3 ms·
but by demolishing you're releasing and generating a ton of embodied carbon for a likely relative limited output of residential homes on the other side (because
by cal_dent 9mo ago
but by demolishing you're releasing and generating a ton of embodied carbon for a likely relative limited output of residential homes on the other side (because the economics doesn't stack up). I'd contend that the trade off is as simple as you're suggesting.
- wing-_-nuts 9mo agoRazing buildings generates no more carbon than what is required by the machinery to demolish it and cart off the debris. I'm starting to question whether you're speaking in good faith
- cal_dent 9mo agoNot sure where you questioning good faith comes from but do you. You're generating more carbon because you're then building more stuff where you've razed. It's a pretty recognised trade off why just mass demolishing stuff isn't the most effective thing to do. https://restoreoregon.org/2021/04/12/understanding-the-carbon-cost-of-demolition/ https://restoreoregon.org/2021/04/12/understanding-the-carbo...