ABSTRACT: The current carbon footprint of the construction sector in Ireland together with the need for new homes to satisfy
housing demand make it difficult to meet Ireland’s commitments for the reduction of emissions. The challenge of increasing the
number of homes while reducing emissions can be partially mitigated with an increased use of timber in the construction sector.
This study analysed the potential of timber construction in Ireland to mitigate climate change while addressing the housing needs.
The analysis drew different scenarios regarding the percentage of dwelling types in the coming years, and the share built with
timber (timber frame and cross-laminated-timber) and masonry or concrete. Overall, scenarios with larger use of timber produced
greater annual greenhouse gas abatement, although the type and mix of dwellings had a large influence, with larger emissions
savings associated with the construction of apartments where masonry and concrete were substituted for mass timber. The best
scenarios for the mitigation of climate changes while addressing the housing needs in Ireland combined a strong increment of
timber scheme houses and apartments in the short term, with a larger presence of medium and high-rise buildings that produce
less emissions than the equivalent in concrete.
KEY WORDS: Timber; CLT; LCA; Embodied carbon; Emissions.
1 INTRODUCTION
The goal of the Paris Agreement to limit global warming to
1.5°C above pre-industrial levels needs the construction sector
to reduce its greenhouse gases (GHG) emissions. Building
construction and operations accounted for 37% of energy‐
related carbon dioxide (CO
2
) emissions in 2020 [1]. The GHG
emissions of materials and/or processes associated with
producing, transporting, installing and disposal are called
embodied carbon (EC). The EC is quantified using Life Cycle
Assessment (LCA) methodology [2, 3].
In 2020, as part of the European Green Deal, the European
Commission announced plans to reduce the EU's GHG
emissions by at least 55 % by 2030 compared to 1990 levels
[4]. Ireland’s emissions of GHG in 2019 were 59.8 Mt of CO
2
e
[5], 9.9% higher than emissions in 1990. These emissions were
the second worst per capita in the EU, and 53% higher than the
EU28 average of 7.9 tonnes [6]. The latest Irish Government
commitment is for a 7% annual GHG emissions reductions for
2021-2030 [7]. In the transition to a climate neutral economy
by 2050, the Climate Bill 2021 [8] states that the first two
carbon budgets “shall provide for a reduction of 51 per cent
[…] on December 31st, 2030, from the annual greenhouse gas
emissions reported in 2018”. Ireland’s emissions of GHG in
2018 were 60.9 Mt of CO
2
eq [9].
Whereas the emissions need to be reduced, according to the
Central Statistics Office (CSO), Ireland’s population is
expected to increase from 4.7 million to between 5.6 and 6.7
million by 2051 [10], depending on the assumptions, creating
significant further demand for housing in the coming decades.
To meet this demand, 30,000 additional housing units must be
provided per annum (p.a.). The Central Bank of Ireland [11],
using the high migration demographic projection of the CSO,
estimates a demand of around 33,000 units per year from 2020-
2039, falling to 26,000 per year from 2040-2051. This is a total
of 972,000 units. The Irish Business and Employers
Confederation estimates 32,000 homes/year between 2019-
2051 [12]. The National Development Plan 2021-2030 [13],
states that 600,000 new homes will be required by 2040,
planning to deliver almost 400,000 new homes between 2020
and 2031 (roughly 33,000 new homes p.a.), which will have an
embodied carbon cost of somewhere between four and six
megatons of CO
2
e, based on the current carbon intensity of
construction (Dr Kinnane, [14]).
Other scenarios draw even higher demands for new homes
when considering obsolescence and changing household size
[15]. In this regard, apartments can play an important role to
address the housing crisis. Ireland has the lowest apartment rate
in Europe at 12% [16] with the next lowest being Malta (22%)
the Netherlands and Belgium (both 28%). Ireland has the
highest percentage in Europe of population living in a house at
92% whereas the average in the EU is 53% [17].
The challenge of increasing the number of homes while
decarbonising the construction sector can be partially mitigated
with a larger use of timber as shown in Figure 1 and Figure 2.
Wood and engineered wood products are bio-based materials
of lower EC than concrete, masonry or steel [18-20] that can
also store carbon (CS) for as long as the material is used.
