PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
March 6, 2026Circular Economy and Sustainability3 citationsOpen Access

Life Cycle Assessment of Construction Timber Waste Within a Circular Economy Framework: A Comprehensive Overview

RSRabaka SultanaTKTaslima KhanamARAhmad Rashedi

Key Points

  • The review aims to evaluate the environmental performance of various timber waste management strategies within a circular economy framework.
  • Critical review of 69 peer-reviewed studies from Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar.
  • Evaluation of environmental impacts through life cycle assessment (LCA).
  • Focus on prevention, reuse, recycling, energy recovery, and landfilling strategies.
  • Global warming potential ranged up to 1780 kg CO₂-equivalent per ton of timber waste.
  • Recycling made up 52% while landfilling accounted for 27% of evaluated methods.
  • Activated carbon production, timber reuse, and incineration with energy recovery were the most favorable options.

Abstract

Abstract Timber waste produced throughout the building life cycle is a growing environmental concern, particularly as global construction activity accelerates. This review critically evaluates the environmental performance of timber waste management strategies—including prevention, reuse, recycling, energy recovery, and landfilling—through circular economy principles. A total of 69 peer-reviewed studies were selected from Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar, with a geographic focus on Europe, the United States, and China. Environmental impacts were assessed using life cycle assessment (LCA), with results standardised per one ton of timber waste. Global warming potential ranged up to 1780 kg CO₂-equivalent per ton, with notable variation across treatment methods. Recycling (52%) and landfilling (27%) were the most commonly evaluated, while only 2% of studies addressed waste prevention through design innovation. Activated carbon production, timber reuse, and incineration with energy recovery were among the most environmentally favourable options. In contrast, landfilling resulted in the highest environmental burdens due to limited methane recovery. The review identifies key research gaps, including inconsistent LCA methodologies, limited regional data, and a lack of performance analysis for recycled timber. Importantly, the findings provide practical insights for construction industry stakeholders and policymakers by highlighting priority areas for waste minimisation, regulatory harmonisation, and circular design adoption. These insights can guide evidence-based policy development and promote sustainable resource management across the construction sector.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Sultana et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69aa7048531e4c4a9ff59ef2https://doi.org/10.1007/s43615-026-00763-z
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Quantification of carbon emission of construction waste by using streamlined LCA: a case study of Shenzhen, China2015 · 62 citations
  2. 2An off-site snapshot methodology for estimating building construction waste composition - a case study of Hong Kong2019 · 86 citations
  3. 3Comparative life cycle assessment of light frame timber and reinforced concrete masonry structural systems for single-family houses in Luxembourg2024 · 18 citations
  4. 4Reusing exterior wall framing systems: A cradle-to-cradle comparative life cycle assessment2019 · 120 citations
  5. 5Life Cycle Assessment of Energy and Energy Carriers from Waste Matter – A Review2014 · 33 citations