concrete absorbs carbon from the air—as a climate advantage. According to an industry-supported study, cement carbonation "represents a large and growing net absorber of CO2," meaning that the entire consumed cement absorbs up to 300 to 800 million tons of CO2 annually on a global scale.

"The industry has spent decades trying to reduce it because, in general, it degrades the concrete," said Robbie Andrew, a scientist at the Center for International Climate Research CICERO.

As lobbying in Brussels is in full swing, a final decision on the materials that will go into future construction products still seems quite elusive.