According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC), not only that, in the long term, a sustainable forest
management strategy aimed at maintaining or increasing
forest carbon stocks, while producing an annual sustained yield
of timber, fibre or energy from the forest, will generate the
largest sustained mitigation benefit [21]. In Sweden, a study
[22] analysed the emissions from the construction of a multi-
storey building, and showed that the GHG mitigation efficiency
of a wood-frame compared to a concrete-frame is higher even
Timber construction in Ireland for the mitigation of climate change and the housing
crisis in 2022
David Gil Moreno
1
, Des O’Toole
2
, Patrick J. McGetrick
1
, Annette M. Harte
1
1
Timber Engineering Research Group, Ryan Institute. National University of Ireland Galway
2
Forest Industries Ireland & Coillte
email: david.gil-moreno@nuigalway.ie, des.oto[email protected], patr[email protected], annette.harte@nuigalway.ie
if in the concrete-frame alternative the forests that would
provide the timber are used for carbon storage. A study in the
UK [23] compared the 100-year GHG mitigation achieved by
newly planted commercial Sitka spruce (the main timber
species in Ireland) and newly planted broadleaf conservation
forests modelling the planting rate of 30,000 ha/year from 2020
to 2050 recommended by the UK Committee on Climate
Change. The study found that harvesting and using the timber
from Sitka spruce forests harvested in year 50 (a conservative
rotation length for this species in Ireland) followed by
replanting achieved better cumulative GHG balance than new
broadleaf or Sitka spruce forests unharvested.
Currently in Ireland, about 24% of new builds are constructed
using timber frame, far from the 83% used in Scotland [24]. In
addition, building regulations in Ireland limit the use of
combustible materials such as timber where the height of the
top floor is over 10 m, equivalent to a building of 4 storeys [25].
The current study aims to show the potential of timber
construction in Ireland to mitigate climate change. The study
draws different scenarios that satisfy the demand for new builds
for the period 2022-2050, using different combinations of
dwelling types and construction materials. The ultimate aim is
to compare the impact of timber construction, including
modern engineered wood products, and the most common
construction material and typologies in Ireland.
Figure 1. Potential applications of wood in domestic
construction. Source [26]
Figure 2. Murray Grove, London. Nine-storey CLT
2 MATERIALS AND METHODS
A study by the BioComposites Centre at Bangor University
[27] analysed the EC and CS associated with the typical
housing archetypes in the UK, very similar to those in Ireland.
This study is used here (Table 1) as the basis to investigate the
potential CO
2
emissions associated with satisfying the housing
demand that Ireland faces in the coming decades. The
calculations covered the product stages of the life cycle of the
structural elements (modules A1-A3), according to EN15804
[28] (excluding internal finishes and fittings). For each housing
archetype different building solutions were investigated. The
functional units were matched within each archetype for
identical floor plan, and matching wall, roof and glazed areas.
Following the guidelines by RICS [3], the CS and EC are
reported separately.
Table 1. EC and CS (kg CO
2
e/m
2
) of structural elements, A1-
A3, for different archetypes and materials (TF: Timber frame;
CLT: Cross-Laminated-Timber). Size shows the internal area
and number of bedrooms (B). Low and medium-rise are 3 and
6 storey respectively. Values adapted from [27]
Archetype
Size
(m
2
, B)
EC
CS
Bungalow, masonry
58.5,
2B
264
-71
Bungalow, TF
235
-111
Detached house, masonry
117, 4B
177
-72
Detached house, TF
150
-109
Detached house, TF & clad
102
-126
Apartment, low-rise, masonry
70.1,
2B
176
-57
Apartment, low-rise, TF
132
-97
Semi- Detached, masonry
84.4,
3B
187
-67
Semi- Detached, TF
152
-105
Mid-terraced, masonry
161
-67
Mid-terraced, TF
137
-103
Apartment, low-rise, masonry,
50, 1B
176
-57
Apartment, low-rise, TF
132
-97
Apartment, medium rise, concrete
414
-61
Apartment, medium rise, CLT
158
-309
Apartment, medium rise, concrete
70.1,
2B
414
-62
Apartment, medium rise, CLT
158
-309
The CSO defines the dwelling types in Ireland as single,
scheme and apartment. Table 2 shows the EC and CS using the
values per living unit in Table 1 and adapted to the CSO
housing archetypes. For that, it was assumed that 50% of single
houses were bungalows and 50% 4-bedroom detached houses.
For the scheme houses, the distribution from the CSO [29] was
used: 12% detached, 17% mid-terrace, and 65% semi-detached
houses, and adjusted relative to the 94% of the breakdown (the
remaining 6% belongs to “others”). For the apartments, it was
assumed that these were 2-bedrooms equally split between 3
and 6-storey unless otherwise stated.
