Timber insulation in walls can outperform steel and concrete for acoustic performance — and generate far fewer emissions in the manufacturing process to boot. That is according to George Edgar, a NZ-based specialist in acoustic engineering, who presented new findings on common wall and floor assemblies at the Sixth Joint Meeting of the Acoustical Society of America and the Acoustical Society of Japan in Honolulu, Hawaii, earlier this month.
Edgar’s analysis compared the sound‑insulating performance of timber, steel, and concrete systems with their global warming potential, or GWP — the emissions generated during the manufacturing phase. “The primary factor that influences GWP in the manufacturing phase is the amount of energy, and therefore carbon emissions, required to produce the material,” he explained. “Concrete and steel are more energy‑intensive to produce than timber products, so they have higher GWP values in the manufacturing phase.”
The study comes at a time when architects, engineers, and construction professionals are being asked to balance an ever-expanding list of performance demands. Modern sustainable buildings must not only reduce operational energy use but also minimise the embodied carbon of the materials they rely on. At the same time, Edgar said, expectations for acoustic comfort have grown. Noise control is now recognised as a key contributor to health, productivity and overall well‑being.
The contrasts he identified were striking.
For floors designed to achieve the same level of sound insulation, concrete systems carried far higher emissions than timber. Whilst in wall assemblies, timber‑based systems not only showed lower GWP but also outperformed standard steel studs acoustically. This held even when additional linings were required to reach equivalent sound insulation targets.
The implication is clear: even when timber needs more layers to meet acoustic requirements, it can still deliver a far smaller climate footprint than steel or concrete. Edgar’s findings suggest that the quietest option in a building may also be the most climate‑friendly.
Despite the significance of the results, he noted that research examining acoustics and carbon together remains limited. He hopes the work will encourage designers to consider both performance metrics from the earliest stages of a project: “As acoustic consultants, an awareness of the GWP associated with the design solutions we specify can help us to make a positive impact on our environment for generations to come,” he said.
