# CO2 impact of mass timber

**URL:** <https://community.carbonleadershipforum.org/t/co2-impact-of-mass-timber/3827>\
**Category:** Materials\
**Tags:** wood\
**Created:** [July 8, 2021, 3:45pm UTC](https://community.carbonleadershipforum.org/t/co2-impact-of-mass-timber/3827 "2021-07-08T15:45:40Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 16

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![solomon.ives](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex015/user_avatar/community.carbonleadershipforum.org/solomon.ives/32/1259_2.png) [@solomon.ives](https://community.carbonleadershipforum.org/u/solomon.ives)\
**Post date:** [July 16, 2021, 5:03pm UTC](https://community.carbonleadershipforum.org/t/co2-impact-of-mass-timber/3827/16 "2021-07-16T17:03:15Z")

</div>

You’re right that Nori’s agriculture-based carbon removal can only scale to so many buildings. But if the status quo is a building with an embodied carbon footprint 10,000 tons of CO2, and with today’s best green design techniques we can prevent 1/4 - 1/2 of that, say, then I think paying to sequester the remainder is a clear improvement. Less carbon in the atmosphere. More thoughts [here.](https://community.carbonleadershipforum.org/t/carbon-is-like-covid-innovation-beats-limits/3873)

---

_[View the full topic](https://community.carbonleadershipforum.org/t/co2-impact-of-mass-timber/3827)._