Table 2. Average EC & CS per housing unit.
Single
Scheme
Traditional
18.09
16.03
-6.3
-6.00
Timber
15.64
13.21
-9.59
-9.34
The analysis draws different scenarios regarding the number
of new homes, and the share built with timber. The new
dwelling completions in the year 2019, which showed the
largest construction activity of the last five years, was chosen
as the most recent pre-Covid reference (Table 3). It must be
noted that currently timber dwellings (24% of the total) only
cover light frame construction. The scenarios assume that
future emissions will remain the same as the baseline scenario.
Table 3. Dwelling types in 2019 in Ireland.
Source: [29] and Timber frame industry data.
Single
Scheme
Apartment
Traditional
4,817
7,863
3,407
Timber
250
4,650
100
Total
5,067
12,513
3,507
This study assumes a slight increment of units built in 2022
(22,000) compared to 2019 (21,087) and then 1,500 additional
units per year to reach 33,000 units p.a. by 2030. This gradual
increment is justified as to due to the limitations of the sector
(workforce, machinery, etc.) it is unlikely that there will be a
large increment in new homes in the short term. The level of
new homes is maintained until 2040, falling to 30,000 per year
from 2041-2050. The reason for drop to 30,000 per year,
instead of the 26,000 projected by The Central Bank of Ireland,
is to compensate for the lower growth in the initial years. Based
on these assumptions a total of 881,000 units will be built in the
period 2022-2050, with an average of 30,400 new homes p.a.
For the period 2022-2040, the total is 581,000 units (the
National Development Plan states that 600,000 new homes will
be required in the period 2021-2040).
Regarding the percentage of dwelling types and share built
with timber over the period studied, the analysis draws different
scenarios. This is mostly based in the need to increase the
proportion of apartments.
All scenarios maintain that in 2022 the mix of dwellings will
be the same as in 2019, i.e. 24%, 59% and 17% for single
houses, scheme houses and apartments. The models, except for
scenario i), assume that the percentage of apartments increases
by 1% p.a., from 17% in 2022 to 30% in 2035 and maintaining
that percentage thereafter. The increment of apartments reduces
the percentage of scheme houses. The percentage of timber
units in 2022 remains the same as in 2019 at 24% of the total
(1%, 22% and 0.5% single houses, scheme houses and
apartments respectively) in i and ii, and in the rest of scenarios
amounts to 26% where the 2% increment is proportionally
spread among the dwelling. Details for each scenario (summary
in Table 4) are:
i) The dwellings distribution (24%, 59% and 17% single
houses, scheme houses and apartments respectively) and
percentage of timber units within a dwelling (5%, 37% and
3% respectively as shown in Table 3) remains like in 2019
for the whole period studied. That is, nothing changes
except the number of new units is larger.
ii) The percentage of timber units within a dwelling type
remains the same as in 2019. The total percentage of
apartments increases by 1% p.a., from 17% in 2022 to 30%
in 2035.
iii) After 2022, there is an increment of 5% p.a. in the
percentage of timber buildings within each dwelling type
until reaching a maximum of 70%. This is only reached by
the scheme houses by 2033.
iv) After 2022, there is an increment of 5% p.a. in the
percentage of timber scheme dwelling and 10% p.a. in
single and apartment dwelling until reaching a maximum
of 70%.
v) After 2022, there is an increment of 5% p.a. in the
percentage of timber scheme dwelling and 15% p.a. in
single and apartment dwelling until reaching a maximum
of 70%. From 2025 all the apartments are 6-storey.
vi) Like v but the apartments were considered the average
between 3- and 6-storey for the whole period.
vii) The scenario aims to build 50% of all dwellings in timber
in a maximum of 10 years. There is an increment of 5%
p.a. in the percentage of timber scheme dwelling, 25% p.a.
in single dwellings and 33% p.a. in apartments until
reaching 50% within each dwelling type.
viii) Similar to scenario v but from 2025 there is a strong
increment of 6-storey CLT apartments that by 2032 make
70% of the dwelling type.
ix) Similar to scenario v but the timber apartments are limited
to 5% of the apartments from 2025. Between 2022-2025
apartments are 2-bedrooms equally split between 3 and 6-
storey. From 2025 all the apartments are 6-storey, either
CLT (5%) or concrete (95%).
Table 4. Summary of scenarios.
2022
Timber
/ Total
% Increments in timber and
CLT p.a.
Max %
Timber
within
dwelling
Single
Scheme
Apartment
i
24%
-
-
-
-
ii
24%
-
-
-
-
iii
26%
5
5
5
70
iv
26%
10
5
10
70
v
26%
15
5
15
70
vi
26%
15
5
15
70
vii
26%
25
5
33
50
viii
26%
15
5
15
70
ix
26%
15
5
15
70 & 5
3 RESULTS
Overall, scenarios with larger use of timber produced greater
annual GHG abatement, although the type of dwellings had a
large influence. Table 1 and Table 2 showed that larger EC
savings are associated with construction of apartments (more
than 60% comparing 6-storey CLT and concrete buildings). For
the most common semi-detached house the reduction in EC is
almost 20%.
Figure 3 shows the variation in the EC emissions associated
with the construction activity. Scenario i could be considered
business as usual (BAU). It has less apartments (146,520) than
the other scenarios (239,189). The drop in 2041 is associated
with a reduction in the construction from 33,000 to 30,000 new
housing units.
Figure 4 shows the EC emissions per dwelling unit. For
scenario i, where the % of dwellings and timber buildings are
like in 2019, the average housing unit produces 16.6 kt CO
2
e.
An almost identical EC emissions are produced by scenario iii,
that built 36% of new dwellings in timber, and 7.1% of the
apartments in timber or CLT (compared to 2.9% in scenario i).
Scenarios iv and vi show a slow reduction in the EC in the first
years, accelerated from 2035 when the apartments reach 30%
of the dwellings. As the result of a larger increment in the
number of timber units in scenario vi, the timber buildings from
2035 are 62% (against 49% in iv), and from 2045 amount to
70% of the total.
Figure 3. EC emissions for different housing scenarios
between 2022 and 2050.
Figure 4. EC emissions per dwelling for different housing
scenarios between 2022 and 2050.
Scenarios v and viii only include 6-storey apartments from
2025, which translates in the sharp EC shown in Figure 4.
Afterwards, both scenarios increase the % of apartments until
reaching 30% in 2035, which is maintained thereafter. In
scenario v the % of timber increases until reaching 70% in 2045
whereas in scenario viii the 70% is reached in 2032 and
therefore the number of CLT apartments over the period is
larger.
The difference between v and vi is the type of apartments,
where the EC of 6-storey concrete building are much higher
than 3-storey. The largest reduction of EC in the next 10 years
is described by scenario vii, in which 50% of all dwellings are
built in timber in 2032, with schemes houses reaching this
percentage in 2026.
However, the EC does not describe the whole picture of the
GHG abatement. Table 5 shows the summary of accumulated
EC and CS for the nine scenarios analysed. Scenario i has less
apartments than the other scenarios and a low % of timber used
that results in higher EC than other scenarios and very low
potential for CS. The most beneficial scenario for GHG
abatement is viii, which combines low EC and the largest CS
giving the lowest cumulative net carbon. Scenario ix, that
increases significantly the number of 6-storey concrete
buildings, is the worst due largely to the high EC.
Scenarios vi and vii are the second most beneficial for GHG
abatement. They describe the lowest EC and a high CS.
Scenario vi, increases the use of timber until reaching 70%
within each dwelling type. It builds more timber units (50%)
than scenario vii (45%), but less apartments with timber.
Scenario vii draws a sharp increment in the timber buildings in
the first ten years that results in a strong reduction of EC and in
a higher % of timber apartments over the full period.
The GHG abatement of scenarios iv and v is slightly better
than the average due to a relatively low EC and high CS.
Scenario ii is the second least beneficial situation. It
maintains the percentage of timber units in each dwelling type,
but it reduces the total number of scheme houses (that bear most
of the timber construction) as the result of building a larger
percentage of apartments. This reduces to 20% the total
percentage of timber units built in 2022-2050. The difference
with scenario viii in the cumulative net carbon are 0.142 Mt
CO
2
e p.a. more in scenario ii.
The greatest CS occurs in the scenarios viii and v, with
average of 0.105 Mt CO
2
e p.a. and 0.07 Mt CO
2
e p.a
respectively. This is due to the large number of CLT
apartments.
Table 5. Accumulated EC & CS for different housing
scenarios between 2022 and 2050.
Average
%
Timber
Timber apart
(% total apart.)
EC
CS (-)
Net
Mt CO
2
e
i
24
4,178 (2.9%)
14.6
5.8
8.8
ii
20
6,820 (2.9%)
15.1
5.6
9.6
iii
36
16,930 (7.1%)
14.7
6,1
8.6
iv
42
41,471 (17%)
14.3
6.4
7.8
v
50
82,883 (35%)
15.0
7.6
7.5
vi
50
82,883 (35%)
13.8
6.9
6.9
vii
45
99,971 (42%)
13.8
6.9
6.9
viii
57
141,117 (59%)
14.0
8.6
5.5
ix
42
11,790 (4.9%)
16.4
6.4
10
Figure 5 shows that when considering the cumulative net
carbon effect (EC and CS together) scenarios viii, vii and vi are
the most beneficial in the GHG abatement.
Figure 5. Cumulative net carbon for different housing
scenarios between 2022 and 2050.
4 DISCUSSION
The best scenarios for the mitigation of climate changes
while addressing the housing needs in Ireland are viii, vii and
vi that combine a strong increment in the number of timber
scheme houses with a larger presence of medium and high-rise
buildings that can accommodate the housing demand while
producing less emissions than the equivalent in masonry and
concrete. In particular, scenario viii avoids 3.3 million tonnes
CO
2
e compared to scenario i that represents BAU.
According to the hypothesis formulated, Ireland would reach
the highest rate of construction in 2030. At this time, total
emissions of GHG should be reduced to at most 31,1 Mt CO
2
e
in agreement with Climate Bill 2021. For the period 2022-2030,
the best scenario is described by scenario vii, where the net
carbon emissions (EC minus CS) produced are 411 kt CO2e
less than those produced by scenario ix, which increases
significantly the number of 6-storey concrete buildings.
In the same period, scenario vii produces 61.4 kt CO
2
e less
EC than scenario i, BAU. Adding the CS in the period, the
difference between scenarios vii and ix in the cumulative net is
164 kt CO
2
e. For the year 2030 only, there are EC savings at
20.6 kt CO
2
compared to scenario i. This difference is roughly
equivalent to the carbon sequestered by 3,700 ha of average
Irish forest in one year [30].
The reductions of emission for the different scenarios may
seem modest. However, it must be understood in the context of
a sector which activity will likely increase in the next decades
and that needs to reduce the GHG emissions with immediate
effect. In addition, the case study only covered residential
buildings. The differences in EC could be larger when using
timber cladding instead of brick that reduces the EC
significantly [31], even after several replacements, and can
account for a reduction of 2.9% in EC and a 3.1% increase in
CS using 25% timber cladding of the external wall area [27].
The current study considers a lower number of apartments than
the housing needs according to Lyons [15] who regarding the
lack of apartment home states: it would be prudent for
policymakers to cater for a slow transition over coming
decades to a society with household sizes similar to Western
European averages now. The results show that the GHG
abatement could be larger if more apartments are built.
However, this will require a revision of the building regulations
in Ireland to allow timber buildings of more than four storeys.
The National Building Code in Canada for example allows for
up to 12 stories, and the UK counts with many examples of
timber frame buildings of six or seven storeys.
The presented analysis assumes that after the service life has
been achieved, new dwellings will replace the old ones.
Therefore, if the timber elements are not reclaimed and reused
the CS released to the atmosphere is compensated by new
construction. In this regard, it is important to highlight the
relatively short rotation lengths used in Ireland for harvesting
forest crops (35-45 years) in comparison to continental Europe.
This is due to the growing conditions that allow to reach
merchantable volumes earlier, and the poor quality of sites to
which forestry is typically relegated (richer soils are used for
agriculture) together with wind exposure of Ireland that advises
against leaving trees standing for too long at the risk of being
windthrows [32].
The savings of CO
2
e using timber would be larger if
assessing more stages of the life cycle. For a cradle-to-grave
boundary (from production to end of life), Walsh and
McAulliffe [33] estimated an annual savings of 460 kt CO
2
e
based on the construction of 25,000 new timber frame homes
in Ireland in comparison to traditional masonry construction.
The study covered stages A1 to C but found the largest
difference in the stages A1-A3. The building materials used in
the timber house produced a saving of 124.1 kg CO
2
e/m², 41%
less carbon than the masonry construction materials. This
difference is larger than that used in the analysis of the current
study. It is also important to notice that the end-of-life C1-C4
in the timber frame building produced 3.1 kg CO
2
e/m² less,
with the additional potential benefit of reclaiming timber for
other projects [34]. The total EC (modules A1-A4, B4-B5, C1-
C4) was 353 kg CO
2
e/m² for the masonry house and 218 kg
CO
2
e/m² for the timber frame building. Including the effects at
the end-of-life allows to account for the carbon sequestration
[3], that amounted to 42 kg CO
2
e/m² and 78 kg CO
2
e/m² in the
masonry and timber frame units respectively. Thus, the
presented study uses conservative values of the GHG emissions
associated with traditional and timber materials used as
structural elements in construction compared to other studies,
but it still shows significant evidence of the benefits that timber
construction can bring to the mitigation of climate change. In
support of this, the Timber Engineering Research Group at NUI
Galway is leading the SAOLWood project, which aims to
create a lifecycle inventory with data specific to harvested
wood products used in construction in Ireland.
5 CONCLUSIONS
The decarbonisation of the construction sector is necessary in
order to mitigate the effect of climate change and achieve the
Irish Government commitment of GHG emissions reductions
while addressing the increasing demand for housing in the
coming decades. This paper has shown that medium to strong
increase in the construction of timber buildings, particularly
apartments, delivers more GHG saving than scenarios with
limited use of timber. Further research is needed to include and
quantify the potential benefits of timber for reuse and recycling
as part of the circular economy.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This work was developed at National University of Ireland
Galway within the WoodProps programme funded by the
Forest Sector Development Division of the Department of
Agriculture, Food and the Marine, Ireland.
REFERENCES
[1] United Nations Environment Programme, "2021 Global Status
Report for Buildings and Construction: Towards a Zero-emission,
Efficient and Resilient Buildings and Construction Sector ",
Nairobi, 2021. [Online]. Available:
https://globalabc.org/sites/default/files/2021-10/GABC_Buildings-
GSR-2021_BOOK.pdf
[2] IStructE, "How to calculate embodied carbon," Second ed. London:
The Institution of Structural Engineers, 2022.
[3] RICS, "Whole life carbon assessment for the built environment,"
1st ed: Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) London,
UK, 2017, p. 41.
[4] European Commission. "2030 climate & energy framework."
https://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/strategies/2030_en (accessed
27/04/2022.
[5] EPA, "Ireland’s National Inventory Report 2021," in Greenhouse
Gas Emissions 1990-2019 Reported to the United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change, ed: Environmental
Protection Agency 2021.
[6] CSO. "Environmental Indicators Ireland 2021 - Greenhouse Gases
and Climate Change." Central Statistics Office. Available:
https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-
eii/environmentalindicatorsireland2021/greenhousegasesandclimat
echange/ (accessed 27/04/2022.
[7] (2020). Ireland’s National Energy and Climate Plan 2021-2030.
[Online] Available: https://www.gov.ie/en/publication/0015c-
irelands-national-energy-climate-plan-2021-2030
[8] Dáil Éireann (2021, 9 Jun 2021). Climate Action and Low Carbon
Development (Amendment) Bill 2021.
[9] EPA, "Ireland’s National Inventory Report 2020," in Greenhouse
Gas Emissions 1990-2018 Reported to the United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change, ed: Environmental
Protection Agency 2020.
[10] CSO. "Population Projections Results." Central Statistics Office.
https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-
plfp/populationandlabourforceprojections2017-
2051/populationprojectionsresults/ (accessed 12/01/2022.
[11] T. Conefrey and D. Staunton, "Population change and housing
demand in Ireland," Central Bank of Ireland Economic Letter, vol.
14, pp. 1-16, 2019.
[12] IBEC, "Estimating Ireland’s long-run housing demand," Property
Industry Ireland, IBEC, 2019.
[13] DPER, "National Development Plan 2021—2030," Department of
Public Expenditure and Reform, 2021.
[14] C. McCurry, "Housing For All plan could see embodied emissions
almost double, says expert," Independent.ie, 26/04/2022. [Online].
Available: https://www.independent.ie/breaking-news/irish-
news/housing-for-all-plan-could-see-embodied-emissions-almost-
double-says-expert-41589059.html
[15] R. C. Lyons, "Ireland in 2040: Urbanization, demographics and
housing. Symposium:‘Where’will the Economy be in 2040?
Delivering on the National Development Framework, 122-128,"
Journal of the Statistical and Social Inquiry Society of Ireland, vol.
Vol. 47, Symposium: Where will the Economy be in 2040?
Delivering on the National Development Framework, 2018.
[16] R. C. Lyons, "The role of apartments in meeting Irish housing
requirements, 2018-2022," ed: Activate Capital, 2017.
[17] Eurostat. "Housing in Europe - House or flat – owning or renting."
European Commission. Available:
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/cache/digpub/housing/bloc-
1a.html?lang=en (accessed 12/01/2022.
[18] C. De Wolf, F. Yang, D. Cox, A. Charlson, A. S. Hattan, and J.
Ochsendorf, "Material quantities and embodied carbon dioxide in
structures," in Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers-
Engineering Sustainability, 2015: Thomas Telford Ltd.
[19] A. M. Moncaster, F. Pomponi, K. E. Symons, and P. M. Guthrie,
"Why method matters: Temporal, spatial and physical variations in
LCA and their impact on choice of structural system," Energy and
Buildings, vol. 173, pp. 389-398, 2018/08/15/ 2018, doi:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2018.05.039.
[20] A. H. Buchanan, S. B. J. E. S. Levine, and Policy, "Wood-based
building materials and atmospheric carbon emissions," vol. 2, no. 6,
pp. 427-437, 1999.
[21] IPCC, "Climate Change 2007: Mitigation. Contribution of Working
Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Inter-
governmental Panel on Climate Change [B. Metz, O.R. Davidson,
P.R. Bosch, R. Dave, L.A. Meyer (eds)]," in Climate change 2007:
Mitigation of climate change: Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 2007, ch.
Chapter 9.
[22] P. Börjesson and L. J. E. p. Gustavsson, "Greenhouse gas balances
in building construction: wood versus concrete from life-cycle and
forest land-use perspectives," vol. 28, no. 9, pp. 575-588, 2000.
[23] E. J. Forster, J. R. Healey, C. Dymond, and D. Styles, "Commercial
afforestation can deliver effective climate change mitigation under
multiple decarbonisation pathways," Nature Communications, vol.
12, no. 1, p. 3831, 2021/06/22 2021, doi: 10.1038/s41467-021-
24084-x.
[24] STA, "Annual survey of UK structural timber markets - Market
report 2016," Structural Timber Association, October 2017 2016.
[Online]. Available:
http://www.forestryscotland.com/media/370371/annual%20survey
%20of%20uk%20structural%20timber%20markets%202016.pdf
[25] NSAI, "IS 440:2009+A1:2014 Timber frame construction,
dwellings and other buildings (including amendment
1,consolidated). National Standards Authority of Ireland, Dublin, p.
92," ed, 2014.
[26] "Forest Industries Ireland, Dublin." Available:
https://www.ibec.ie/connect-and-learn/industries/energy-transport-
and-resources/forest-industries-ireland (accessed 27/04/2022.
[27] M. Spear, C. Hill, A. Norton, C. Price, and G. Ormondroyd, "Wood
in Construction in the UK: An Analysis of Carbon Abatement
Potential. Extended Summary. Published as an annex to the
Committee on Climate Change report" Biomass in a low-carbon
economy"," 2019.
[28] CEN, "Sustainability of construction works. Environmental product
declarations. Core rules for the product category of construction
products. EN 15804: 2012+ A2: 2019. European Committee for
Standardization, Brussels," p. 67, 2014.
[29] CSO. "New Dwelling Completions Q4 2020." Central Statistics
Office. Available:
https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/er/ndc/newdwelling
completionsq42020/ (accessed 12/01/2022.
[30] Forest Service, "Forest Statistics Ireland 2020," Department of
Agriculture, Food & the Marine, Ireland, Wexford, Ed., ed, 2020.
[31] J. Monahan, J. C. J. E. Powell, and buildings, "An embodied carbon
and energy analysis of modern methods of construction in housing:
A case study using a lifecycle assessment framework," vol. 43, no.
1, pp. 179-188, 2011.
[32] Á. N. Dhubháin and N. Farrelly, "Understanding and managing
windthrow," COFORD Connects, Silviculture/Management No. 23
ed: Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine, Dublin, 2018.
[33] J. Walsh and B. McAulliffe, "Study of the Embodied Carbon in
Traditional Masonry Construction vs Timber Frame Construction
in Housing," ed: Jeremy Walsh Project Management, Tralee,, 2020.
[34] "InFutUReWood." InFutUReWood, 2020, Available:
https://www.infuturewood.info (accessed 27/04/2022.